The Ben Shapiro Show - February 26, 2018


Resign, Sheriff Israel | Ep. 483


Episode Stats

Length

49 minutes

Words per Minute

200.31386

Word Count

9,999

Sentence Count

664

Misogynist Sentences

14

Hate Speech Sentences

5


Summary

The Broward County Sheriff makes a complete ass of himself, and high school classmates of shooting victims take it way too far, and Democrats try to defend the FBI over the Steele dossier. Lots to get to, lots to cover, including: 1. The Florida school shooter who killed 17 people after he opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School called the police distressed after his mother passed away just a few months ago. 2. A woman who knew the shooter called the FBI tip line and said, I know he s going to explode. On January 5th, 2019, a woman who was close to the shooter told the FBI that she was worried he was going to try to enter the school. 3. On Saturday night, the Sheriff released a statement saying there were only 23 calls involving the shooter or his family over the years. But a BuzzFeed News report shows at least 45 calls made to the suspect's home by the police over the past decade. 4. The number of calls made by the shooter and his family were nearly twice the number publicly disclosed by the department on Friday. 5. There were four different deputies standing outside the shooting scene. 6. There was no evidence that the shooting was actually a shooting. 7. The shooter was actually calling the police on himself. 8. And finally, there's good news for our listeners. 9. There's not just one loan! Check your rate for free! Ben Shapiro: Check it out at LendingClub.com/Ben Shapiro: Checking Your Rate for Free! And when you do, you can get a rate for $40,000 up to $40k for a home improvement project, or a car loan, for almost any other purpose, you get a better chance of getting a better car, a better loan, and you can make it faster than you can use that? Ben: Checking your Rate for FREE! - Ben: Check your Rate For Free, Check Your Rate For FREE, Ben: 09999, Check It Out Here: Ben: $5, $4, 5, $7,99, $15,000, $19,99 or $25,000? - Check It Up? Also, check it Out! Plus, Check it Out: Lending Club: And When You Can Help Me Out: Check It Rate For $40K, It s Not That Good?


Transcript

00:00:00.000 The Broward County Sheriff makes a complete ass of himself, high school classmates of shooting victims take it way too far, and Democrats try to defend the FBI over the Steele dossier.
00:00:08.000 Lots to get to.
00:00:09.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.
00:00:09.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
00:00:15.000 So here we are in beautiful, scenic Minnesota.
00:00:18.000 I'm speaking at the University of Minnesota tonight.
00:00:20.000 I've been shuttled off campus to what they call the Cal College, I guess, which is the agriculture school, which is at least a mile away, I believe, from the main campus, where I will be doing my speech tonight.
00:00:30.000 I look forward to seeing everybody there.
00:00:32.000 We'll talk a little bit more about that.
00:00:34.000 Plus, I have some good news for my producer, Mathis, in the stuff that I like a little bit later in the show.
00:00:39.000 But before we get to any of this stuff, first, I want to say thank you to our new sponsors over at Lending Club.
00:00:45.000 Everybody needs a helping hand sometimes.
00:00:46.000 A lot of folks who need a little bit of extra money for a wedding, or you have medical expenses, or you have credit card debt.
00:00:51.000 Well, sometimes a little money can make a pretty big difference, and you can make it happen over at LendingClub.com.
00:00:56.000 So here's what Lending Club does.
00:00:57.000 They give you access to low rates on loans up to $40,000 for almost any purpose.
00:01:02.000 You take control of your debt, finance a major purpose, purchase, or make those home improvements.
00:01:07.000 It's particularly good if you already have credit card debt and you want to take out a loan to get that APR down, for example.
00:01:12.000 It's easier than going to
00:01:30.000 So here's how it works.
00:01:30.000 Go to LendingClub.com slash Ben and there you can check your rate for free.
00:01:35.000 This will not impact your credit score.
00:01:36.000 So that's good news number one.
00:01:38.000 Then LendingClub.com slash Ben.
00:01:40.000 LendingClub.com slash Ben.
00:01:41.000 Then it gives you a bunch of different options and Lending Club lets you know whether you're approved for a loan via Lending Club.
00:01:49.000 So go to LendingClub.com, check your rate for free.
00:01:51.000 LendingClub.com slash Ben.
00:01:53.000 And when you do, you can check your rate for free.
00:01:55.000 Again, this is the best way that you can get one of these
00:01:59.000 Let's do it!
00:02:17.000 All loans made by WebBank, member of FDIC, equal housing lender.
00:02:20.000 Go check it out right now.
00:02:21.000 LendingClub.com slash Ben.
00:02:23.000 Again, there's not a better way to get a loan than LendingClub.com slash Ben.
00:02:27.000 That also lets them know that we sent you.
00:02:28.000 All right.
00:02:29.000 So, we begin today with the news update on what we now know about what happened in Parkland.
00:02:34.000 So, we now know from the UK Daily Mail that not only was everybody around the shooter in Parkland actually calling the police over all of this, we now know
00:02:44.000 That the shooter himself called the police on himself.
00:02:47.000 According to the Daily Mail, it has been revealed that the Florida school shooter who killed 17 people after he opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School called the police distressed after his mother passed away just a few months ago.
00:02:57.000 He called authorities just after Thanksgiving, saying he had been in a fight and was struggling with the death of his mother.
00:03:02.000 He said, On January 5th,
00:03:07.000 A woman who knew the shooter called the FBI tip line and said, quote, I know he's going to explode.
00:03:11.000 She said her biggest fear was that he might resort to entering a school and just start shooting the place up.
00:03:15.000 40 days later, of course, he did exactly that.
00:03:17.000 So warning after warning after warning after warning.
00:03:21.000 Scott Israel is the is the
00:03:23.000 Sheriff of Broward County who's made a complete fool of himself.
00:03:27.000 He came out earlier, late last week, and he suggested that there weren't quite as many calls to the house as he had once been accused of.
00:03:35.000 Apparently there were people saying there were 39 different calls to the house by the police because of all the warnings about the shooter.
00:03:41.000 He said, no, no, no, it was only 23.
00:03:43.000 Only one problem, according to BuzzFeed, that is not true.
00:03:45.000 They say Broward County Sheriff's officials said in a statement late Saturday they responded only to 23 calls involving suspected Florida shooter or his family over the years.
00:03:54.000 But records obtained by BuzzFeed News show at least 45 responses since 2008.
00:03:58.000 The number of calls made over the years involving the shooter or his family, according to the call records, are nearly twice the number publicly disclosed by the department.
00:04:06.000 On Saturday night, they had released a statement pushing back on reports they had been called to more than 23 incidents released by the department.
00:04:13.000 They also put out a statement suggesting that it was not true, as CNN reported on Friday, that there were four different deputies standing outside the shooting with their guns drawn, refusing to go in.
00:04:24.000 But then they admitted that they actually did not know whether that was the case or not.
00:04:28.000 So just absolute malfeasance.
00:04:31.000 Ridiculous malfeasance.
00:04:33.000 The idea that anybody's going to give up their gun because the authorities are going to take care of them when the authorities clearly are not taking care of them.
00:04:40.000 Yeah, good luck with that.
00:04:41.000 Good luck with that.
00:04:41.000 Not a lot of Second Amendment advocates going to sit around waiting for you to show up when you prove that you can't even show up to a school shooting when you have an armed school officer there.
00:04:49.000 So, just to show how ridiculous this is, Scott Israel finally appears with Jake Tapper on Sunday morning.
00:04:54.000 Now, I was very critical of Jake and his role in what I thought was just an absolute debacle.
00:04:59.000 Last week on CNN, they had a two-hour CNN town hall with Dana Lash from the NRA and Senator Marco Rubio and Senator Bill Nelson, the Democrat, who was a hero to the crowd for suggesting that they ought to ban all semi-automatic weapons.
00:05:10.000 And I thought Jake did not do a good job of handling that situation.
00:05:13.000 I thought the thing was a setup from the beginning.
00:05:14.000 I thought it was an emotional manipulation move.
00:05:16.000 I thought it had nothing to do
00:05:18.000 With disseminating important information to the public, it was just a way for people to vent their spleen and ire at Dana and at Rubio, two people who had nothing to do with the shooting, while completely ignoring Scott Israel.
00:05:28.000 Scott Israel, the Broward County Sheriff, was there too.
00:05:30.000 And as you recall, he ripped into Dana Lash.
00:05:32.000 He ripped into Rubio.
00:05:33.000 He suggested that these were the people at fault, not him.
00:05:35.000 He had done a wonderful job.
00:05:37.000 Well, then it came out, literally within 48 hours, that there was a deputy on the grounds who did nothing, that the police department had gotten warning after warning after warning after warning nearly 40 times, or more than 40 times, according to BuzzFeed, and did nothing.
00:05:50.000 And he went on stage with Dana Lash, and he ripped her up and down, knowing that the culpability was, for the most part, his.
00:05:57.000 So on Sunday, he comes back, and he does his sit-down with Jake Tapper.
00:06:01.000 And Jake, this time, does a really good job.
00:06:02.000 Jake grills him.
00:06:04.000 And Jake makes him look pretty bad.
00:06:05.000 This exchange is just astonishing.
00:06:07.000 Scott Israel, the sheriff of Broward County, explaining that actually, in reality, his leadership was just amazing.
00:06:12.000 His leadership was actually incredible.
00:06:14.000 Jake, I can only take responsibility for what I knew about.
00:06:18.000 I exercise my due diligence.
00:06:20.000 I've given amazing leadership to this agency.
00:06:23.000 Amazing leadership?
00:06:25.000 Yes, Jake.
00:06:27.000 There's a lot of things we've done throughout.
00:06:30.000 You don't measure a person's leadership by a deputy not going into a... These deputies received the training they needed.
00:06:40.000 Maybe you measure somebody's leadership by whether or not they protect the community.
00:06:43.000 In this case, you've listed 23 incidents before the shooting involving the shooter.
00:06:50.000 And still, nothing was done to keep guns out of his hands, to make sure that the school was protected, to make sure you were keeping an eye on him.
00:06:58.000 Your deputy at the school failed.
00:07:00.000 I don't understand how you can sit there and claim amazing leadership.
00:07:03.000 Okay, but Scott Israel did anyway.
00:07:05.000 Good for Tapper for calling him on it.
00:07:07.000 Too bad that they didn't have this information before that town hall, when Israel was allowed to rant and rave around the stage like a maniac, blaming everybody but himself.
00:07:15.000 Tapper went further than this.
00:07:16.000 He said, are you really not taking any responsibility here?
00:07:19.000 He grilled Israel for suggesting that everything was hunky-dory.
00:07:23.000 Here is Tapper going off on Scott Israel again.
00:07:25.000 Deputies make mistakes, police officers make mistakes, we all make mistakes.
00:07:29.000 But it's not the responsibility of the general or the president if you have a deserter.
00:07:33.000 You look into this, we're looking into this aggressively, and we'll take care of it and justice will be served.
00:07:40.000 Are you really not taking any responsibility for the multiple red flags that were brought to the attention of the Broward Sheriff's Office about this shooter before the incident, whether it was people near him, close to him, calling the police on him?
00:07:54.000 I mean, really, what the hell is he talking about?
00:07:56.000 When Israel says that this is like the president being responsible for a deserter, no, this is not like the president being responsible for a deserter.
00:08:02.000 There you have an entire chain of command and the deserter is punished in some cases with jail time and in rare cases with actual death penalty.
00:08:10.000 In this case, not only was there one deputy there, there may have been four deputies there who did nothing, and again, there were dozens and dozens and dozens of warnings.
00:08:17.000 If there were dozens of warnings that there was an attack about to happen, a specific warning, not just a general warning, specific warnings that there was an attack about to happen on 9-11, and the President of the United States ignored warning after warning after warning after warning that was brought to him, and all of his people did that, and then an attack took place, and 3,000 Americans died, do you think that impeachment might be on the table?
00:08:33.000 The answer is yes.
00:08:35.000 People were talking about how Bush was neglectful of 9-11 based on one vague warning that airplanes might be used for a terror attack at some point in the future.
00:08:45.000 One warning that I'm not even sure Bush saw at any point.
00:08:48.000 He was ripped up and down for that.
00:08:50.000 We're good to go.
00:09:06.000 Did you know it then?
00:09:07.000 Did you know it Wednesday night?
00:09:27.000 It was spoken about earlier during that day.
00:09:31.000 I'm not on a timeline for TV or any news show.
00:09:35.000 We need to get it right.
00:09:36.000 We need to get it accurate.
00:09:37.000 We're talking about people's lives.
00:09:39.000 We're talking about a community.
00:09:41.000 So he'd heard before, but he's trying to now talk about, we're about people's lives and about the community.
00:09:45.000 How about this?
00:09:46.000 How about you go in front of the community and you go on bended knee and you ask their forgiveness for all of the crappy job that you did here?
00:09:53.000 It is just an amazing thing that he says, and it gets even worse.
00:09:56.000 It gets even worse, because in just a second, I'm going to play you what Israel said when he was asked about what the department could have done differently, because it truly is an amazing thing.
00:10:05.000 First, okay, so Israel is asked about when he knew that the deputies had not entered.
00:10:10.000 He's asked again by Tapper, and again, he misdirects the question.
00:10:13.000 When did you find out that Deputy Peterson had not gone into the building?
00:10:17.000 How soon after the shooting did you know that?
00:10:21.000 Not for days.
00:10:22.000 How many days?
00:10:25.000 I'm not sure.
00:10:26.000 He's not sure.
00:10:27.000 He just didn't know.
00:10:27.000 It was just a mystery to him.
00:10:28.000 He can't remember.
00:10:30.000 That answer means that he knew before the town hall.
00:10:31.000 Here's the one that was really making the rounds.
00:10:33.000 This particular response from Scott Israel.
00:10:35.000 If this guy has a job by the end of the week, that is a blight on the state of government in Florida.
00:10:42.000 He can be fired by Rick Scott.
00:10:43.000 Rick Scott, the Florida governor, who's a Republican, who's come in for a lot of criticism from Israel, has said that he wants a full investigation before he fires Israel.
00:10:50.000 That's probably not the worst move in the world, considering that he doesn't want the partisan blowback.
00:10:54.000 He wants to be able to show, case in point, exactly how Israel screwed this thing up, so that Israel can't claim it's a partisan hit, but
00:11:01.000 If Israel had any sort of moral fortitude at all, he would step down.
00:11:04.000 Obviously he does not.
00:11:05.000 And this quote shows that he does not.
00:11:07.000 Look at this.
00:11:08.000 This is just astonishing.
00:11:09.000 So Israel is asked what he could have done differently, and his answer is just... It's mind-boggling.
00:11:13.000 It's mind-boggling.
00:11:14.000 Do you think that if the Broward Sheriff's Office had done things differently, this shooting might not have happened?
00:11:22.000 Listen, if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, uh, you know, uh, O.J.
00:11:26.000 Simpson would still be in the record books.
00:11:28.000 I don't know what that means.
00:11:29.000 There's 17 dead people, and there's a whole long list of things your department could have done differently.
00:11:33.000 How could... Listen, uh, that's what, that's what, uh, after-action reports are.
00:11:38.000 That's what Lessons Learned reports are for.
00:11:41.000 If ifs and nuts were candies and buts?
00:11:44.000 What is he even talking about?
00:11:45.000 What kind of, what?
00:11:46.000 And Tapper says, there's 17 people dead.
00:11:48.000 I don't even know what you're talking about here.
00:11:50.000 What are you even saying?
00:11:52.000 And the answer is he doesn't know what he's saying because this is complete nonsense.
00:11:54.000 He's just saying random crap because this is what he's doing to avoid responsibility.
00:11:58.000 So finally he's asked if he's going to resign, and of course he answers no, he's not going to resign.
00:12:02.000 The people responsible are the ones who took the calls and didn't follow up on them, as it was with the FBI, as it was with any person.
00:12:11.000 Leaders are responsible for the agency, but leaders are not responsible for a person.
00:12:18.000 I gave him a gun.
00:12:19.000 I gave him a badge.
00:12:21.000 I gave him the training.
00:12:22.000 If he didn't have the heart to go in, that's not my responsibility.
00:12:26.000 So I gave him the gun, I gave him the training, I gave him the badge, but it's not my fault if he didn't go in?
00:12:30.000 How about it's your fault if you were told nearly 50 times what the shooter was doing?
00:12:34.000 Again, all of this is an attempt to misdirect.
00:12:36.000 Now what's truly astonishing is you would expect the survivors, you would expect some of the victims to speak out against Scott Israel, and some of them are.
00:12:42.000 There are some of the shooting victims who are actually coming out and saying that this sheriff is a coward and he did something wrong.
00:12:47.000 These are not the ones, however, that you're seeing on CNN.
00:12:49.000 You're seeing them on Fox News.
00:12:50.000 You're not seeing them on MSNBC.
00:12:51.000 You're not seeing them in the mainstream media nearly as much as you're seeing, for example, David Hogg or Gonzales, the 17-year-old girl who's been on TV a lot.
00:13:02.000 You're seeing those people.
00:13:03.000 You're seeing people who are pro-gun control on CNN and MSNBC a lot.
00:13:06.000 One deputy that worked there, Peterson, he worked there.
00:13:27.000 And he's a coward.
00:13:28.000 He was, uh, he stood by the door.
00:13:31.000 I know as a fact he could have made it to the third floor and saved all six victims if he wasn't some little, I can't even, words can't even describe what, the way I think about him.
00:13:43.000 But I'm not trying to think about that stuff because that's just negative and I'm just gonna make me toxic.
00:13:49.000 It's the father of a shooting victim saying the sheriff's deputy was a coward, which is obvious.
00:13:52.000 The sheriff himself has said that, but the real question is, is it the sheriff's fault?
00:13:55.000 A survivor, a young student named Kyle Kashuv, he came out, he says, yeah, of course it's the sheriff's fault.
00:14:00.000 Why are we even talking about random law-abiding gun owners across the country instead of talking about the sheriff?
00:14:04.000 It absolutely outrages me that on the CNN town hall, we had the sheriff who was virtue signaling against the NRA and against guns, when he didn't even act properly.
00:14:14.000 The armed officer at our school waited outside, and then the sheriff and his men, for four minutes, let my classmates die while he sat outside and waited.
00:14:22.000 He didn't even do his job properly.
00:14:24.000 And then he comes around and turns around saying guns are the issue, when he failed to act properly.
00:14:29.000 Let's
00:14:48.000 Let's see, how many Twitter followers?
00:14:49.000 He has like 13.6 thousand Twitter followers.
00:14:53.000 He is from the school, he was there.
00:14:55.000 But, no shock of course, no shock that he is not getting nearly the same coverage that Emma Gonzalez is getting.
00:15:02.000 She has
00:15:03.000 As of today, 968,000 followers on Twitter helped along by her celebrity friends who all want to push gun control.
00:15:09.000 So you can see the differential in attention being paid to particular victims.
00:15:12.000 Certain victims get lots of attention.
00:15:14.000 Certain victims don't get any attention.
00:15:15.000 Because certain victims say the right things that the cameras want to hear.
00:15:18.000 Well, one of those victims, one of the witnesses to the shooting, a guy named David Hogg.
00:15:22.000 You've seen him all over TV.
00:15:24.000 He's been very loud.
00:15:24.000 He's been saying some pretty absurd things.
00:15:26.000 And over the weekend, he was on CNN with Brian Stelter and Dan Rather.
00:15:30.000 For some reason, he's a journalism student, I guess, and Dan Rather was there to advise him on journalism, which
00:15:35.000 Is sort of like being advised on journalism by Stephen Glass.
00:15:38.000 Like, why you're being advised on journalism by a guy who was run out of the industry in 2004 for putting forward a fake letter about George W. Bush is beyond me.
00:15:45.000 But I guess that's what the media do now.
00:15:47.000 We have to rehabilitate Dan Rather.
00:15:48.000 In any case, David Hogg, who's one of these students, he actually gets on national TV.
00:15:53.000 And because he understands that his agenda here, his goal here, is to push the notion that guns are responsible and not the police department, suddenly he's defending the cops for not doing their job.
00:16:03.000 Here's David Hogg defending the police officers.
00:16:05.000 By the way, no one should be doing this, okay?
00:16:06.000 If a police officer does something that is wrong, then everybody should be condemning that police officer.
00:16:11.000 With a sheriff's deputy,
00:16:12.000 Does not run into the line of fire when he has a gun and try and save students.
00:16:16.000 He did something wrong.
00:16:17.000 And David Hogg, nobody else, nobody is allowed to go out there and exonerate this person for the sin of letting children die when you had the capacity to stop it and it was your legal duty to do so, which is what happens here.
00:16:27.000 Now I'm not talking about whether it's suable, I'm talking about you were hired to do a job and you purposefully did not do that job, even according to your own sheriff, who himself is a garbage provocateur.
00:16:37.000 Here is David Hogg on CNN defending the police officers and saying, well, I don't really want to say anything about Scott Israel.
00:16:43.000 No shock, he doesn't want to say anything about Scott Israel.
00:16:45.000 Scott Israel is on the same side as he is when it comes to guns.
00:16:48.000 And if he goes after Scott Israel, then it may allow the press to swivel their attention away from their maniacal approach to gun control and toward what actually happened here.
00:16:55.000 So here's David Hogg.
00:16:56.000 He, just like every other police officer out there,
00:16:59.000 At heart, he's a good person.
00:17:00.000 He didn't take action in this event, and I can't explain why, or I just can't explain, there are no words to explain why he wouldn't take action to take out this individual, but I think it's a good example of how if he didn't take action, and supposedly four others didn't, I mean, who does?
00:17:14.000 Who wants to go down the barrel of an AR-15, even with a Glock?
00:17:17.000 And I know that's what these police officers are supposed to do, but they're people too.
00:17:21.000 They need to worry about themselves as well as all the other students, and I don't think teachers need to have that responsibility either.
00:17:27.000 So no one should have the responsibility of facing down a bad shooter.
00:17:30.000 So who's going to stop that bad shooter?
00:17:32.000 I love this assumption that the guns are magically going to disappear from society, but they're not.
00:17:36.000 So who's going to stop the bad shooter?
00:17:37.000 Was it that long ago that we forget that there was a security officer with a Glock who stopped a congressional baseball shooting?
00:17:46.000 Is it that long ago that we forget that it was an NRA member who shot a mass shooter in Texas?
00:17:52.000 Is it that long ago that we forget that the vast majority of these mass shooters are stopped eventually by a cop?
00:17:59.000 Most of them don't end up shooting themselves?
00:18:00.000 Usually it's the police officers who have to do something to stop these guys?
00:18:04.000 But I guess that we're going to pretend that David Hogg gets to be the Pope now.
00:18:07.000 He's going to provide indulgences.
00:18:09.000 He's going to provide old-school, corrupt indulgences.
00:18:13.000 All he has to do is sit around and pass out indulgences.
00:18:15.000 All you have to do to get an indulgence is say that you are for gun control.
00:18:19.000 That's all you have to do.
00:18:20.000 David Hogg really keeping the blame where it belongs.
00:18:22.000 He keeps attacking Dana Lashley.
00:18:24.000 He's on CNN's reliable sources.
00:18:26.000 With Brian Stelter.
00:18:27.000 And there, he defended the sheriff again, said that the sheriff, Scott Israel, hadn't done anything wrong, but attacked Dana Lash again.
00:18:33.000 Because, of course, Dana is more responsible, and the sheriff whose job it is to actually protect these kids, and who failed dramatically over and over and over and over, 45 times, and then had a sheriff's deputy there who didn't do anything, and maybe three more who didn't do anything, and then went on national television and yelled about it.
00:18:46.000 Here's David Hogg, though, attacking Dana Lash, because it's really Dana's fault.
00:18:49.000 Here's what Dana's been saying as a spokesperson for the NRA.
00:18:52.000 She says that she wants to continue to pass laws.
00:18:55.000 She wants people in Congress to pass laws that help out with mental health and things like that, and she says that she can't do that.
00:19:01.000 Are you kidding me?
00:19:02.000 You own these politicians.
00:19:03.000 You've passed legislation that enables these bump stocks, which by the way, aren't allowed at NRA shooting ranges because they're too dangerous.
00:19:09.000 That's how bad they are.
00:19:10.000 But, continuing on with my point, she wants Congress to take action and she says that they won't?
00:19:16.000 Are you kidding me?
00:19:17.000 She owns these congressmen.
00:19:19.000 She can get them to do things, it's just she doesn't care about these children's lives.
00:19:24.000 I asked Dana, if she owns congressmen, can she get them to do entitlement reform?
00:19:27.000 I mean, so long as she's got them completely in her pocket.
00:19:29.000 Can she push them for maybe some better regulations?
00:19:34.000 There are about a thousand things that I could ask Dana to do as long as she has Congress directly in her pocket.
00:19:39.000 But that last statement is really egregious, and we're going to discuss that at length in just a second.
00:19:42.000 That last statement where he says that Dana doesn't care if children get killed, this is sick stuff.
00:19:48.000 And I understand you went through a tragedy.
00:19:50.000 I understand something bad happened to you.
00:19:52.000 That does not make that statement any less immoral.
00:19:55.000 It is immoral to sit around suggesting that Dana Lash does not care about dead kids because she disagrees with David Hogg, of all people, on gun control.
00:20:02.000 Again, I've been saying this for a week and a half.
00:20:04.000 I don't understand what about tragedy somehow confers expertise on policy on people.
00:20:07.000 I don't think it does.
00:20:08.000 I think it confers expertise on suffering because that's what you've done.
00:20:11.000 You have experience in suffering.
00:20:13.000 But you don't magically have knowledge about gun control or how it works.
00:20:16.000 You don't magically have knowledge about gun policy after studying the issue for half a second, half a hot second, and then going on TV and spouting slogans that you got from Chuck Schumer's webpage.
00:20:26.000 And you certainly don't have the moral credibility under any circumstances to impugn the intent of people who clearly do care about the death of children.
00:20:36.000 You know who doesn't care about the death of those kids?
00:20:37.000 The shooter.
00:20:38.000 You know who doesn't care about the death of those kids?
00:20:40.000 Presumably ISIS.
00:20:41.000 But I promise you, Dana Lash does care about the death of those kids.
00:20:45.000 I even believe that Scott Israel, who I think is a schmuck, cares about the death of those kids.
00:20:49.000 I think he's a bad guy.
00:20:50.000 I think he cares more deeply about his own political career than he does about the truth.
00:20:53.000 But I'm sure that he was pained by the death of those children.
00:20:58.000 But attributing those motives to Dana, it really is immoral.
00:21:01.000 And this brings up a serious problem with the entire debate that we are currently having.
00:21:06.000 It is self-contradictory.
00:21:07.000 We have all these statements that are being put out there, one after another, and they all contradict each other, and we are supposed to pretend like they don't.
00:21:13.000 So, for example, we keep hearing that the Parkland shooting witnesses are taking moral leadership of the gun control debate.
00:21:19.000 These high school students.
00:21:19.000 They've filled the gap left by the adults.
00:21:21.000 They're our new leaders.
00:21:22.000 They're the people we should take super seriously.
00:21:24.000 And then, simultaneously, we are told that you must never criticize their perspective because they're victimized children.
00:21:29.000 So which is it?
00:21:30.000 Are these the most brilliant, wise, and wonderful among us?
00:21:35.000 Or is it possible that they could be criticized?
00:21:39.000 Like, which is it?
00:21:40.000 Are they innocent children?
00:21:42.000 And if they are innocent children, then wouldn't that suggest we have to protect their innocence rather than using them as political shields?
00:21:48.000 It's so disingenuous to go around saying, these kids are the new experts on gun control, and then the minute you say what they just said is wrong or immoral or not true, then it's you who are the problem.
00:21:57.000 I'm not the one who stepped in front of the camera after a shooting and decided to spout off about gun control.
00:22:03.000 And that was not me.
00:22:05.000 And my job is to comment on current events.
00:22:08.000 But these kids put themselves in the public eye.
00:22:10.000 That's fine.
00:22:11.000 That's their choice.
00:22:12.000 But being in the public eye comes with criticism.
00:22:14.000 It does.
00:22:15.000 Have been doing it since I was their age.
00:22:18.000 I understand that.
00:22:19.000 I got hit a lot when I was a kid for all of the things that I said politically.
00:22:22.000 And you know what?
00:22:22.000 Some of those were deserved.
00:22:23.000 Sometimes I was wrong.
00:22:26.000 There's this weird notion going around that they can simultaneously claim that they are the great moral arbiters of society, and at the same time receive no blowback whatsoever.
00:22:34.000 That's not how the First Amendment works, that's not how public debate works, and that's certainly not how politics should work.
00:22:38.000 We cannot have a society if the way we make policy is someone experienced a tragedy, therefore they are the new king and potentate, and they get to determine what the policy is.
00:22:46.000 So pick one, okay?
00:22:47.000 If all of these witnesses are the moral leaders, then they also have to take the slings and arrows that come with speaking publicly.
00:22:54.000 Hey, how about this?
00:22:55.000 People who are saying the Parkland shooting witnesses demonstrate that 16-year-olds have important things to say about public policy and they should vote.
00:23:01.000 Okay, that's fine.
00:23:03.000 Let's say that's true.
00:23:04.000 Let's pretend that's true for just a second.
00:23:06.000 I'm going to need to hear you make the case why it is, then, that we should raise the age of being able to obtain a weapon to 21 years old, that children should stay on their parents' health insurance until they're 26 years old, and that teenage criminals should be treated as juveniles.
00:23:18.000 You have to pick one.
00:23:20.000 Are kids adults, or are they not adults?
00:23:22.000 How about this one?
00:23:23.000 People on the left suggesting that the police response to the Parkland shooting shows that a good guy with a gun can't stop a bad guy with a gun.
00:23:31.000 Alright?
00:23:33.000 Then how do you also argue that I should hand over my guns to the authorities who are going to protect me?
00:23:38.000 So if the good guys with the guns can't stop the bad guys with the guns, why should I give my guns to a bunch of the good guys who can't stop the bad guys?
00:23:44.000 That makes no sense to me.
00:23:44.000 I'm not handing my gun over to the same police department that stood by while 17 people were slaughtered.
00:23:50.000 You gotta pick one.
00:23:50.000 Either you can trust the police to protect you, or you can't trust the police to protect you.
00:23:56.000 Here's another one.
00:23:57.000 Members of the NRA don't care about the deaths of children in mass shootings because they disagree with particular policies the left wants.
00:24:05.000 And then we hear from the same people that the media do care deeply about the deaths of children in mass shootings, even if they continue to show the names and the faces of shooters regularly and engage in the same sort of coverage issues that apparently make those shootings more common by studies.
00:24:19.000 So which is it?
00:24:21.000 If we are going to impute motives to people based on their activity, if we're going to say the NRA doesn't care about school shootings because their policies lead to more school shootings, not true but okay if that's your argument, then how can you say that the media obviously do care about mass shootings even when they continue to show names and faces of mass shooters on TV for ratings?
00:24:38.000 Which is it?
00:24:40.000 My understanding is the folks in the media do care about shootings and maybe they disagree with me on how to treat those.
00:24:45.000 And people in the NRA care about shootings too, and maybe they disagree with you on how to treat those.
00:24:48.000 But you gotta pick one.
00:24:49.000 You can't have it both ways.
00:24:50.000 Here's another one.
00:24:52.000 David Hogg was completely right to shellack Dana Lash over her culpability in the Parkland shootings, but he was also completely right to ignore the culpability of Sheriff Israel in the Parkland shootings because the facts aren't out yet.
00:25:02.000 Can't have it both ways.
00:25:03.000 If you're gonna blame Dana, you certainly have to blame the sheriff who was in charge of all this crap when it went down.
00:25:08.000 How about this?
00:25:09.000 The shooting survivors claiming that Dana and Senator Rubio are morally inferior human beings who don't care about the mass slaughter of innocent kids, but Americans are doing something deeply wrong if we question whether it's appropriate for survivors to impute nasty motives to those with whom they disagree.
00:25:23.000 So in other words, if you're a survivor, you get to impute whatever motive you want to anybody else, but if I say, I'm going to impute a motive to you, which is a political motive, to how you are assessing blame, then I'm the bad guy for having politicized.
00:25:36.000 Doesn't work that way.
00:25:38.000 The same people.
00:25:38.000 I mean, again, there's so many contradictions that are being offered by the gun control proponents here.
00:25:42.000 None of these make sense.
00:25:44.000 People who are saying semi-automatic rifles must be banned because they're so commonly used in mass shootings, but then say that if I say the Second Amendment is under assault, I'm paranoid and crazy.
00:25:52.000 Why would I possibly think the government wants to take away my rights?
00:25:55.000 Why would I think I need a gun to protect the government from taking away my rights?
00:25:59.000 And then at the same time, they say the government should remove my guns from my house.
00:26:02.000 Explain that one.
00:26:04.000 By the way, side note here.
00:26:05.000 I saw an argument online today from some dolt that the Second Amendment should be interpreted to give everyone a musket, as opposed to the rifle that they currently have, right?
00:26:18.000 That is equivalent to saying, it is the pure equivalent of saying that we should get rid of the internet, we should get rid of text messaging, we should get rid of the telegraph, we should get rid of the telephone.
00:26:25.000 None of those are protected by the First Amendment.
00:26:27.000 Your ability to speak on none of those is protected by the First Amendment because none of those things existed in 1791.
00:26:31.000 It's a dumb, dumb argument.
00:26:34.000 Another internal contradiction from the gun control side.
00:26:37.000 More armed security at schools, they say, will not make our children safer.
00:26:41.000 But then the folks in the media who say this have armed security at every one of their media outlets.
00:26:45.000 I know.
00:26:46.000 I've been to all of them.
00:26:47.000 CNN has great security.
00:26:49.000 MSNBC, ABC, CBS, they all have terrific security.
00:26:53.000 They're not giving up those armed security guards anytime soon, nor should they.
00:26:57.000 Hey, how about this one?
00:26:58.000 Holding mass town hall events with mass shooting victims and witnesses before a stacked crowd of community gun control enthusiasts is journalism.
00:27:06.000 It's not activism, it's journalism.
00:27:07.000 This is what the media maintain.
00:27:09.000 Folks at CNN said, what we did last week with that Orwellian two-minute hate, that wasn't activism, that was journalism.
00:27:15.000 But these same people will suggest that it is not journalism if you actually question any of these victims or witnesses.
00:27:22.000 If you actually ask them questions about their views, then somehow you are violating journalistic ethics.
00:27:27.000 Again, none of these contradictions can hold.
00:27:30.000 We have to be at least, in some minor way, intellectually consistent.
00:27:34.000 If we can't be intellectually consistent, we can't have a discussion.
00:27:36.000 If we can't have a discussion, this is completely useless.
00:27:39.000 If we can't have a discussion, this is just a waste of time.
00:27:44.000 But that's really what it is anyway.
00:27:45.000 It's a politicized waste of time.
00:27:46.000 People are attempting to avoid responsibility for the decisions that they've made.
00:27:51.000 The cop, Sheriff Israel, doesn't want any of the responsibility.
00:27:56.000 The media don't want any responsibility.
00:27:58.000 Again, in the end, responsibility with the shooting lies with the shooter and the people who could have prevented it.
00:28:05.000 The NRA are not the people who could have prevented this.
00:28:07.000 I, as a responsible gun owner, I'm not one of the people who could have prevented this.
00:28:09.000 You know when I bought a gun for the first time, by the way?
00:28:12.000 You wanna know when I actually bought a gun?
00:28:14.000 I actually bought a shotgun for the first time after I had my gun debate with Piers Morgan.
00:28:17.000 I did not own a gun up till that point.
00:28:20.000 Really.
00:28:20.000 Didn't have a gun.
00:28:22.000 Because I grew up in L.A.
00:28:23.000 Most people in L.A.
00:28:24.000 don't have guns.
00:28:25.000 And I just didn't grow up in the gun culture.
00:28:27.000 It wasn't until I was threatened with death after I said to Piers Morgan that there was a Second Amendment right to own a gun that I actually went and bought a gun.
00:28:35.000 And that's why people are buying guns now, because they feel like they are being assaulted for exercising their rights.
00:28:38.000 They feel like they are being told what to do by a government and by a media who are intent on infringing their rights and getting no safety in return.
00:28:47.000 It's not even like they're trading their gun away for safety.
00:28:51.000 That's not what's happening.
00:28:51.000 They're trading their gun away and in return they're getting the media's smug moral satisfaction in preening.
00:28:57.000 That's all we're getting here.
00:28:59.000 I mean, I hesitate to bring up Jimmy Kimmel again because Jimmy Kimmel says the dumbest possible thing about this kind of stuff, but yesterday he retweeted an account suggesting that Republicans would take money from ISIS because that's the same as taking money from the NRA.
00:29:10.000 And then you wonder why people are joining the NRA at record numbers?
00:29:13.000 You wonder why people like me are going out and looking to purchase a rifle?
00:29:16.000 Because when you say you're going to infringe our rights and then you show that you can't defend me, of course I'm going to go out and get another gun.
00:29:23.000 Okay, now, meanwhile,
00:29:25.000 There is some breaking news in MemoGate 2018.
00:29:28.000 Yeah, it's been a little while since MemoGate.
00:29:32.000 And I know that you were excited that we didn't ask you to do MemoGate, but sadly we now have to do MemoGate.
00:29:36.000 And the reason we have to do MemoGate is because there's a new memo out.
00:29:39.000 Yay, another memo!
00:29:40.000 How exciting.
00:29:41.000 Now, I'm going to recapitulate what happened with the memos in just a second, but first you're going to have to go over to Daily Wire and subscribe.
00:29:46.000 For $9.99 a month, you can get a subscription to dailywire.com.
00:29:49.000 When you do, you get the rest of my show live.
00:29:51.000 You get the rest of Andrew Klavan's show live.
00:29:52.000 You get the rest of Michael Knowles' ex-Scribble show live.
00:29:54.000 You get to be part of our mailbag.
00:29:56.000 All of those wonders you get.
00:29:58.000 Plus, you get to ask us questions when we have our conversations.
00:30:01.000 All of these wonderful things.
00:30:02.000 And, if you get the annual subscription for $99 a year, you get all of those things, plus the magical Leftist Tears Hot or Cold Tumblr, which is just phenomenal.
00:30:10.000 You will enjoy it in every possible way.
00:30:12.000 If you just want to listen later for free, go over to iTunes, SoundCloud, YouTube, download, subscribe, leave a review.
00:30:17.000 We always appreciate it.
00:30:18.000 We are the largest, fastest-growing conservative podcast in the nation.
00:30:25.000 Alrighty, so, let's recapitulate what was happening in MemoGate when last we left our fascinating story.
00:30:31.000 So, I'm annoyed by MemoGate.
00:30:32.000 I know there are lots of people who are very into MemoGate.
00:30:34.000 MemoFight 2018.
00:30:36.000 I know.
00:30:37.000 Everybody's very into it.
00:30:39.000 The reason I was never enthused about this is because I always thought that the allegations were a little exaggerated.
00:30:44.000 Recall, the allegation was that the FBI targeted then-candidate Trump, or president-elect Trump, in order to discredit him over Trump-Russia collusion ties.
00:30:54.000 And they did so in improper fashion.
00:30:55.000 They weren't actually performing an honest investigation of facts surrounding members of the Trump campaign.
00:31:00.000 Instead, they were out to get Trump.
00:31:01.000 Now, I've always had a few problems with this.
00:31:03.000 Number one, if this was the case, Trump could have declassified all the materials proving it.
00:31:06.000 Number two, if they were actually trying to get Trump, why didn't any of this material leak into the public in the middle of the election cycle?
00:31:12.000 That'd make a ton of sense to me.
00:31:14.000 But that's the argument.
00:31:15.000 And so the argument was forwarded by Devin Nunes.
00:31:17.000 Devin Nunes is the House Intelligence Committee chair, and he wrote this four-page memo, six-page memo, in which he discussed supposed FBI malfeasance.
00:31:26.000 What did he accuse the FBI of doing?
00:31:27.000 What he suggested is that there was a Trump former foreign policy advisor named Carter Page.
00:31:32.000 Carter Page was apparently connected with Russia, or very friendly with the Russians, going all the way back to 2013, when there was a FISA warrant on him at that point, supposedly.
00:31:41.000 Okay, so Carter Page was investigated by the FBI, and they took out a FISA warrant on him.
00:31:45.000 No harm, no foul, right?
00:31:46.000 Well, Devin Newton said there was harm and there was foul.
00:31:48.000 He says that basically the FBI took what is known as the Steele dossier, and they used it in order to get the FISA warrant against Carter Page.
00:31:58.000 His argument was that the Steele dossier was a compendium of bad intel by Christopher Steele, who didn't like President Trump, and it was a piece of OPPO research put together by Fusion GPS through Christopher Steele at the behest of the Clinton campaign.
00:32:13.000 So basically, Hillary Clinton paid for information that went from the Russian government to Christopher Steele.
00:32:18.000 That information was used by the FBI to go get a warrant against Carter Page in an attempt to tie together the Trump-Russia collusion
00:32:25.000 That's the accusation.
00:32:47.000 That said, it didn't look to me like there was anything that suggested the FBI was specifically targeting Page in order to get to Trump.
00:32:54.000 It looked to me more like they suspected Page, they got a flimsy warrant based on material they suspected was true, and it hasn't panned out yet.
00:33:03.000 Which happens.
00:33:04.000 Is that scandalous?
00:33:05.000 Is that the end of the world?
00:33:06.000 Didn't seem to be so.
00:33:07.000 Okay, so the real accusation, the most damning accusation in the Nunes memo, was that the FISA warrant that was gotten on behalf of the Steele dossier, when they got the warrant, the FBI lied to the FISA court.
00:33:18.000 They lied to the FISA court by telling the FISA court that the actual Steele dossier was not OPPO research, or at least they didn't show that it was OPPO research.
00:33:26.000 So they didn't say it was OPPO research.
00:33:28.000 If they had said that, then the court would have taken it less seriously, and then they wouldn't have granted the FISA warrant.
00:33:32.000 Okay, so now Adam Schiff, who is in fact a leaker, he's a radical Democrat from California.
00:33:38.000 He's from my district, I believe, or the district over.
00:33:42.000 No, he has come out with a new memo, and his memo is an attempt to rebut Devin Newton's memo.
00:33:48.000 So here is what Schiff claims.
00:33:50.000 He claims, number one, and this is true, that the Page Warrant did not start the Trump-Russia collusion investigation.
00:33:55.000 This, of course, was acknowledged by
00:33:57.000 By Nunes in the original memo.
00:33:59.000 That originally the investigation started in July 2016 thanks to investigation into Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos having nothing to do with Carter Page.
00:34:07.000 So the idea that the entire Trump-Russia collusion investigation is fruit of the poisonous tree based on a bad FISA warrant, that's not the case.
00:34:14.000 Okay, claim number two is that the Steele memo was not the sole basis for the FISA application.
00:34:19.000 Now this is a little more unclear.
00:34:21.000 So Schiff, a lot of the information in his memo has been redacted.
00:34:24.000 So he claims that the FISA warrant wasn't gathered solely on the basis of the Steele memo, even though the Steele memo was used.
00:34:30.000 According to Schiff, quote,
00:34:50.000 That's a little dicey.
00:34:52.000 It looks a lot like the Steele memo was actually very important to getting the FISA warrant.
00:34:56.000 That doesn't make it illegitimate.
00:34:57.000 It's possible that the FBI believed the Steele memo was filled with real information because Steele had a history of working with the FBI and passing them real information.
00:35:04.000 That was good enough for them.
00:35:05.000 They applied.
00:35:06.000 But then again, there's the Nunes allegation that the application did not include the fact that the Steele memo, the Steele dossier, was actually paid for by the Clintons.
00:35:15.000 Okay, so Schiff goes on, he says, He also says there was no wiretap on the Trump campaign because Page was not working for Trump at the time of the surveillance.
00:35:21.000 That claim by Schiff is probably the most dicey of all because
00:35:34.000 The warrants against Page allows for retroactive searches of his messages, including the time that he was on the Trump campaign.
00:35:40.000 So, Page obviously was being investigated for Trump campaign connections.
00:35:47.000 Also, but the biggest claim that is made by Schiff in this memo is that he actually lets the application speak for itself.
00:35:53.000 And this is pretty damning to Nunes.
00:35:55.000 So Nunes' memo claims that the FBI did not tell the FISA court exactly how biased the dossier process was, the information gathering process was.
00:36:05.000 He did not quote the application.
00:36:07.000 Schiff quotes the application.
00:36:08.000 Here's what the application said.
00:36:10.000 Quote.
00:36:10.000 It says that Steele was, quote, approached by an identified U.S.
00:36:13.000 person.
00:36:14.000 This would be Fusion GPS's Glenn Simpson, who indicated to Source One, that'd be Steele, that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S.
00:36:22.000 person to conduct research regarding Candidate One's ties to Russia.
00:36:24.000 That's Trump.
00:36:25.000 The identified U.S.
00:36:26.000 person and Source Number One have a longstanding business relationship.
00:36:29.000 The identified U.S.
00:36:30.000 person hired Source Number One to conduct this research.
00:36:33.000 The identified U.S.
00:36:33.000 person never advised Source Number One as to the motivation behind the research into Candidate One's ties to Russia.
00:36:40.000 The FBI speculates, now this is the key, the FBI speculates that the identified U.S.
00:36:44.000 person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate One's campaign.
00:36:50.000 So it says right there in the application, let me read that again slowly.
00:36:52.000 It says, in the application, the FBI speculates that the identified U.S.
00:36:56.000 person, that'd be Fusion GPS's Glenn Simpson, was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit candidate number one's campaign, that could be used to discredit Trump's campaign.
00:37:06.000 When I read that, that says to me that the FBI did in fact tell the courts that this was oppo research.
00:37:10.000 That sounds to me like them telling the courts oppo research.
00:37:13.000 It doesn't sound to me like they were hiding the ball.
00:37:15.000 It sounds to me like legal language.
00:37:18.000 It was in a footnote, but no matter.
00:37:20.000 It's in the document.
00:37:21.000 Again, would that have prevented the court, if the court knew that it was Apple Research, would that have prevented the court from actually granting the FISA warrant?
00:37:27.000 No.
00:37:28.000 They would have said, okay, we trust that your source, Steele, has worked with you guys before, and he's provided you good information, and we assume that you did some checking into the veracity of the information.
00:37:40.000 Now, here's where it gets a little bit problematic for the FBI, because they didn't apparently do a lot of checking into the information regarding the allegations made in the Steele dossier.
00:37:47.000 They just went straight to
00:37:49.000 The FISA Court.
00:37:49.000 Now, could that be a problem?
00:37:50.000 Andy McCarthy says yes over at National Review.
00:37:54.000 Andy McCarthy is defending the Nunes memo.
00:37:58.000 He says that the FBI should have told the FISA Court that the Russians considered Page an idiot, which they had said in some intercepted conversations.
00:38:05.000 They should have known the Steele dossier was nonsense because FBI agent Bruce Ohr worked for Fusion GPS and knew Steele did not want Trump to become president.
00:38:13.000 So the FBI should have revealed that Steele was biased against Trump.
00:38:17.000 And that the FBI's language was misleading, since they knew Steele was doing opera research for Hillary.
00:38:21.000 And also, that Lisa Page and Peter Strzok's bias — remember, these are the FBI agents who were texting each other about how much they hated Trump — that matters, because they worked on the investigative team together.
00:38:31.000 Well, a lot of that is speculation.
00:39:02.000 It is unclear to me whether all of these allegations are enough to discredit even the Page warrant.
00:39:09.000 Forget about the entire Trump-Russia collusion investigation.
00:39:11.000 Now, by the way, do I think the Trump-Russia collusion investigation is going anywhere?
00:39:15.000 I don't with regard to actual collusion.
00:39:17.000 Again, I've seen no evidence of actual collusion.
00:39:18.000 I'm not sure Mueller has either.
00:39:20.000 All of the allegations that are currently being made by the Democrats have so far been unsupported by evidence.
00:39:25.000 All of the indictments that have been brought down by Mueller have nothing to do with collusion.
00:39:29.000 The indictments against Manafort are for him working with the Russian government before he knew Trump.
00:39:34.000 All of the activity with Rick Gates involves Manafort and the Ukrainian government, but nothing to do with Trump.
00:39:40.000 The George Papadopoulos thing involves him lying to the FBI, but it's not clear at all that he was funneling information up the chain to Trump.
00:39:47.000 Mike Flynn was indicted not for corrupt carryings on during the campaign, but for making a phone call to the Russian government while he was still in the transition period, and then lying about it to the FBI.
00:39:58.000 So he was charged with obstruction, not even with collusion or any crime that could plausibly be called conspiracy.
00:40:04.000 So a lot of the talk about how the Trump-Russia investigation is proceeding apace, I think this ends with maybe some obstruction charges against some folks, but I don't see this being the blockbuster that the left really wants.
00:40:18.000 So there is your update on MemoGate 2018.
00:40:20.000 Yeah, I know.
00:40:22.000 Fascinating, right?
00:40:23.000 But it's important to debunk this stuff because you're seeing partisans on both sides jump to conclusions.
00:40:27.000 People on the left saying, obviously everything was fine, and people on the right saying, obviously... and people on the right saying, obviously...
00:40:34.000 Nothing was fine.
00:40:34.000 Everything was garbage.
00:40:35.000 The FBI is a bad organization, all the rest.
00:40:37.000 I don't think either of those things are true.
00:40:39.000 I think the FBI cuts corners on a pretty routine basis on FISA warrants, and I think this is another case of that.
00:40:44.000 I don't know that it was an attempt to quote-unquote get Trump by the deep state, which is the accusation that's currently being made over and over and over.
00:40:51.000 By the way, worth noting,
00:40:53.000 That the President of the United States is talking about various policies on gun control right now.
00:41:00.000 He's talking about arming what he calls adept teachers.
00:41:04.000 The President of the United States is also talking about using the gun violence restraining orders.
00:41:09.000 This is a topic that I have talked about a little bit before, recommended by David French over at National Review.
00:41:15.000 This was the policy that would allow family members, close friends, to apply to courts to temporarily withhold your capacity to have a gun or buy a gun based on your mental health.
00:41:24.000 This seems to me perfectly reasonable.
00:41:26.000 The president also made a comment today that was not quite so reasonable, where he suggested that he would run into—that he was ripping into the deputy again in Parkland, and he said, I would have run in there unarmed.
00:41:38.000 Um, sure.
00:41:40.000 Sure you would, Mr. President.
00:41:42.000 Yeah.
00:41:42.000 No.
00:41:43.000 No.
00:41:43.000 Okay.
00:41:44.000 I don't want to mention things like bone spurs.
00:41:46.000 I don't want to mention things like your personal Vietnam being avoiding STDs in the 70s.
00:41:50.000 But I have my doubts that you would have run in unarmed.
00:41:54.000 But armed, maybe.
00:41:55.000 I mean, again, this is why I think that we have to have professionals with arms who actually do what they are supposed to do.
00:42:00.000 Okay.
00:42:01.000 Time for a couple of things that I like, and then a couple of things that I hate, and we'll do a Federalist Paper.
00:42:06.000 Thing I like number one.
00:42:09.000 There's a movie that I watched.
00:42:11.000 It's by Danny Boyle.
00:42:13.000 And it is with Chris Evans, Captain America, who apparently hates me for some reason that I can't quite nail down.
00:42:19.000 And Cillian Murphy.
00:42:20.000 The movie is called Sunshine.
00:42:22.000 It's a sci-fi movie.
00:42:23.000 The first two-thirds of this movie is quite good.
00:42:24.000 The last third of it is kind of dumb.
00:42:26.000 But the first two-thirds of it are really stylish and interesting and well-made.
00:42:30.000 The basic premise is that the sun is burning out, and we here on Earth have decided that we are going to nuke the sun.
00:42:35.000 Which is pretty awesome.
00:42:36.000 We're going to send a giant nuclear weapon into the sun to reinvigorate the sun, and it will all be fantastic.
00:42:40.000 So here it is.
00:42:41.000 Here's a little bit of the preview.
00:42:43.000 Our sun is dying.
00:42:46.000 Mankind faces extinction.
00:42:50.000 Sixteen months ago, I, Robert Kappa, and a crew of seven left Earth frozen in a solar winter.
00:42:58.000 Our mission?
00:42:59.000 Reignite the sun before it's too late.
00:43:03.000 Okay, so the movie's cool looking.
00:43:05.000 Again, it's Danny Boyle who would go on to direct Slumdog Millionaire and a bunch of other kind of interesting looking movies.
00:43:12.000 The movie's look is really interesting.
00:43:13.000 It turns into a kind of rote monster picture for no reason in the last third of the film.
00:43:17.000 But there's some cool stuff in it and it is, I think the first two thirds of it is worth watching.
00:43:22.000 I will not say that the entire movie is worth watching because I wouldn't want you to waste half an hour on some pretty bad sci-fi horror.
00:43:27.000 Okay.
00:43:28.000 Other things that I like.
00:43:30.000 It's Mathis's birthday today.
00:43:31.000 So congratulations to my son, Mathis, for finally reaching his 21st birthday.
00:43:36.000 Now you can drink.
00:43:38.000 Mathis, how old are you actually?
00:43:39.000 Mathis.
00:43:40.000 Okay, so Mathis is 25.
00:43:42.000 So in honor of Mathis's 25th birthday, he gets to work tomorrow.
00:43:46.000 So congratulations to Mathis.
00:43:48.000 I did not get him a present other than this, but this should suffice because, I mean, this is the most famous he's ever gonna be, is me talking about him right now.
00:43:54.000 So Mathis, congratulations on your birthday.
00:43:57.000 And yes, that's right, you get ripped even on your birthday.
00:43:59.000 Because you knew that, though, coming in here today, dude.
00:44:01.000 Everybody knew that.
00:44:02.000 Okay, so, happy birthday to the best producer at the company, except for all the other guys.
00:44:07.000 Math is clever.
00:44:08.000 Well done.
00:44:09.000 Other things that I like.
00:44:10.000 California Democrats are refusing to endorse Dianne Feinstein, which I find hilarious.
00:44:13.000 So she's been in the Senate since 1833.
00:44:16.000 Actually, since 1992.
00:44:17.000 She's one of the most left-leaning members of the U.S.
00:44:19.000 Senate.
00:44:20.000 She was the sponsor, of course, of the 1994 assault weapons ban.
00:44:23.000 She has a 100% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, so she's a pro-abortion fanatic.
00:44:28.000 She has a 7% rating from the Chamber of Commerce.
00:44:34.000 Suffice it to say, she's very left.
00:44:36.000 And the California Democratic Party refused to endorse her because she's not far left enough.
00:44:40.000 Because that's how insane Democrats are.
00:44:42.000 If they want to lose elections, they should continue to do this.
00:44:46.000 If Dianne Feinstein ain't enough for you, I don't know what is.
00:44:48.000 Time for a couple of things that I hate, and then we'll do a Federalist Paper.
00:44:52.000 So.
00:44:57.000 Alrighty, things that I hate.
00:44:58.000 So, today's things that I hate.
00:45:00.000 Ivanka Trump went to South Korea for the Olympics, the very end of the Olympics, and an Olympic skier named Gus Kenworthy, who apparently is also, he also stars as Robb Stark, apparently.
00:45:14.000 I guess in Game of Thrones, you'll see what I mean when we show a picture of him.
00:45:18.000 He came out and said, what is Ivanka Trump doing here?
00:45:20.000 Well, what Ivanka Trump is doing there is that she's the daughter of the president of the United States, and she's going there for goodwill.
00:45:24.000 I mean, like, duh.
00:45:25.000 But here he is whining about it.
00:45:26.000 He says, so proud of all these people.
00:45:28.000 Everyone here has worked hard to make it to the Olympics and have the opportunity to be at the closing ceremony.
00:45:32.000 Well, everyone except Ivanka, honestly.
00:45:35.000 TF she doing here?
00:45:37.000 What a kind and generous human being.
00:45:39.000 What a nice fellow.
00:45:40.000 What is she doing at the Olympics?
00:45:41.000 You know, a celebration of the American spirit.
00:45:43.000 Just terrible.
00:45:44.000 How dare Ivanka go to South Korea?
00:45:46.000 There was another Olympian who came out and said that they were very happy to see Ivanka.
00:45:49.000 That seems a lot nicer to me.
00:45:51.000 When you're so polarized that Ivanka showing up in South Korea is a disaster for you, I'd say your priorities are slightly misplaced.
00:45:56.000 Okay, other things that I hate.
00:45:58.000 We're good.
00:46:18.000 Restrictions on biological boys wrestling biological boys.
00:46:21.000 And so she wrestles with the girls and of course she won because she's on testosterone.
00:46:25.000 Now this is absurd.
00:46:27.000 I mean it is absurd to have women who are taking heavy doses of what would be banned drugs if they were taking them for athletic purposes suddenly being allowed to wrestle girls who are not allowed to take those drugs for competitive purposes.
00:46:38.000 But this is how it works now.
00:46:40.000 So this woman, this girl who has muscles that are
00:46:44.000 You know, man-looking muscles, let's put it that way.
00:46:48.000 She just won the Texas class 6A championship in the girls division for the second year in a row.
00:46:54.000 She is on a dosage of testosterone pursuant to her transition.
00:46:58.000 And of course, she had a perfect 32-0 record against steroid-free girls she took on this season.
00:47:04.000 And of course, some people booed and some people cheered.
00:47:06.000 The wrestler's mother has argued the steroids are not really an advantage to her daughter, and that wrestling has more to do with skill and discipline.
00:47:12.000 Okay, if that's the case, then why do we have to have separate divisions at all?
00:47:14.000 Maybe men should just wrestle women, since testosterone doesn't matter and it's all technique.
00:47:17.000 Okay, men have different body types than women, and testosterone gives you an advantage.
00:47:21.000 This is why, if you're at the Olympics and you take testosterone, you will be banned from competition, as many Russians were.
00:47:27.000 Okay, quick Federalist paper time.
00:47:28.000 So Federalist number 17.
00:47:29.000 We've been going through a Federalist paper every week.
00:47:31.000 We are already up to Federalist 17.
00:47:33.000 In Federalist 17, Alexander Hamilton makes the case that it does not threaten the Union to have a strong central government, that people should not feel threatened by a strong central government.
00:47:41.000 That may seem like a laughable case to you now because the central government is so strong and so overpowering.
00:47:46.000 He claims that the federal government would not want to interfere in every part of our life and usurp authority from the states.
00:47:50.000 He says, quote,
00:47:52.000 The administration of private justice between the citizens of the same state, the supervision of agriculture and of other concerns of a similar nature, all those things in short, which are proper to be provided for by local legislation, can never be desirable cares of a general jurisdiction.
00:48:05.000 He's saying that state business is going to remain state business.
00:48:07.000 And he also says that because people are going to be more loyal to states than they are to the federal government,
00:48:13.000 They will not take kindly to federal usurpations of state power.
00:48:17.000 He says, That obviously is not true.
00:48:18.000 And the question now is why that isn't true.
00:48:38.000 Some of it is the Civil War and the change in the balance of power between the states and the federal government, some of which had to happen in order to assure the rights of former slaves, black Americans.
00:48:48.000 But there's something else that's happened too, and that is that Americans' belief in their local community has completely fallen by the wayside.
00:48:55.000 As we become more atomized, as we engage less socially, as we work less with our neighbors,
00:48:59.000 Our adherence to community loyalty is dumped in favor of adherence to broader national ideals, I would say.
00:49:07.000 And that's why you see local communities being ignored so often in favor of women's marches and million man marches, or March for Life marches, these widespread public events.
00:49:19.000 We're good to go!
00:49:47.000 Okay, so we will be back here tomorrow.
00:49:48.000 I will give you the update on University of Minnesota, how it went.
00:49:51.000 And if you're there tonight, I'll see you there.
00:49:53.000 Look forward to it.
00:49:53.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.
00:49:54.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.