Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro took aim at the Biden administration for their feckless response to the attacks on shipping that continue across the Middle East. “The cost of shipping has markedly increased‚” he noted. “According to a chart from Axios‚ the average shipping container rates for particular routes have spiked dramatically toward the end of December. That’s when the Houthis started attacking shipping in the Middle East. The cost of shipping from Asia to the Mediterranean areas has jumped wildly.” “Who bears the cost?” he asked rhetorically. “You bear that cost. We all bear that cost because Joe Biden is allowing the Houthis to basically gum up the works in the Red Sea and in the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait. Why? Because Democrats keep hoping that if we’re sweet and if we’re nice‚ then things aren’t going to escalate any further when it’s precisely the opposite tack that gets things to calm down in the Middle East.” “When you want to calm things in the Middle East‚ you know what you do? You make clear that if you screw with the United States‚ things go really badly for you‚” he declared‚ adding‚ “That’s why everyone in the Middle East was afraid to start up while Donald Trump was president because they thought‚ ‘This guy is nuts. This guy is crazy. He might just fire a missile at my house.’” “Meanwhile‚ we have Joe Biden saying‚ ‘I don’t know‚ should we touch the Houthis? Should we not‚ maybe‚ should remove an aircraft carrier from the Mediterranean? Why do you think this thing is lasting as long as it is?’” he said. “So Hezbollah just keeps firing anti-tank missiles into northern Israel‚” he pointed out. “Why do you think they’re doing that? If the United States said‚ ‘Listen‚ one of those missiles goes awry and it hits an American‚ you will not exist tomorrow morning” — which is true‚ it’s actually the reality — the firing would stop tomorrow morning.’” “But Joe Biden is too cowardly to do any of that‚” he posited. “So instead‚ you have Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm declaring her hope that things are going to calm down‚ shipping will probably get better‚ even though Maersk is now saying that they’re going to completely avoid the Red Sea‚ which‚ of course‚ creates a supply chain bottleneck.” “Hopefully‚ if it doesn’t escalate further‚ we’ll be okay‚“ Granholm had stated. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP “Hopefully‚ if it doesn’t escalate further?” Shapiro said incredulously. “It’s their responsibility to make sure it doesn’t escalate further.” “And therein lies the problem: They don’t want the responsibility‚” he concluded.

There’s a documentary called “Behind the Curve” in which a group of people who think the Earth is flat decided to test their hypothesis. They spend something like $20‚000 on a laser gyroscope‚ and run some tests‚ and lo and behold‚ they learn that the Earth‚ contrary to their assumptions‚ is in fact round. Their response was exactly what you’d expect. At first they didn’t want to believe it‚ they started rationalizing away the experiment. “We were taken aback by that‚” one of the men said. He added: “We obviously were not willing to accept that.” That documentary came out a few years ago. It was an interesting look at human psychology and how people respond when their own actions debunk their whole worldview (literally their worldview‚ in the case of the flat-earthers). It’s not an easy thing to experience. It’s one thing for someone else to prove you wrong. It’s something else entirely to disprove your own ideology‚ and to reveal how bankrupt and nonsensical it is. It’s easy to point and laugh at flat-earthers‚ but this is a phenomenon we’re seeing more often these days. In fact‚ it’s been playing out for the whole country over the past few weeks‚ as proponents of diversity‚ equity‚ and inclusion‚ or DEI‚ have witnessed the complete implosion of the president of Harvard University‚ Claudine Gay. This is a woman who personifies everything DEI stands for. She came from an extremely wealthy background; her family runs the largest concrete plant in Haiti. She became the first black president of Harvard University‚ despite publishing only a handful of academic papers. She did it all based on three factors: her skin color‚ her gender‚ and her willingness to smear and destroy all of her ideological enemies along the way. And in just a couple of weeks‚ she’s been outed as a complete moron and fraud. She proved she’s incapable of answering extremely basic questions in Congress. She also demonstrated that she’s incapable of writing anything without ripping off dozens of other papers. WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show Given all this‚ the cognitive dissonance for the DEI crowd has to be overwhelming right now. After all‚ one of the holiest figures in their entire cult has just crashed and burned. She’s provided irrefutable evidence that DEI rewards mediocrity and destroys every institution that embraces it. That’s difficult for these people to accept‚ as you can imagine. That’s why‚ in the wake of Gay’s resignation as president of Harvard‚ there hasn’t really been a debate over the merits of DEI‚ or anything approaching a reasonable conversation. The word “debate” suggests that two sides are presenting their arguments in a clear and rational way. In this case‚ what’s happening is that the anti-DEI side is making coherent arguments‚ while the pro-DEI faction can do nothing but perform and posture and vomit its emotions all over the place. They’re actually a lot less respectable and coherent than the flat-earthers. At least the flat-earth proponents have arguments‚ as flimsy as they may be. But that’s still more than can be said for the DEI defenders. The spectacle that aired on CNN over the weekend perfectly captures the dynamic. It features two D.E.I. advocates — Lulu Garcia-Navarro and Kara Swisher — speaking with two sane male counterparts‚ Reihan Salam and Jonah Goldberg. In this debate‚ Goldberg and Salam explain why DEI is a scam used to smuggle leftist ideology under the guise of diversity. The women on the other side of the discussion can only scowl and huff and repeatedly declare how “infuriated” they are. Lulu Garcia-Navarro also interrupts constantly while demanding that the two men on the other side stop interrupting her (which they never did). Salam makes the reasonable case against DEI and remains logical‚ level-headed‚ and perfectly coherent throughout. But once the other side starts interjecting‚ it all goes downhill. Our discussion of DEI on The Chris Wallace Show. pic.twitter.com/3OqZXs5Xr7 — Jonah Goldberg (@JonahDispatch) January 6‚ 2024   The whole segment goes on like this. The women just keep shouting about how horrible it is to assume that Claudine Gay was a DEI hire‚ even though Harvard’s policy — for generations now — has been to elevate mediocre candidates on the basis of their skin color. And then‚ when it’s pointed out that Gay plagiarized more than half of her academic writings‚ their response is to attack the motivations of the people who uncovered this plagiarism. They have no response but to screech incoherently. As with so many other debates on so many other issues‚ if you knew nothing about the issue‚ and you saw this discussion‚ you would immediately know the women on the Left are full of crap. They bring nothing but their emotions to the table. All they have is their indignation and their feelings. If you ask them for evidence to prove their assertions‚ they’ll say something about “books that have been written about this.” This is why these people get in trouble for plagiarizing so often. They don’t know how to provide citations. “Books” are not a citation. And‚ again‚ all of this would be clear to any observer who had no background knowledge about the subject. If you do have background knowledge‚ then it’s even more obvious that the women on the Left are full of crap. On this issue‚ like most others‚ the Left has no intellectual leg to stand on. If there was any sort of substantive argument to be made for DEI‚ they would make it. They would produce evidence‚ for example‚ that institutions become more effective as they become more diverse and inclusive. They wouldn’t just assert this fact — as they always do — they would show it. But they can’t. Instead they simply insist that their position must be true‚ and even if it isn’t true‚ only a bigot would point it out. After all‚ pointing things out — noticing things — is the cardinal sin on the Left. That appears to be their entire argument when it comes to the entire Gay controversy. They won’t try to claim that Gay didn’t plagiarize. It’s clear she did‚ repeatedly. Instead they appear to be arguing that it was our responsibility to not notice the plagiarism‚ or to ignore it once we did‚ because she’s a black woman. This is the total intellectual bankruptcy of the Left. And since the Left controls all of our powerful institutions‚ this intellectual bankruptcy lies at the core of all of them. This is the larger problem underlying the Gay debacle. The real problem with Gay’s plagiarized papers isn’t that they were plagiarized. It’s the fact that‚ even if they were original thoughts‚ they were vapid and dumb and pointless. It used to be that Harvard presidents conducted original research on important topics like biochemistry. Now they write useless garbage for a nonexistent audience‚ solely to advance themselves. This is the part of the whole Claudine Gay story you don’t hear much about‚ but it’s far more important than the fact she lifted several paragraphs from other authors. It turns out that‚ even if she hadn’t plagiarized a word of her academic writings‚ Claudine Gay would still be a total fraud. First of all‚ let’s just look at the topics of all of her publications. Every single one of them is about black people or equity in some fashion. That’s not an exaggeration. That was Gay’s obsession. Her papers have titles like‚ “The Effect of Black Congressional Representation on Political Participation‚” and “The Impact of Gender and Race on the Politics of Black Women‚” and “The Effect of Economic Disparity on Black Attitudes Toward Latinos.” This is what passes for research on “diversity.” It’s the least diverse resume you can possibly imagine. It’s like paging through a random author bio on Salon.com. With a sole‚ exclusive focus on black issues‚ Gay shouldn’t have been in the running for any job anywhere but‚ perhaps‚ a historically black college. And even there‚ she would have been totally unqualified.  Now to be fair to Gay — in and of itself‚ this resume isn’t necessarily disqualifying. If Gay had been writing truly groundbreaking stuff about gender and race and the politics of black women or whatever‚ then you might be inclined to give her a pass on this singular obsession she has on skin color. But the deeper you dig‚ the worse it gets. It turns out that Gay wasn’t just a race-obsessed grifter who plagiarized whole paragraphs every now and then. In fact‚ the data behind Gay’s papers — the information she was passing off as new and important — was also garbage. Let’s zero in on one of the papers I mentioned a few seconds ago. It’s called “The Effect of Black Congressional Representation on Political Participation.” This paper was published in the American Political Science Review all the way back in 2001. It’s an important paper‚ because it’s one of the handful of publications that somehow got Gay tenure at Stanford University‚ before she moved on to Harvard. The basic idea of this paper is that when black people get elected to Congress‚ they make white people want to vote less. Somehow‚ this thesis made sense to Gay and everyone who peer-reviewed this document. To that end‚ the paper contains all kinds of tables which point to data that supposedly prove this point — that whites just hate voting when black people are on the ballot. That’s the kind of discovery that would confirm white supremacy is real‚ and white people are bad‚ and so of course both Stanford and Harvard loved it. It was too good to check. The problem is that a few decades later‚ a researcher named Jonatan Pallesen decided to look into the claim anyway. And he found that Gay’s data contradicts itself. At one point‚ Gay’s data tables show that Missouri Congressman Bill Clay’s presence on the ballot didn’t have much impact on voter turnout. But elsewhere Gay’s tables show that Bill Clay had a very significant effect on voter turnout — close to a 17% reduction in turnout‚ in fact. Put aside the fact that it’s absurd to claim that Bill Clay‚ simply because he’s black‚ would make white voters want to stay home on Election Day. The question remains: Why do Claudine Gay’s tables contradict themselves? There’s no clear answer to that question. Pallesen couldn’t come up with an explanation. Claudine Gay certainly hasn’t offered one. And here’s the really incriminating detail: Every time researchers have tried to look into this‚ Gay refused to provide the underlying data that she used to generate the tables in her papers. In 2002‚ two professors — Michael Herron of Dartmouth and Kenneth Schotts of Stanford — presented a paper that effectively debunked Gay’s entire methodology. They included this footnote: “We were‚ however‚ unable to scrutinize Gay’s results because she would not release her dataset to us.” That’s pretty incriminating. But here’s the really amazing thing. That footnote was removed from the final version of Michael Herron and Kenneth Schott’s paper. If you try to find and download the paper online now‚ you won’t find any mention of Claudine Gay. It’s been scrubbed completely. Instead‚ if you find the paper‚ you’ll find that Herron and Schott debunk a “hypothetical” methodology‚ without using Claudine Gay’s name at all. It’s almost like someone wanted to protect her for some reason. But‚ writing for Jordan Schachtel’s Substack‚ Chris Brunet got his hands on the first version of Herron and Schott’s takedown — the one that hasn’t been censored or redacted in any way. The full‚ uncensored footnote calls Gay’s conclusions “logically inconsistent.” It repeatedly calls out Claudine Gay by name. And it includes a lot of technical details which no one — including Claudine Gay — has refuted. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP This is a far bigger scandal than Claudine Gay lifting some paragraphs here and there. The fact is‚ her ideas and the data underlying those ideas were useless and fraudulent. Her publications were race-based screeds that were only ever cited by a handful of academics — and those handful of academics very quickly proved they were complete garbage. And yet‚ Gay somehow became president of Harvard. Documents criticizing the substance of her “scholarship” were scrubbed. Even now‚ she’s still making around $900‚000 as a professor. This is the state of Harvard University and American academia in general. And this is the key point. Yes‚ our intellectual elites are often thieves and plagiarists. That certainly matters. But what matters more is that they are just as intellectually bankrupt as they are morally bankrupt. They are charlatans. Their power and influence is crumbling by the day. And based on their panic over the past few weeks‚ we can be pretty sure they’re aware of it.

The Florida Republican Party voted this week to remove Christian Ziegler as party chairman following allegations that he raped a woman last year. Florida Republicans stripped Ziegler of his authority and reduced his salary to $1 last month after he refused to resign. In an emergency vote on Monday‚ they voted 199-3 to oust him which comes after Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and other top Florida Republican officials had called on him to resign. Police in Florida are also investigating whether Ziegler recorded the alleged incident‚ which could constitute video voyeurism‚ a third-degree felony in Florida. Zeigler‚ who has not been charged‚ and his attorney allegedly showed the video to law enforcement with the belief that it proved that the interaction was consensual. Attorney Bryant Camareno‚ who is not involved in the case‚ told local media that showing the video to law enforcement could be proof of a different crime. “I think number one‚ it may show that there was consent to have sex‚” he said. “Number two‚ it may show that she knew that she was being recorded‚ but number three‚ if he sent it to her with the intent of harassment then that may be another crime which is cyberstalking.” Ziegler and his wife‚ Bridget Ziegler‚ reportedly admitted to police that they previously had a consensual sexual relationship with the woman who made the rape accusation. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP The alleged incident occurred on October 2‚ 2023‚ when the accuser‚ Christian Ziegler‚ and Bridget Ziegler allegedly agreed to have “a sexual encounter‚” according to police documents. When the accuser learned that Bridget Ziegler would not attend‚ she allegedly changed her mind and cancelled the encounter with Christian Ziegler. “On 10/02/23‚ the victim opened her apartment door to walk her dog and Christian was standing outside in the hallway‚” the police search warrant says. “Christian entered the apartment‚ bent the victim over the bar stool and” raped her.

Former first lady and author Michelle Obama said she is “terrified” by what may come out of the 2024 election. In an episode of the “On Purpose” podcast‚ which was posted to YouTube on Monday‚ host Jay Shetty asked Obama what keeps her up at night. “What’s going to happen in this next election? I am terrified about what could possibly happen‚” Obama said as part of her answer. “Because our leaders matter: who we select‚ who speaks for us‚ who holds that bully pulpit. It affects us in ways that sometimes I think people take for granted.” Former First Lady Michelle Obama says fears about the 2024 election are some of what keeps her up at night: “What's going to happen in this next election? I am terrified about what could possibly happen. Because our leaders matter.” pic.twitter.com/NcNZeyzP1G — The Recount (@therecount) January 8‚ 2024 Obama added‚ “The fact that people think that government‚ ‘Eh‚’ you know‚ ‘Does it really even do anything?’ And I’m like‚ ‘Oh my God‚ does government do everything for us.’ And we cannot take this democracy for granted.’ And sometimes I worry that we do.” Recent media reports said Obama’s husband‚ former President Barack Obama‚ has expressed “deep concern” about former President Donald Trump‘s “political strength” and tried to course-correct President Joe Biden‘s re-election campaign amid flagging poll and approval numbers. Michelle Obama herself has been floated as a possible candidate for the presidency‚ particularly if Biden drops out‚ but the former first lady has insisted that she has no intention of running. Leading up to her comment on the election‚ Obama talked about “knowing too much” being married to the president “who knows everything about everything in the world” and wanting to tune it out. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP She listed wars in “too many regions‚” the future of artificial intelligence‚ the environment‚ education‚ whether people will vote‚ and people being too engrossed in their phones as other issues that keep her awake at night. During a different part of the discussion‚ focused on what offends the former first lady‚ Obama spoke about how she dislikes injustice‚ ego‚ greed‚ and racism. She condemned “unfairness” and bullies. Obama also decried “childish leadership” in which “somebody is just base‚ and vulgar‚ and cynical‚” arguing that the negativity spreads to others. “I think we are obligated to model‚ for those of us that have a platform‚ because it resonates. And I want to resonate good. I want to resonate reason‚ and compassion‚ and empathy‚” Obama said. “That’s more important than my feelings because my feelings — I can take care of those.” “This is the thing about being an other: You learn how to be excellent all the time because you can't be less than…Other people can be indicted a bunch of times and still run for office. Black men can't.” — Former First Lady Michelle Obama reflects on the White House pic.twitter.com/jWgNrYAgXT — The Recount (@therecount) January 8‚ 2024 At another point‚ Obama talked about “being an other” and how “you learn how to be excellent all the time because you can’t be less then.” In what appeared to be a reference to Trump‚ who is facing off against multiple indictments while running a third campaign for the presidency‚ Obama added that some people “can be indicted a bunch of times and still run for office” while “black men can’t.” Obama also said she hopes her legacy is that she “helped more young people feel seen” and created “a stronger foundation for young people.”

Golf legend Tiger Woods announced this week that his nearly three-decade partnership with Nike has come to an end‚ marking an end to one of the most iconic brand relationships in sports history. Woods signed a multiyear $40 million deal with Nike when he turned pro in 1996 after finishing his collegiate career at Stanford. In 2000‚ he signed a $100 million deal with Nike — the largest sponsorship ever for an athlete — and he reportedly signed a ten-year extension in 2013 that was worth $200 million. The company stood by Woods when a scandal involving extramarital affairs became public in 2009 and led to other brands dropping him. The partnership spanned 15 PGA major championship victories and 82 PGA Tour wins. “Over 27 years ago‚ I was fortunate to start a partnership with one of the most iconic brands in the world‚” Woods said in a statement posted on social media that included a photo of him posing with Nike founder Phil Knight. “The days since have been filled with so many amazing moments and memories‚ if I started naming them‚ I could go on forever.” “Phil Knight’s passion and vision brought this Nike and Nike Golf partnership together and I want to personally thank him‚ along with the Nike employees and incredible athletes I have had the pleasure of working with along the way‚” Woods continued. “People will ask if there is another chapter. Yes‚ there will certainly be another chapter. See you in LA! Tiger” Nike posted on its Instagram account a photo of Woods‚ writing: “Tiger‚ you challenged your competition‚ stereotypes‚ conventions‚ the old school way of thinking.” “You challenged the entire institution of golf‚” the statement said. “You challenged us. And most of all‚ yourself. And for that challenge we’re grateful.”   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Nike (@nike) ESPN noted that Woods’ statement seemed to indicate that he would be playing in the Genesis at Riviera Country Club in Pacific Palisades on February 15-18.

Notorious bachelor and rumored lothario John Mayer said he’s ready to settle down and get married. The 46-year-old singer songwriter has dated many famous women over the course of his career‚ but so far he hasn’t ever made it down the aisle. The “Gravity” singer revealed his feelings about marriage on the podcast “Comfort Food with Kelly Rizzo‚” which is hosted by Bob Saget’s widow‚ Kelly Rizzo. “People don’t think I want to be married. I absolutely want to be married‚” Mayer told the podcast host when their conversation landed on the topic of marriage. “You know the secret‚ which is that I’m actually fairly well-adjusted considering what’s happened to me in my life. Pretty well-adjusted and ready to go at any moment.” “And I so badly want to get married if only for my wife to just know in her heart‚ like‚ ‘John will know what to do‚'” he added. “I just think that level of being relied on is the hottest thing in the world. ‘If my husband was here‚ he would know what to do. Call John. Call my husband.’ You’re a full grown-up when this is your romantic fantasy. You’re a fully-fledged grown-up.” Before his statements‚ Rizzo had been praising Mayer for being supportive of her following Saget’s death in January 2022.  “Your kink is that you want someone to be like‚ ‘John’s got a guy‚'” Rizzo said to Mayer. “Reliance kink? Oh my God. Dependability kink? YES‚” he confirmed. This isn’t the first time Mayer hinted at wanting a more serious relationship. “Of course I want to get married‚” he said in 2022 during a “Call Her Daddy” podcast appearance. “Dating is no longer a codified activity for me‚ it doesn’t exist in a kind of … it’s not patterned anymore.”  The “Your Body Is a Wonderland” singer also addressed his dating reputation. “That is what that is. That’s the role I play on the big TV show I didn’t write‚ but that’s fine. Maybe I had a hand in it or something.” Mayer has been linked romantically with Taylor Swift‚ Katy Perry‚ Jennifer Aniston‚ Minka Kelly‚ Jessica Simpson‚ Jennifer Love Hewitt‚ to name a few.

Joe Biden is desperate. And he should be. The world is an uglier and uglier place under Biden. Nearly no one believes the country is moving in the right direction. And Biden is clearly an ailing man. He’s not with it‚ and everyone knows it. That includes‚ apparently‚ former president Barack Obama. According to the Washington Post: Former president Barack Obama has raised questions about the structure of President Biden’s reelection campaign‚ discussing the matter directly with Biden and telling the president’s aides and allies the campaign needs to be empowered to make decisions without clearing them with the White House‚ according to three people familiar with the conversations. In other words‚ Obama is telling Biden to outsource his campaign to people … other than Joe Biden. Apparently‚ Obama grew “animated” in discussing the election‚ and recommended David Plouffe‚ Obama’s own 2008 campaign manager‚ to head the effort. Other Democrats are also worried about Biden’s reelect chances. “Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.)‚ who is running for her state’s open Senate seat‚ has expressed concern to allies that she may not be able to win if Biden is at the top of the ticket‚ according to people familiar with the conversations‚” the Post reports. Axios has reported similar findings‚ saying that “many high-level Democrats think it’s not fine. They fear the president’s political machine hasn’t found the sweet spot between a chill Zen and dangerous complacency — and has been way too Zen.” Biden allies are worried that his base won’t show up. So Biden is turning to his last messaging refuge: Stop Donald Trump. That’s what his speech in Valley Forge on Friday was all about. It was a strange place to effectively launch his reelection campaign. Valley Forge immediately spells negativity: a nation under attack‚ trying to live through its darkest moment. It’s not about hope or change. It’s about soldiering through winter. It’s about gangrene and frostbite. That’s not a recipe for reelection success. So the theme of Biden’s speech was that he is like George Washington and Trump is like Adolph Hitler. He did not really differentiate between Trump and his followers; he did not really differentiate between Trump’s followers and other Republicans; he did not really differentiate between Trump voters who don’t like the events of January 6 and those who do. Everyone who would vote for Trump was lumped together. And that’s a dangerous play. It’s the same play Hillary Clinton made in 2016 when she suggested Trump was the leader of the deplorables. And people did not show up to vote for her. WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show What happens this time when you have an elderly‚ ailing‚ fragile old man who has tyrannically used the power of the executive in order to overthrow generations of precedent with regard to what the president can or cannot do‚ standing up and declaring that his political enemies are actual enemies of the Republic itself? That’s why he was at Valley Forge: He wants the dark; he wants the cold. He wants you to feel that‚ but he wants you to feel that about Trump — not about his administration. Biden attacking Trump as a candidate with reference to January 6 — particularly as opposed to what Trump will do as president or what his agenda is as president — is not going to play. Why? Because the date on the calendar is January 8‚ 2024. We are now three full years removed from January 6‚ and in that intervening time‚ Trump has not been the president of the United States. For all the talk about how horrible January 6 was‚ it did not actually stop the peaceful transition of power in the United States. Donald Trump left office on Inauguration Day and Joe Biden became president. Since then Biden has been president for three years — and he doesn’t want to talk about any of it. He just wants to talk about how Donald Trump is a threat to the Republic. There’s one significant problem with that: Joe Biden is an actual threat to the Republic.

Golden Globes’ elite audience and social media users’ responses to comedian Jim Gaffigan’s pedophile joke at the 2024 award show made it clear that everyone wants comedian Ricky Gervais back as the host. During the 81st annual awards show on Sunday‚ the 57-year-old actor and comic got more cheers and applause for his jokes than the comedian picked to host the 2024 show‚ Jo Koy. “This is so exciting for me‚” Gaffigan said as a presenter at the annual ceremony for first-ever Best Performance in Stand-Up Comedy on Television. “The Golden Globes – I can’t even believe I’m in the entertainment industry. I can’t.” “You know‚ it’s so unlikely‚” he added. “I’m from a small town in Indiana. I’m not a pedophile. I don’t know if that’s a new category here‚ but …” The room of star Hollywood performers roared with laughter at the gag and gave the comedian a round of applause. Jim Gaffigan calls out pedophilia in Hollywood at the #GoldenGlobes: “I can’t even believe I’m in the entertainment industry. It’s so unlikely… I’m from a small town in Indiana and I’m not a pedophile” pic.twitter.com/RhNKeNX2ZH — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) January 8‚ 2024 The comedian then listed off the the names of nominees for the award which included‚ Gervais‚ Chris Rock‚ Amy Schumer‚ and Wanda Sykes‚ with the award going to Gervais for his successful Netflix special‚ “Ricky Gervais: Armageddon.” And over on X (formerly Twitter)‚ the response to Gaffigan’s brief moment on the show was similar‚ with people posting clips of his bit along with clips of Gervais torching Hollywood four years earlier at the 2020 Golden Globes — all while panning the current host‚ Koy. “Is it me or is this becoming a trend?” one person wrote on social media comparing the two comedians’ appearances. “Jim Gaffigan pulled a Ricky Gervais at the Golden Globes. I’m here for it.” Another added‚ “This is epic!  We got a [Ricky Gervais] moment at Pedowood’s 2024 Golden Globe.” A third person included a side-by-side clip of Gaffigan’s appearance alongside Gervais —who torched Hollywood over its “pedophile movies” and cracked a joke about convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein while hosting the show in 2020. “No one cares about movies anymore‚” Gervais said at the time. “No one goes to cinema‚ no one really watches network TV. Everyone is watching Netflix …” “You could binge-watch the entire first season of ‘Afterlife’ instead of watching this show‚” he added. “That’s a show about a man who wants to kill himself ’cause his wife dies of cancer and it’s still more fun than this.” “Spoiler alert‚ season two is on the way so in the end he obviously didn’t kill himself‚” Gervais continued. “Just like Jeffrey Epstein. Shut up. I know he’s your friend‚ but I don’t care.”

Seattle police made no arrests