The Ben Shapiro Show - Agents Of Foreign Influence | Ep. 801

00:00:00.000 Iran allegedly bombed some ships, so obviously this is Trump's fault.

00:00:03.000 Trump reaps the whirlwind after saying he'd take opposition research from foreigners, and the left loses its taste for tolerance.

00:00:09.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

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

00:00:17.000 It's amazing.

00:00:18.000 Iran bombed some ships, and somehow this is Trump's fault. 0.73

00:00:21.000 Because everything is Trump's fault.

00:00:22.000 Everything in the entire world.

00:00:23.000 We'll get to it in just one second.

00:00:24.000 First, let's talk about the fact that it is 2019, so everybody needs a great pair of wireless earbuds.

00:00:29.000 I spend an enormous amount of time walking around every day With the earbuds in my ears because I am watching video for the show or I am listening to music.

00:00:37.000 But before you go dropping hundreds of bucks on a pair, you need to check out the wireless earbuds from Raycon.

00:00:42.000 These things are incredibly comfortable.

00:00:43.000 They're incredibly easy to use.

00:00:45.000 They're stylish as well.

00:00:46.000 I own a pair of them.

00:00:47.000 I'm getting a pair for my wife too.

00:00:48.000 Raycon earbuds start at about half the price of any other premium wireless earbuds on the market.

00:00:53.000 And they sound just as amazing.

00:00:54.000 The company was actually co-founded by Ray J and celebrities like Brandy, J.R.

00:00:57.000 Smith, are already obsessed with it.

00:00:59.000 Raycon's E50 wireless earbuds have totally changed the game for me because they're really comfortable and they are easy to take anywhere.

00:01:05.000 Unlike some other wireless options, Raycon earbuds are both stylish and discreet.

00:01:08.000 There are no dangling wires, there are no stems, and of course, they don't just look great, they sound great as well.

00:01:12.000 Raycon offers their wireless earbuds for everyone in a range of fun colors and at an unbeatable price.

00:01:17.000 They're very stylish.

00:01:18.000 Go to buyraycon.com slash ben to get 20% off your order.

00:01:22.000 That is buyraycon.com slash ben for 20% off Raycon wireless earbuds.

00:01:26.000 If you've been eyeing up here, now is the time to get an amazing deal.

00:01:28.000 One more time, that's buyraycon.com slash ben.

00:01:32.000 Buyraycon.com slash ben.

00:01:35.000 They really are terrific.

00:01:36.000 Go check them out right now.

00:01:37.000 Buyraycon.com.

00:01:38.000 Okay, so, the big story today is the supposed militancy of the Trump administration.

00:01:43.000 This Trump administration getting so militant over Iran, you know, bombing things. 1.00

00:01:47.000 Stupid Trump and his anger over people bombing American allies. 1.00

00:01:52.000 Why doesn't he just, like, sit down and then ship a billion dollars in cash to them? 1.00

00:01:56.000 I mean, why does he even do that?

00:01:57.000 Like, that's what Obama would have done.

00:01:58.000 Because Obama was the best, man.

00:02:00.000 Obama was so great that he cut a deal with a bunch of terrorists who run a regime to basically give them a 10-year window to start building up their economies so they could build a nuclear weapon and then they could spread their terrorism everywhere.

00:02:12.000 That guy was great.

00:02:13.000 That guy was awesome.

00:02:15.000 And he knew that the Iranians were to be trusted.

00:02:17.000 And then there's this Trump guy and he's just sitting there and the Iranians start mining ships and Trump gets all mad about it.

00:02:22.000 Man, because he's volatile, right?

00:02:24.000 This is the way the media have been covering this particular issue.

00:02:27.000 For the last day and a half, the media have been running stories that say things like, Trump administration alleges, without evidence, that the Iranians are behind the bombing of ships in the Persian Gulf.

00:02:36.000 Who do they think did it?

00:02:37.000 Santa Claus?

00:02:39.000 And Mike Pompeo, the Secretary of State, came out yesterday and he said yes.

00:02:42.000 It turns out that intelligence reviewed by American officials showed that Iran was responsible for attacks earlier in the day on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman, a critical waterway for the transit of much of the world's oil.

00:02:51.000 See, it's all fun and games for folks when it comes to Iranian militancy until the Iranians effectively choke off one of the actual bottlenecks In oil supply, in terms of global oil supply, and suddenly the price of oil doubles. 0.90

00:03:05.000 You know, that would be kind of unfortunate, would it not?

00:03:07.000 Here's Secretary of State Pompeo talking about this, and then we'll get to the media saying, well, he's making up the intelligence.

00:03:13.000 It's weird how the intelligence community under George W. Bush was never to be trusted, ever, ever, ever to be trusted.

00:03:20.000 You cannot trust them because of the Iraq War fiasco, because they got WMD wrong, despite the fact that intelligence services all over the world got WMD wrong because Saddam Hussein was actively lying about WMD. 0.69

00:03:31.000 The intelligence community was terrible.

00:03:33.000 And then it came to the Obama administration and suddenly the intelligence community was awesome again.

00:03:38.000 Suddenly they were great at their job and everything we were told by the Obama administration about, for example, the newfound moderation of the Iranian regime.

00:03:46.000 That was all.

00:03:47.000 It was all true.

00:03:47.000 We could take it as gospel truth without any evidence to support it.

00:03:51.000 And then Trump became president.

00:03:53.000 And then the intel community went back to being sort of half-awesome and half-awful.

00:03:57.000 Half-awesome when they were targeting President Trump and Russian collusion, and super-awful when it came to their record in terms of foreign policy in the Middle East.

00:04:05.000 So here's Mike Pompeo explaining that yeah, it was the Iranians who were behind the bombing of these couple of ships in the Persian Gulf yesterday.

00:04:12.000 The Islamic Republic of Iran is responsible for the attacks that occurred in the Gulf of Amman today.

00:04:18.000 This assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication.

00:04:37.000 This is only the latest in a series of attacks instigated by the Islamic Republic of Iran and its surrogates against American and allied interests.

00:04:46.000 And they should be understood in the context of 40 years of unprovoked aggression against freedom-loving nations.

00:04:52.000 Okay, that of course is true.

00:04:53.000 The Iranian Navy has a long history of getting itself involved in attacks on shipping in the Persian Gulf.

00:04:59.000 It has ended poorly for them before, as we'll get to in just a second, but the media coverage of this thing is just about what you would expect it to be.

00:05:05.000 So, the New York Times says, Mr. Pompeo did not present any evidence to back up the assessment of Iran's involvement.

00:05:10.000 The assertion is certain to further fuel tensions between the Trump administration and Iranian leaders.

00:05:15.000 See, it's not the Iranians bombing things that fuels tension.

00:05:18.000 It is the Trump administration responding to the bombing of things that fuels the tension.

00:05:22.000 You see, Iran puts mines on ships and blows holes in them and sets them on fire and people have to evacuate. 0.95

00:05:27.000 And then Trump gets mad about it.

00:05:28.000 But it's the Trump getting mad about a part that I think is really the problem.

00:05:32.000 That's what the media think.

00:05:33.000 That's where the big problem really is.

00:05:36.000 The sarcasm font there is very strong.

00:05:39.000 And then the New York Times says, the assertion is certain to further fuel tensions between the Trump administration and Iranian leaders, which have been at heightened levels since early May, when the White House announced military movements in response to what American officials have said is an increased threat from Iran.

00:05:52.000 So again, twice in one paragraph, the New York Times basically suggests that America's response to Iranian aggression is what causes the Iranian aggression.

00:05:58.000 You get the timeline wrong here, guys.

00:06:01.000 Iran got militant, and then we put 1,500 additional troops into the region.

00:06:05.000 Iran has been bombing things, and then we have been responding to the bombing. 0.62

00:06:09.000 They're now using cycle of violence language they usually only reserve for the Israelis when the Israelis are being hit by unprovoked rocket assaults.

00:06:17.000 Now they're using it on the Trump administration.

00:06:19.000 So the Iranians bomb stuff, Trump gets mad.

00:06:21.000 Trump's anger caused the Iranian bombing.

00:06:24.000 What, do you have a time machine?

00:06:25.000 How exactly did this work?

00:06:27.000 Well, there is a little bit of tape that we have seen that has been released of apparently the Iranian Navy in the SS Minnow from Gilligan's Island approaching a larger ship and removing one of the mines that was on it.

00:06:39.000 This is before the attack.

00:06:40.000 It's black and white footage.

00:06:42.000 There's no sound on it because it's security footage.

00:06:45.000 The Iranian Navy, needless to say, is not exactly the world's most powerful Navy. 0.89

00:06:49.000 And the fact that we have been allowing them to basically bully us in the Persian Gulf for the past several years going all the way back to the Obama administration really is pathetic. 0.57

00:06:58.000 You remember there was that incident in which the Iranian Navy hit a U.S. 0.88

00:07:01.000 vessel and then basically took a bunch of Americans prisoner.

00:07:05.000 And there are pictures of the American prisoners on their knees with their hands behind their head.

00:07:09.000 It was quite humiliating, but since Obama was president, it was great.

00:07:12.000 And that was the way the media covered it.

00:07:14.000 It was evidence of President Obama's tremendous diplomatic abilities that we were able to get those American soldiers out of Iran.

00:07:23.000 Listen, we should be able to tell Iran to release our soldiers whenever we please, considering the fact that, again, their navy is made up of ships that barely fit inside my son's bathtub. 0.53

00:07:33.000 I mean, it's the Iranian Navy is not exactly well known for it.

00:07:38.000 It ain't the British Navy, OK?

00:07:40.000 It doesn't it doesn't rule the globe.

00:07:43.000 But it is amazing to watch.

00:07:45.000 As folks on the left claim that Trump is trying to manipulate everybody into war.

00:07:49.000 Again, do you really think that Trump wants to go to war in Iran?

00:07:51.000 Do you think this is something that Trump desperately needs?

00:07:54.000 Trump hates the idea of going to war in Iran.

00:07:57.000 He has said so over and over.

00:07:58.000 There's infighting inside the administration over what exactly should be done about Iran.

00:08:03.000 But the Obama administration, folks, they're now pushing the lie that this is being manipulated into war.

00:08:07.000 It's just like when Bush and with WMD and blah, blah, blah, blah. 1.00

00:08:10.000 Here's Ben Rhodes, who's a damned liar, especially on Iran. 0.98

00:08:14.000 He tweets out, This definitely feels like the kind of incident where you'd want an international investigation to establish what happened. 0.99

00:08:20.000 Huge risk of escalation!

00:08:22.000 Ben Rhodes, may I have a seat, my friend?

00:08:25.000 Ben Rhodes, the national security advisor to Barack Obama, was the guy who openly admitted that he lied to the American people about the incipient moderation of the Iranian regime.

00:08:34.000 Basically, in 2009, there was a near-Iranian revolution, again, to overthrow the Iranian government, and Barack Obama sat by and allowed people to be slaughtered in the streets without any level of support other than a few tepid public statements.

00:08:46.000 And then he made out that the Iranian regime was on the verge of a turnaround.

00:08:50.000 And if only we paid them billions of dollars in cash, if only we opened up their economy by allowing them to develop quote-unquote peaceful nuclear power.

00:08:58.000 Because if there's one thing that Iran, one of the most oil-rich nations on earth needs, it is nuclear power.

00:09:03.000 It has nothing to do with developing a nuclear weapon that they have been seeking for decades at this point.

00:09:08.000 If only we did that, then they would come around, then they would moderate.

00:09:11.000 And they were about to moderate, according to Ben Rhodes.

00:09:14.000 Ben Rhodes went out there and he lied to the American people over and over.

00:09:17.000 And he said that the Iranian government was on the verge of moderation, that Hassan Rouhani was a different, he was a different kind of person than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

00:09:25.000 And now the Ayatollahs were finally coming around. 0.96

00:09:27.000 If only we were nice to them and stroke their buttocks in precisely the proper way by giving them money and allowing them to re-enter the family of nations. 1.00

00:09:34.000 Of course, all of that was a lie. 0.96

00:09:36.000 And now here is Ben Rhodes, who actively admitted to falsifying narratives about Iran to the American people.

00:09:41.000 Saying that the Trump administration is falsifying narratives about Iran in order to what?

00:09:46.000 Bomb Iran? 0.76

00:09:47.000 Like we want to go to war with Iran?

00:09:48.000 Now here's the reality.

00:09:50.000 Next time, if they hit an American ship, if there's any situation in which they hit an American flag vessel, we should do exactly what we did to the Iranian Navy all the way back in 1988. 0.97

00:10:01.000 According to History on the Net, there's a pretty good description of what happened.

00:10:04.000 There's something called Operation Praying Mantis.

00:10:07.000 A western and allied navies participated in the Persian Gulf tanker war during the mid to late 1980s, protecting oil tankers from attack by Iranian small craft.

00:10:15.000 In April 1988, the frigate Samuel B. Roberts hit a mine, sustaining heavy damage but no casualties.

00:10:20.000 Physical evidence proves what was already apparent, the mine came from Iran.

00:10:23.000 In response, Enterprise and her escorts, with a surface action group, launched Operation Praying Mantis, attacking Iranian facilities in the Gulf on April 18th.

00:10:31.000 The 46th anniversary of the Doolittle Raid, primary targets were two Iranian oil platforms that offered a base for Revolutionary Guard speedboats harassing, re-flagging Kuwaiti tankers.

00:10:41.000 Marines helicoptered onto one platform, leaving explosives to disable the facility.

00:10:45.000 In response, the Iranians deployed Swedish-built Boghammer speedboats, threatening transiting tankers.

00:10:50.000 Two Enterprise intruders intercepted the boats, dropping rockeye cluster bombs that destroyed one Boghammer and hold another.

00:10:56.000 Meanwhile, one of Iran's fast La Combatante Class frigates exchanged missiles with two U.S.

00:11:02.000 ships coming off Second Best around Joshin Sank with heavy loss of life.

00:11:05.000 Shortly thereafter, an Iranian frigate sortied, firing SAMs, the surface-to-air missiles, at nearby A-6s.

00:11:11.000 The intruders combined with the destroyer to smother the 1,100-ton Sabalon with harpoon missiles and later laser-guided bombs.

00:11:18.000 She drifted away unfired and was towed to port for repair. 0.82

00:11:22.000 During the day, the Iranian Air Force launched two pair of F-4 Phantoms.

00:11:26.000 Neither could intervene.

00:11:27.000 The first two diverted when illuminated by a destroyer's fire control radar.

00:11:31.000 The second set was engaged by a guided missile cruiser, damaging one of the American-made fighters and forcing its withdrawal.

00:11:35.000 In all, Praying Mantis destroyed an Iranian frigate, a gunboat, three speedboats, and damaged another frigate.

00:11:40.000 A Marine Corps helicopter crashed during the operation with two flyers killed in the accident.

00:11:45.000 So the only Americans who died were thanks to basically mechanical failure.

00:11:49.000 And some 56 Iranians were killed in the operation, and basically we sank their entire navy in like a day. 1.00

00:11:56.000 So...

00:11:57.000 When people talk about this would break out into all-out war, what would happen if the United States took harsh military action?

00:12:03.000 What would happen is that we would sink all of their tiny little boats in the Persian Gulf.

00:12:07.000 That's what would happen.

00:12:08.000 Because it turns out the United States is the most powerful military in the history of the world, and it is not particularly close.

00:12:12.000 And it's certainly not close when you compare it to a second-rate naval power, third-rate naval power, like Iran. 0.97

00:12:17.000 We're not even talking about the Iranian land army, okay?

00:12:19.000 The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is very large.

00:12:22.000 I mean, it's like a couple of million people.

00:12:24.000 It's very, very large.

00:12:25.000 But You know what is not particularly large or particularly strong is the Iranian Navy.

00:12:29.000 They're mosquitoes and they're harassing.

00:12:31.000 And, you know, if they approach American ships at any point, we should just blow them out of the water. 0.83

00:12:36.000 Seriously, it will not end in a full-scale war because that is the last thing the Ayatollahs want.

00:12:40.000 What they want is to look strong to their people by harassing American ships and then have plausible deniability when it comes to the international stage, knowing that people like Ben Rhodes will cover for them.

00:12:49.000 Okay, we'll get to more of this in just one second.

00:12:51.000 First, You know those times when every day feels the same, like you're on autopilot, and you're caught up in your routine, and you forget to take care of yourself?

00:12:58.000 Well, Dollar Shave Club makes it easy to take care of yourself when that happens, because they have quality products that arrive direct to my door.

00:13:04.000 I don't even have to think about it.

00:13:05.000 And those quality products help me look, feel, and smell my best.

00:13:08.000 I get everything I need from Dollar Shave Club without going to a store.

00:13:11.000 Not only do they have the greatest razors, shave butter, face cleanser, everything, they also have terrific other stuff.

00:13:18.000 They have soap, and they have shampoo, and it's all just amazing.

00:13:22.000 They have amazing, amazing products.

00:13:24.000 I use it literally every day because their products are so good.

00:13:27.000 And here's the beautiful thing, it arrives to your door on a regular schedule.

00:13:30.000 As amazing as their shave stuff is, Dollar Shave Club is way more than just the razors.

00:13:33.000 They've got the body washes I mentioned, the shampoo, they have toothpaste, you name it, they've got it.

00:13:37.000 I use all of it, right?

00:13:38.000 They've got the Amber Lavender Body Cleanser which is just Delightful.

00:13:41.000 Dollar Shave Club has spent years developing, crafting, refining their products.

00:13:44.000 They're so much better than anything that I have used before.

00:13:47.000 Right now, you can get a Dollar Shave Club starter set for just five bucks.

00:13:50.000 You can give it a try.

00:13:51.000 It comes with everything you need for a great shave.

00:13:53.000 The Executive Razor, Shave Butter, Face Cleanser.

00:13:54.000 You're going to love it as much as I do.

00:13:56.000 Get your starter set for just five bucks at dollarshaveclub.com slash ben.

00:13:59.000 That's dollarshaveclub.com slash ben.

00:14:01.000 Go check them out right now.

00:14:06.000 There's this bizarre notion when it comes to American foreign policy that folks are eager to go to war with the United States.

00:14:12.000 And it really is nonsensical.

00:14:14.000 People are not eager to go to war with the United States.

00:14:15.000 You know why?

00:14:16.000 Because when they do, they lose.

00:14:17.000 There's a lot of talk about the United States hasn't won a war since World War II.

00:14:21.000 Really?

00:14:22.000 Is that the case?

00:14:23.000 Really?

00:14:24.000 Okay, so South Korea is a free country because the Korean War was won by the United States.

00:14:30.000 At least a free and independent South Korea was achieved.

00:14:33.000 The Vietnam War was won until basically Congress decided to give it away in the mid-70s, in the early to mid-70s.

00:14:40.000 The Persian Gulf War, number one, was a victory. 1.00

00:14:43.000 The second Persian Gulf War was a victory. 1.00

00:14:46.000 He may not like what came afterward, but there's no question it was a victory.

00:14:49.000 The United States military has an undefeated record in combat.

00:14:52.000 There's no way to say that even the Vietnam War is a loss for the United States military.

00:14:55.000 It was a political loss.

00:14:57.000 Just look at the killed numbers from the United States versus the Viet Cong, for example.

00:15:02.000 So this idea that countries around the world are itching for a full-scale military conflict with the United States is just a joke.

00:15:09.000 Which means that there's no reason why the United States should tolerate any of this placing of mines on vessels in the Persian Gulf, Iran choking off the Straits of Hormuz.

00:15:20.000 It's just nonsense.

00:15:21.000 It's truly, truly nonsense. 0.93

00:15:22.000 There are certain countries where you don't want to play chicken with them.

00:15:24.000 China would be a country where you don't want to play chicken simply because they have tremendous leverage over the American economy and they have a massive military and they have the power to project into the South China Sea.

00:15:33.000 But the Iranian Navy?

00:15:36.000 Really?

00:15:37.000 The Iranian? 0.93

00:15:37.000 No. 0.93

00:15:38.000 No.

00:15:39.000 OK, so again, that is not the Trump administration itching for war.

00:15:42.000 And I don't even think that's the perspective that they are taking right now.

00:15:45.000 But it is a perspective that is on the table.

00:15:47.000 OK, meanwhile, A lot of hubbub is being paid to Kellyanne Conway. 0.99

00:15:52.000 Supposedly, Kellyanne Conway violated the law. 1.00

00:15:55.000 An independent government agency recommended on Thursday that President Trump fire Kellyanne Conway, his White House counselor, for repeated violations of an ethics law barring partisan politics from the federal workplace.

00:16:05.000 Is according to the New York Times.

00:16:07.000 In a letter accompanying a report to Mr. Trump, the agency called Ms.

00:16:10.000 Conway a repeat offender of the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in campaign politics at work, saying that her flagrant defiance of the law justified her dismissal from the White House.

00:16:20.000 Really? 0.99

00:16:20.000 Okay, so the Hatch Act is dumb. 0.99

00:16:21.000 Let me just say that right off the bat. 0.93

00:16:22.000 Head of the agency says, as a highly visible member of the administration, Ms. Conway's violations, if left unpunished, send a message to all federal employees that they need not abide by the Hatch Act's restrictions.

00:16:32.000 Her actions erode the principal foundation of our democratic system, the rule of law. 0.87

00:16:36.000 Really? 0.99

00:16:38.000 Okay, so the Hatch Act is dumb. 0.99

00:16:39.000 I'll just say that right off the bat. 0.98

00:16:40.000 The Hatch Act is completely incoherent, legally speaking.

00:16:43.000 The Hatch Act basically says that you do have a right to speak out and vote how you want as a federal employee, but you can't use the power of your office to endorse any political candidate.

00:16:53.000 Well, what exactly do these people think politics is?

00:16:56.000 I totally agree with the idea that you should not be using government resources in order to stump for a particular candidate, right?

00:17:02.000 By the way, Congress people are not federal employees, so they don't really have these sorts of boundaries.

00:17:09.000 But Congress, this is actually the biggest issue, is that incumbent Congress people can use all sorts of congressional resources in order to push their reelection.

00:17:17.000 So this is why you get a letter from your congressperson paid for by you that says, here's all the great things that I've done this year.

00:17:22.000 I mean, that is obviously campaigning.

00:17:24.000 It's legal, but I don't think that's right. 0.93

00:17:26.000 When it comes to federal employment, is the idea here that Kellyanne Conway is allowed to talk about how great Trump is, but she can't say how much Joe Biden sucks? 0.91

00:17:33.000 That's...

00:17:35.000 That's really where we're going with this?

00:17:36.000 The Hatch Act should have been held unconstitutional after it was written.

00:17:39.000 It is far too broad.

00:17:41.000 It says you have free speech rights, but then you're not allowed to exercise those free speech rights in certain ways.

00:17:41.000 It conflicts.

00:17:45.000 It doesn't make any sense at all.

00:17:48.000 So should Kellyanne Conway be fired? 1.00

00:17:49.000 No, they should rewrite the Hatch Act. 0.99

00:17:51.000 The Hatch Act is dumb. 0.97

00:17:52.000 I'd be saying the same thing if this were a Democrat. 0.96

00:17:54.000 It has never occurred to me that members of the federal executive branch are apolitical actors who are not going to be using at least their ability with their face to talk about people they don't like.

00:18:06.000 In other administration news, Sarah Huckabee Sanders is headed out. 0.95

00:18:06.000 It's very silly, okay? 0.95

00:18:10.000 According to the New York Times, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary who fiercely defended President Trump through one of the most tumultuous periods in American politics, while presiding over the end of the iconic daily news briefing, will step down at the end of the month.

00:18:22.000 I do find it hilarious that so many members of the media, all of whom have dealt with press secretaries for their entire political career, suddenly are finding it shocking that Sarah Huckabee Sanders fiercely defended President Trump.

00:18:34.000 I'd like for them to name a time when Jake Harney or Robert Gibbs or any of the other myriad spokespeople for Barack Obama went out there and they're like, yeah, you know that Obama?

00:18:46.000 That was pretty bad what you said, right?

00:18:48.000 Like, this is the job of the press secretary.

00:18:50.000 You're literally paid to be a show.

00:18:51.000 That is your entire job.

00:18:53.000 You're paid to stand out there and defend the president.

00:18:56.000 Yeah, you don't even have any of your own opinions.

00:18:58.000 And what was hilarious was to watch members of the press say things to Sarah Huckabee Sanders like, well, what, Sarah, what do you think of what the president had to say?

00:19:04.000 It's like, she's the press secretary.

00:19:06.000 If she wanted to run for office, she can. 1.00

00:19:08.000 She's going to go back to Arkansas, maybe she'll run for office there. 1.00

00:19:11.000 Then you can ask her what she thinks of various statements of President Trump.

00:19:14.000 But if her job is to be the press spokesperson for the President of the United States, then she has asked the administration's position on things, not her personal position.

00:19:24.000 It was always bizarre to me watching the media try to separate out Huckabee Sanders from Trump and then be like, that's Sarah Huckabee Sanders shilling for the president.

00:19:33.000 Literally, the job should be retitled shilling for the president.

00:19:37.000 That is what these folks are paid for.

00:19:38.000 So, I don't really buy it.

00:19:41.000 Folks on the right, like Sarah Huckabee Sanders, what a stalwart defending the president. 0.99

00:19:44.000 That was her job.

00:19:45.000 She was paid to do it.

00:19:46.000 Sean Spicer was bad at that job, which is why he left that job.

00:19:49.000 Sarah Huckabee Sanders was better at that job because she could, with a straight face, defend many of the things Trump was saying. 0.96

00:19:55.000 In many cases, she militantly did so in rightful fashion.

00:19:57.000 In many cases, she stood up there and, like a trooper, she basically took one for the team.

00:20:04.000 Whatever that is, that is the job of a good press secretary, is to take one for the team, basically.

00:20:08.000 It's the roughest job in America.

00:20:10.000 It's a very rough job, which is why I nominate Michael Knowles for it.

00:20:13.000 I think he'd be perfect for it.

00:20:14.000 First of all, he would suffer in the job, which I would greatly appreciate.

00:20:17.000 Second, it would take him off my payroll.

00:20:19.000 And third...

00:20:20.000 I think that he would be perfectly willing to show for President Trump.

00:20:23.000 So I think that he is probably the best pick for a replacement for Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

00:20:28.000 Now, the big story that the press are focused on today is not the turmoil inside the administration on these grounds.

00:20:33.000 The big story is that President Trump is a very bad man.

00:20:36.000 Why?

00:20:37.000 Because President Trump said yesterday that he would consider not reporting to the FBI if he was approached with opposition research by a member of a foreign government or a foreign national agent.

00:20:49.000 And people lost their minds over this.

00:20:51.000 Now, you should morally lose your mind over this.

00:20:53.000 On a moral level, it is very, very bad when politicians are saying that they would take information presented to them by foreign governments about their political opposition.

00:21:02.000 It was bad when Hillary Clinton did it, too. 1.00

00:21:04.000 Now I know that we're not supposed to talk about Hillary Clinton doing this, but Hillary Clinton did do this. 0.99

00:21:08.000 There's a lot of talk about Trump receiving information from Russia.

00:21:11.000 There's no actual information he received from Russia.

00:21:13.000 The Mueller Report does not provide a shred of information that the Trump campaign directly received from Russia.

00:21:19.000 You know what did happen?

00:21:20.000 A DNC staffer was in open communication with the Ukrainian embassy digging up dirt about President Trump.

00:21:25.000 So that would be a...

00:21:27.000 A baseline case in point of a foreign government providing information to the DNC.

00:21:32.000 That was the thing that happened.

00:21:33.000 Christopher Steele was a foreign national and he was getting his information from Russian governmental officials and then funneling it to Hillary Clinton.

00:21:40.000 Hilariously enough, folks on the left have been defending the Steele report on the grounds that, well, that's legal because the, because Fusion GPS and the Clinton campaign paid Christopher Steele.

00:21:49.000 So if you pay a foreign national for the information, then it doesn't violate the law.

00:21:52.000 So let me get this straight.

00:21:53.000 If a foreign national just comes to you and says, I have some information, want it? 1.00

00:21:56.000 You're like, yeah, sure, give it to me.

00:21:58.000 That's illegal.

00:21:59.000 But if you pay the foreign national to go get the information, then it's not illegal? 0.66

00:22:03.000 No, I do not buy this particular line of legal argumentation.

00:22:07.000 Nonetheless, Ellen Weintraub, who is the head of the FEC, she issued, she was nominated under George W. Bush a while ago, she issued a statement about all of this.

00:22:16.000 And the statement is basically a slap at President Trump It's not actually legally true, and herein lies the issue.

00:22:22.000 We'll get to that in just one second.

00:22:23.000 First, let's talk about making your neighborhood safer.

00:22:25.000 So, I am deeply worried about personal security, because I receive a number of death threats all the time.

00:22:31.000 And I'm also worried about my neighborhood safety, because the fact is I live in Los Angeles, and Mayor Eric Garcetti's a terrible mayor, which means that the city has devolved into a hellscape.

00:22:38.000 Well, this is one of the reasons why I rely on Ring.

00:22:41.000 Ring's mission is to make neighborhoods safer.

00:22:43.000 You might already know about their smart video doorbells and cameras that protect millions of people everywhere.

00:22:48.000 Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world.

00:22:51.000 So if there's a package delivery or a surprise visitor, you'll get an alert and be able to see, hear, and speak to them all from your phone.

00:22:57.000 That's thanks to HD video and two-way audio features on Ring devices.

00:23:00.000 We've been using Ring devices in my house for years.

00:23:02.000 It makes sure that if somebody rings my doorbell, I know exactly who it is, no matter where I am in the country, no matter what time it is.

00:23:08.000 As a listener, you have a special offer on the Ring Starter Kit available to you just right now.

00:23:12.000 With a video doorbell and motion-activated floodlight cam, the Starter Kit has everything you need to start building a ring of security around your home.

00:23:19.000 So, your home can be just as safe as mine is, and mine's basically a fortress.

00:23:22.000 Just go to ring.com slash ben.

00:23:24.000 That's ring.com slash ben.

00:23:26.000 Check it out.

00:23:27.000 Ring.com slash ben for a special deal.

00:23:29.000 Okay, so, Ellen Weintraub is the head of the Federal Election Commission, and in response to the President of the United States saying that Sure, he might or he might not report to the FBI.

00:23:39.000 He'll sort of take it on like a case-by-case basis.

00:23:42.000 That's the Trump campaign line right now, by the way.

00:23:45.000 According to Kayleigh McEnany, the campaign's press secretary, she said on CBS's news red and blue on Thursday, the campaign will follow President Trump's lead when it comes to handling potential offers.

00:23:54.000 Quote, the president's directive, as he said, it's a case by case basis.

00:23:57.000 He said he would likely do both.

00:23:59.000 Listen to what they have to say, but also report it to the FBI.

00:24:02.000 And that's not great stuff.

00:24:05.000 I mean, honestly, if Trump just said, listen, I'm going to what am I supposed to like block out my ears if they give me a good piece of information, but I'll report it to the FBI for sure.

00:24:12.000 That is perfectly defensible.

00:24:14.000 But this whole, maybe I'll report it to the FBI, maybe I won't report it to the FBI.

00:24:19.000 He sort of had it every which way in his statement the other day with George Stephanopoulos.

00:24:23.000 He said, I think maybe you do both.

00:24:25.000 I think you might want to listen.

00:24:26.000 There's nothing wrong with listening.

00:24:28.000 It's not an interference.

00:24:29.000 They have information.

00:24:30.000 I think I'd take it.

00:24:32.000 If I thought there was something wrong, I'd maybe go to the FBI.

00:24:36.000 And then he suggested that he might not go to the FBI because the FBI doesn't have time, and who goes to the FBI anyway?

00:24:41.000 And all of this.

00:24:42.000 So it was a very bad statement.

00:24:43.000 I talked about it yesterday.

00:24:44.000 And again, it is a morally bad statement.

00:24:46.000 When Hillary Clinton... 1.00

00:24:48.000 When the DNC was coordinating with the Ukrainian government, that is a bad thing.

00:24:52.000 Now it's worse if you're coordinating with an overtly adversarial country like Russia.

00:24:58.000 If you're getting information from an overtly adversarial country like Russia, that would be worse.

00:25:02.000 There's no evidence the Trump campaign actually received that sort of information from the Russians.

00:25:07.000 But Ellen Weintraub from the FEC, she says that this is a violation of law.

00:25:10.000 That if a foreign national approaches you with OPPO research, or a member of a foreign government approaches you with OPPO research, that this is obviously a violation of law.

00:25:18.000 I don't actually think she's right.

00:25:19.000 I'll explain in a second.

00:25:21.000 Again, there's a difference between legal and moral.

00:25:23.000 I've just said many times in the past few minutes, it is immoral to take opposition research from a foreign party and not report it to the FBI.

00:25:32.000 It is not illegal.

00:25:33.000 So Ellen Weintraub said, I would not have thought I needed to say this.

00:25:33.000 I'll explain in a second.

00:25:38.000 Well, weird, because Christopher Steele gave a lot of stuff of value to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

00:25:40.000 "to the American public and anyone running for public office, "it is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, "or receive anything of value from a foreign national "in connection with the U.S. election." Well, weird, 'cause Christopher Steele gave a lot of stuff of value to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

00:25:55.000 Don't see the incipient prosecution happening.

00:25:58.000 This is not a novel concept, Electoral intervention from foreign governments has been considered unacceptable since the beginnings of our nation.

00:26:05.000 Our founding fathers sounded the alarm about foreign interference, intrigue, and influence.

00:26:09.000 They knew that when foreign governments seek to influence American politics, it is always to advance their own interests, not America's.

00:26:15.000 Anyone who solicits or accepts foreign assistance risks being on the wrong end of a federal investigation.

00:26:20.000 Any political campaign that receives an offer of a prohibited donation from a foreign source should report that offer to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

00:26:27.000 Hey now, there's what you should do and then there's what you are legally mandated to do.

00:26:31.000 The provision of law that governs all of this is section, it is 52 U.S.

00:26:37.000 Code section 30121.

00:26:39.000 Contributions and donations by foreign nationals.

00:26:43.000 Prohibition.

00:26:43.000 It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation in connection with a federal, state, or local election.

00:26:57.000 And it is unlawful for a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution described in subparagraph A or B of paragraph 1 from a foreign national.

00:27:07.000 They say a foreign national means a foreign principal, except that the term foreign national should not include anybody who has dual citizenship, and it means an individual who's not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States who's not lawfully admitted for permanent residence.

00:27:21.000 Well, Christopher Steele was a non-resident alien, so he actually kind of falls under this definition, and if the idea is you paid him for it, I'm not sure how that really changes the game very much on a legal level.

00:27:32.000 Anyway.

00:27:33.000 The question in the law is whether this provision, a contribution or donation of money or any other thing of value, means also information.

00:27:42.000 And it's pretty dicey to say that it does.

00:27:44.000 The reason is because throughout American law, whenever it says other thing of value, it doesn't mean information.

00:27:48.000 It typically means Another thing of value.

00:27:50.000 In other words, they give you a desk.

00:27:52.000 They give you a bar of gold.

00:27:53.000 They give you something that is of value.

00:27:55.000 But not information.

00:27:56.000 Because the problem with information is once you are talking about the conveyance of information, you run into First Amendment issues.

00:28:02.000 Serious First Amendment issues.

00:28:04.000 So Eugene Volokh, who's a professor over at UCLA Law, wrote a long piece back in 2017 specifically talking about this in the context of the Trump Tower meeting.

00:28:13.000 He says it would make opposition research on much possible foreign misconduct virtually impossible if this stuff were legal.

00:28:19.000 Say that Hillary Clinton's campaign heard rumors that the construction of a Trump resort in Turkey might have involved some shenanigans.

00:28:25.000 It's likely impossible to effectively follow up on that without soliciting some valuable information from foreign nationals, such as the foreign government officials, who are hypothetically and allegedly bribed, or rivals, who may have a motive to provide information.

00:28:38.000 Or say that Bernie Sanders' campaign heard rumors of some misconduct by Hillary Clinton on her trips abroad.

00:28:43.000 It wouldn't be allowed to ask any foreigners about that under these particular interpretations of the law.

00:28:49.000 So the case that's being made that it is illegal for Trump to receive information from a foreign national, OPPO Research, again, Hillary Clinton actually did it in 2016.

00:28:57.000 That is undeniable.

00:29:00.000 She actually received opposition research from a foreign national by the name of Christopher Steele, who is receiving information in turn from Russian governmental officials.

00:29:08.000 She actually did it.

00:29:09.000 It was not illegal.

00:29:10.000 It was also not illegal when the DNC was soliciting information from the Ukrainian embassy about Donald Trump.

00:29:16.000 Also not illegal.

00:29:17.000 But, immoral?

00:29:19.000 Sure, yes.

00:29:20.000 It's one of the reasons why Republicans are mad about the Steele report.

00:29:24.000 Now, you're seeing folks come out and say that what Trump said is completely different.

00:29:28.000 So Andy McCabe, who of course hates President Trump because basically Trump ended his career after he lied to the inspector general of the FBI and ended up losing his pension.

00:29:37.000 He's a very bitter man.

00:29:38.000 So he's on CNN talking to block of wood Chris Cuomo, and he explained there is no equivalent on how Hillary and Trump acquired opposition information from foreigners.

00:29:46.000 You shouldn't have Russians giving you anything and you shouldn't have been paying Russians for information to amass a dossier the way Clinton did.

00:29:54.000 Do you see these as analogs?

00:29:56.000 Not at all, Chris.

00:29:57.000 There's no equivalence between those two examples.

00:30:01.000 To say, to openly invite foreign intelligence officers, representatives from a hostile foreign government, to steal information, to acquire opposition research in any way, in any illegal way that they might do that, and to present it to you, is one thing.

00:30:19.000 Okay, so, in other words, if you pay somebody for the information, it's not illegal, but if they give it to you for free, then it's illegal.

00:30:24.000 No.

00:30:24.000 That is a bizarre interpretation of law at the very least.

00:30:27.000 who then contracts out with a foreign individual, that is not illegal. - Okay, so in other words, if you pay somebody for the information, it's not illegal, but if they give it to you for free, then it's illegal.

00:30:38.000 No, that is a bizarre interpretation of law at the very least.

00:30:43.000 Okay, in a second, we'll get to why this is still political poison for President Trump.

00:30:48.000 So again, I'm just debunking the idea that this is obviously illegal that was put out by the FEC.

00:30:52.000 It's not obviously illegal.

00:30:54.000 I'm not the only one saying it. 0.91

00:30:55.000 Eugene Volokh, who really studies this stuff, has been saying it for literally years, going back to 2017.

00:30:59.000 We'll get to more of this in just one second.

00:31:01.000 First, attention gun lovers. 0.69

00:31:03.000 If you want to win one of the most popular and advanced 1911s on the market, Listen up.

00:31:07.000 I've teamed up with my friends over at the USCCA, and we are going to give you seven chances to win $1,234.

00:31:11.000 That's the exact amount of money you need to buy this very special gun.

00:31:16.000 Now remember, the USCCA is the country's number one organization that provides education, training, legal protection to responsible gun owners like you and me.

00:31:23.000 And they love giving away free guns to those responsible gun owners.

00:31:26.000 I believe that if you are a responsible human being, you should know how to use a gun, know how to protect yourself, know how to protect your family.

00:31:31.000 The USCCA agrees.

00:31:32.000 So, which 1911 is it?

00:31:33.000 Well, here are some hints.

00:31:35.000 To start, it's lightweight, it's easy to shoot, making it one of the most popular 1911s to carry concealed.

00:31:40.000 It boasts night sights, G10 grips, and comes in a beautiful flat dark earth finish.

00:31:44.000 If you want to see it for yourself, just text WIN to 87222 right now to reveal the gun and instantly lock in your 7 free chances to win it.

00:31:51.000 That's WIN to 87222.

00:31:52.000 It is simple, quick, 100% free.

00:31:55.000 But your opportunity is slipping away because the giveaway does end Friday, June 28th.

00:32:00.000 So get in now.

00:32:01.000 Text the word WIN to 87222 right now for the official rules.

00:32:04.000 Lock in your seven entries before it's too late.

00:32:06.000 That's text WIN to 87222.

00:32:07.000 W-I-N to 87222.

00:32:08.000 Go check it out right now.

00:32:10.000 Alrighty, so.

00:32:15.000 We're going to get back to the Trumpian foreign interference suggestion in just one second.

00:32:21.000 First, you have to go over to dailywire.com and subscribe.

00:32:23.000 So we have so many goodies for you this week.

00:32:25.000 So if you want to listen to something fun, yesterday, Larry Wilmore put out an interview that he did with me.

00:32:32.000 I'm sure he's getting all sorts of crap for it from the left.

00:32:34.000 Larry Wilmore, you'll remember from Comedy Central, very controversial figure at the time in 2016. 0.97

00:32:39.000 He was at the White House Correspondents Dinner and he controversially, I criticized him for it, he controversially Suggested that President Trump was his N-word, and this made all sorts of waves.

00:32:48.000 Larry and I disagree about virtually everything, but Larry Wilmore is also an open-minded, good dude who's willing to have a conversation, which is something I appreciate.

00:32:56.000 I think a lot of conservatives appreciate.

00:32:58.000 So, he was on my podcast, and I was on his podcast.

00:33:01.000 You can go listen to our conversation with him interviewing me.

00:33:03.000 It covers a lot of issues regarding race and American history.

00:33:07.000 It's called Larry Wilmore Black on the Air.

00:33:09.000 It comes from The Ringer.

00:33:10.000 You can go download that.

00:33:11.000 Also, you should definitely subscribe so you can check out our Sunday special with Larry Wilmore on Saturday.

00:33:15.000 It really is a fascinating and awesome episode, I think.

00:33:18.000 Go check it out.

00:33:19.000 Here's a little bit of the preview.

00:33:20.000 When I was growing up, people would say I wasn't black enough, you know, or that I don't talk black.

00:33:27.000 And I said, well, I'm talking and I'm black.

00:33:30.000 Ergo.

00:33:32.000 And I'm like, maybe brothers shouldn't say ergo.

00:33:37.000 The interview is really terrific.

00:33:38.000 It covers a lot of ground and it covers some of our agreements and disagreements and good for Larry Wilmore, seriously.

00:33:43.000 You know, it's something that I really do appreciate because the fact is that if we are going to have a politics together, then we are going to have to have conversations with people with whom we disagree and treat them with respect and not turn every conversation into an opportunity to club somebody to death.

00:33:59.000 It's really funny.

00:33:59.000 I get a lot of criticism that my brand is beating people up.

00:34:04.000 Watch every conversation that I have with somebody publicly, unless they attack me, unless they decide to get militant.

00:34:10.000 Every conversation is exceedingly polite because my view is we should treat other people we are talking to As human beings.

00:34:16.000 Now, Twitter is for jokes.

00:34:17.000 But in real life, when we have conversations, every single Ben Shapiro destroys video of me with a college student or me with a member of the media is a polite conversation in which people who like what I'm saying think that I made a good argument.

00:34:30.000 That's all those videos are.

00:34:32.000 And this Larry Wilmore thing, I'm sure he will get hit for it.

00:34:35.000 I'm sure folks on the left will suggest that Deadspin, which is a disgusting website, is already suggesting Larry Wilmore is a very, very bad man for even having a conversation.

00:34:43.000 Well, good for Larry Wilmore for having the conversation.

00:34:46.000 And that's what we need more of in this country.

00:34:49.000 We need more conversations between people who disagree that are polite and well-motivated and people who are interested in learning more about the philosophy of the other, because the conversation themselves reinstills a feeling that we ought to live in a country together and not just separate and go our own separate way.

00:35:04.000 So go check out our Sunday special with Larry Wilmore.

00:35:06.000 It really is first rate.

00:35:07.000 And check out his podcast as well.

00:35:09.000 Larry Wilmore, Black on the Air, has conversations with I think I'm the first Also, it's that glorious time of the week when I give a shout out to a Daily Wire subscriber.

00:35:16.000 David Froman and Rick Wilson, I think, were on his show.

00:35:18.000 But I'm the first, let's say, my pitch on his show was not the anti-Trump pitch.

00:35:25.000 And the show, I think, is really good, his and mine.

00:35:28.000 So go check out both of those.

00:35:29.000 When you subscribe, you get it a day early.

00:35:31.000 Also, it's that glorious time of the week when I give a shout out to a Daily Wire subscriber.

00:35:34.000 Today, it's Twitterer Tyler Adams, who has just successfully weathered one of the Middle school sucks, dude.

00:35:40.000 I am so glad for you that you have graduated.

00:35:43.000 Fantastic, dude.

00:35:43.000 the picture, Tyler is raising his leftist years tumbler into frame under gold and silver balloons spelling out grad.

00:35:48.000 He writes, owning the libs and consuming these nutritious tears got me through the middle school years.

00:35:53.000 Hashtag leftist years tumbler.

00:35:55.000 Congrats to Tyler, who also is apparently an amazing basketball player too.

00:35:55.000 Fantastic, dude.

00:35:59.000 Keep up the good work.

00:36:00.000 Thanks for your support.

00:36:01.000 If you want to be featured on the show, you have to be a DailyWire annual subscriber.

00:36:04.000 You have to post a photo of your Tumblr on either Twitter or Instagram with the hashtag LeftistTearsTumblr.

00:36:09.000 You can even be in the photo if you would like to be.

00:36:11.000 If to become a subscriber, go to DailyWire.com, click on the subscribe button at the top of the page, and then send us your Tumblr pics if you want a chance at getting a shout-out on the show.

00:36:20.000 So, go check us out over at DailyWire.

00:36:21.000 Subscribe.

00:36:22.000 It really does help us out.

00:36:23.000 There are a lot of bad people out there.

00:36:24.000 We're attempting to prevent you from getting the show.

00:36:26.000 You can ensure that we can continue to bring the show by joining the team and subscribing for $9.99 a month or $99 a year and get that left to steer as hot or cold tumbler, which is phenomenal.

00:36:35.000 Go get all of those aforementioned glories and help us out. 0.62

00:36:38.000 We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.

00:36:41.000 Alrighty, so just because the president of the United States didn't do anything illegal in 2016, nor would it necessarily be under current law illegal for the president to accept opposition nor would it necessarily be under current law illegal for the president to accept opposition research from a foreign source tomorrow, as I explained a minute ago,

00:37:05.000 It is not politically smart, especially because the Democrats have crafted a narrative whereby President Trump is a tool of foreign powers and is open to being a tool of foreign powers, and President Trump's own language tends to underscore this sort of silliness.

00:37:17.000 And President Trump is a guy who said in 2016 repeatedly that the United States, our foreign policy is somehow akin to Vladimir Putin's.

00:37:24.000 He's a guy who has really kissed the rear of Kim Jong-un, one of the worst dictators on planet Earth.

00:37:29.000 I've been highly critical of him for that.

00:37:31.000 Obviously, I continue to be.

00:37:32.000 I think it's morally not only unbecoming, but disreputable.

00:37:37.000 So President Trump needs to not underscore all of that by suggesting that he is willing to work with foreign powers to undermine some sort of Democrat who is running against him.

00:37:46.000 Mark Warner, the senator from Virginia, says Americans should be outraged at even the very suggestion.

00:37:51.000 Here is where, again, I think it goes a little bit too far.

00:37:53.000 You might want to look to your own party, dude, and talk to like Hillary Clinton, who actually did some of this stuff, too.

00:37:57.000 If there is a standard, We should uphold it for everyone.

00:38:00.000 It is not whataboutism for me to point out that what Trump did is bad but not illegal and also what Hillary Clinton did is very bad but not illegal.

00:38:07.000 That's called a standard.

00:38:09.000 Whataboutism would be me saying that what Trump did was okay because Hillary Clinton also did it, which is not a thing that I am saying.

00:38:15.000 Mark Warner, many other politicians seem to be completely ignoring the fact that there are other politicians who do this stuff and pretending as though this is a singular incident of President Trump doing something out of the realm of normal bad.

00:38:28.000 OK, it is, in fact, normal bad and it is, in fact, bad.

00:38:31.000 Here's Mark Warner.

00:38:32.000 I think this last incident and again, time will probably prove me wrong again.

00:38:39.000 But there was beginning of folks stepping up.

00:38:42.000 And I frankly, at the end of the day, it's also up to the American public.

00:38:46.000 If the American public, no matter whether they watch Fox or MSNBC or anything in between, isn't outraged by the comments that he made yesterday, then shame on Americans as well.

00:38:56.000 Shame on all of us.

00:38:59.000 This is why it's still politically damaging.

00:39:00.000 And of course, you have Senator Mitt Romney from Utah, and he says it's the same thing.

00:39:04.000 It's unthinkable for a presidential candidate to accept dirt from a foreign government.

00:39:08.000 I agree, and that applies to all candidates equally, Democrat and Republican.

00:39:13.000 That would be simply unthinkable for a candidate for president to accept that involvement, to encourage it, to participate with it in any way, shape, or form.

00:39:21.000 It would strike at the very heart of our democracy.

00:39:24.000 OK, and then you have Lindsey Graham, who's an ally of the president, who is acknowledging it's a mistake for the president to talk this way on a political level.

00:39:30.000 It's more than a mistake.

00:39:31.000 It is, in fact, a lack of morality to say that you wouldn't report it to the FBI if the Chinese government approached you with some sort of negative information on Joe Biden.

00:39:39.000 Here's Lindsey Graham. 0.98

00:39:40.000 What are the implications of hearing of a president of the United States saying it's okay to accept foreign dirt from about an opponent? 0.56

00:39:48.000 I think it's a mistake.

00:39:49.000 I think it's a mistake of law.

00:39:51.000 I don't want to send a signal to encourage this.

00:39:54.000 And I hope my Democrat colleagues will be equally offended by the fact that this actually did happen in 2016, where a foreign agent was paid for by a political party to gather opposition research.

00:40:05.000 All those things are wrong.

00:40:07.000 Okay, this is exactly right.

00:40:09.000 What Lindsey Graham says right there is exactly right.

00:40:11.000 Now, should President Trump be talking the way he is?

00:40:13.000 No, which is why it's very awkward when Kevin McCarthy, the House Minority Leader, has to go out there and say, yeah, Trump doesn't want foreign interference, while the president is out there saying, well, you know, we'll take it on a case-by-case basis, guys.

00:40:25.000 Doesn't the president have to set a tone about what is right and what is wrong?

00:40:28.000 I think the president's been very clear.

00:40:30.000 The president does not want foreign governments to interfere in our elections.

00:40:33.000 He's been very strong about that.

00:40:35.000 He did not say he'd have a foreign government to interfere.

00:40:38.000 He said he'd look at the information, listen to it, and if there were a problem, he would go to the FBI.

00:40:42.000 I've watched the president.

00:40:44.000 I believe the president would always do the right action.

00:40:46.000 OK, OK, Mr. President, Mr. President, first of all, bad, bad.

00:40:55.000 Your job as the president of the United States is not only to do the moral thing, but also as a politician, it is to make it easy for your defenders to defend you.

00:41:02.000 Kevin McCarthy is out there trying to defend this.

00:41:05.000 Why don't you just make it easy for him by saying the right thing?

00:41:08.000 Why not just do that?

00:41:09.000 Instead, you're out there saying that your own FBI director, Chris Wray, is wrong when he says that you should report this sort of stuff to the FBI.

00:41:14.000 After all, who has time for- This is bad stuff. 1.00

00:41:16.000 It's stupid stuff. 1.00

00:41:17.000 The president shouldn't say it. 1.00

00:41:18.000 Now, Democrats in the media, remember that time when you guys did all this kind of stuff?

00:41:23.000 Remember that?

00:41:24.000 And then you don't care?

00:41:26.000 Remember how that was?

00:41:27.000 Yeah, I remember it.

00:41:28.000 But we're going to pretend that you didn't do it because apparently that is the way that all of this works.

00:41:32.000 It's only bad when Trump does it.

00:41:33.000 Orange man bad. 0.78

00:41:36.000 And when the orange man is doing a bad thing, by the way, that does not excuse you for also doing the same bad thing.

00:41:42.000 Pretty impressive how the standard just seems to malleably change.

00:41:45.000 As soon as Trump does it, it becomes very bad.

00:41:46.000 When Hillary did very similar stuff, no problem at all, because after all, you had to stop the orange man. 0.82

00:41:51.000 Okay, time for some mailbag, because it is indeed a Friday.

00:41:55.000 So, let's jump right in.

00:41:57.000 Elizabeth says, Hey Ben, I wanted to let you know I didn't go through with an abortion because of your show.

00:42:01.000 Wow.

00:42:02.000 Wow.

00:42:03.000 Well, thank you so much.

00:42:04.000 Your child thanks you.

00:42:06.000 That means an enormous amount to me.

00:42:08.000 I mean, that's the real reason we do the show.

00:42:10.000 Honestly, like I was, I was doing politics long before we were, we had a huge audience.

00:42:13.000 We're making money from it.

00:42:15.000 So thank you.

00:42:16.000 You are doing exactly the right thing.

00:42:17.000 You are doing, I kid you not, God's work.

00:42:20.000 Okay.

00:42:20.000 Bringing a child into the world and not having it killed before it's born.

00:42:24.000 Thank you.

00:42:25.000 It's sad to say that that's an act of heroism in today's society, but it absolutely is.

00:42:29.000 Elizabeth says, I'm giving the baby up for adoption through a church, which again is great.

00:42:33.000 Put the kid in a home where they can grow and thrive.

00:42:36.000 Good for you.

00:42:36.000 That is an act of generosity of spirit.

00:42:38.000 It is an act of heroism.

00:42:40.000 Thank you.

00:42:42.000 God thanks you too.

00:42:43.000 What are your thoughts on adoption in the states?

00:42:45.000 Well, adoption needs to be made much easier.

00:42:47.000 Right now, it's insane.

00:42:49.000 But states are basically cracking down on adoption agencies if those adoption agencies have religious backgrounds.

00:42:54.000 We've seen adoption agencies in places like Massachusetts actually shut down if they prefer to hand a baby over to a traditional male-female couple as opposed to a same-sex couple.

00:43:03.000 So Catholic charities have shut down adoption services in Massachusetts because of this.

00:43:08.000 Now, I think that there is a perfectly secular, rational case for handing a baby over to a male and a female, because I don't think that males and females are the same. 0.99

00:43:15.000 I don't think fathers and mothers are the same, which is why every single Father's Day and Mother's Day, I make the same joke on Twitter. 0.97

00:43:20.000 It's a running joke, and it is, happy second legal guardian of unspecified gender day. 0.93

00:43:26.000 Because if you don't think there's a difference between fathers and mothers, or males and females, then why have a Father's Day or a Mother's Day?

00:43:31.000 Just have an unspecified legal guardian day.

00:43:34.000 But if you feel a child needs a mother and a father, then yes, I think that it is perfectly fine and perfectly rational and, in fact, good to prefer all other things being equal, obviously, a male-female couple to a male-male or a female-female couple or a single mom. 0.69

00:43:49.000 There is nothing, I think, remotely controversial about that in a social science sense.

00:43:54.000 Now, again, that's all other things being equal.

00:43:56.000 If you're talking about an abusive household where the male is abusing the female as opposed to two males who are not abusing each other, obviously that is different.

00:44:02.000 If you're talking socioeconomically, the difference between growing up in a house on food stamps as opposed to growing up in a middle-class household, that makes a difference too.

00:44:11.000 It's multifactorial, in other words, but One of the things that would make adoption easier is more adoption agencies, not fewer adoption agencies.

00:44:18.000 Also, the hoops that you have to run through in order to adopt are just ridiculous.

00:44:23.000 And one of the things about... We already have laws against child abuse.

00:44:27.000 We already have laws against child endangerment.

00:44:30.000 The notion that the state has to be involved in every adoption runs counter to my libertarian sensibility that suggests that if I give... Let's say that I wanted to put my kid up for adoption.

00:44:40.000 And so I went to my local church or synagogue and I said, I want you to put the kid up for adoption. 0.99

00:44:44.000 The local synagogue or church has an interest, presumably, in the child going to a good home.

00:44:47.000 That's why I'm a member of the synagogue or the church.

00:44:50.000 The state does not have a particularly wonderful record in its treatment of children.

00:44:54.000 I have friends right now who are seeking to adopt, and they're asked some of the dumbest questions I have ever heard, the process is years long, and you basically have to sign on to the government's version of what good parenting looks like in order to get a child.

00:45:06.000 So if you tell a member of the state's adoption resources that, for example, you might swat the kid on the fanny if the kid tries to run into the street, it will put you in basically a re-education course in order to make you eligible for getting the kid.

00:45:22.000 This seems insane to me.

00:45:24.000 Now, I've never spanked my kids.

00:45:26.000 I'm actually not into spanking.

00:45:27.000 I don't think that it is necessary.

00:45:29.000 When I was growing up, my parents spanked a little bit, but really not much.

00:45:32.000 I don't think there's a lot of data to back spanking, but There are a lot of friends of mine who do believe that on occasion you have to spank a kid.

00:45:40.000 I've seen no evidence that mild spanking is the end of the world.

00:45:44.000 But according to the state of California, if you say that to them, they will not give you a kid. 0.92

00:45:48.000 So in other words, you have a beautiful middle-class household, you have a beautiful religious household, and every so often you say, if my kid is deeply disobedient, I'm going to slap them on the tuchus.

00:45:58.000 And then the state's like, no, you can't have a baby.

00:46:00.000 Instead, we're giving it to this couple that we like.

00:46:02.000 I find that problematic.

00:46:06.000 The United States is way better.

00:46:10.000 The reason the United States is way better is because of the inherent instability of coalition systems that exist overseas.

00:46:16.000 So Israel is the perfect example of a parliamentary system that collapses in on itself every five seconds.

00:46:21.000 Almost literally every five seconds.

00:46:23.000 They just had an election and then Prime Minister Netanyahu couldn't form a coalition government and so he dissolved the Knesset and made a new election.

00:46:32.000 The problem with parliamentary systems is that there are so many interests to juggle that you can never actually get any political work done.

00:46:39.000 Basically you have to appease everybody.

00:46:41.000 So if you are worried about bribery in the United States Congress, if you are worried about Conflicts of interest in the U.S.

00:46:46.000 Congress?

00:46:46.000 Take a look overseas, where in order to form a coalition, you have to bribe this little party, and this little party, and this little party, just to get them to stick around.

00:46:52.000 You have to make sure their welfare benefits are maintained.

00:46:55.000 It takes disaster in order to motivate those governments to do anything of real consequence.

00:46:59.000 Pat says, Hey Ben, thank you for everything you do.

00:47:01.000 I'm a recent subscriber to the Daily Wire and many other conservative platforms to show support against this leftist censorship lunacy.

00:47:07.000 Thank you.

00:47:08.000 I'm 31 years old, have been a conservative libertarian basically my whole conscious life.

00:47:11.000 However, aside from passing conversations with friends and living according to my values, I've sat mostly on the sidelines of public political discourse in my life.

00:47:18.000 My question to you is, what, in your opinion, is the best way to get involved in the war of ideas and changing hearts and minds when you don't have a large platform?

00:47:24.000 Thanks again.

00:47:25.000 Well, you know, I honestly think that the best way to get involved in the war of ideas and change hearts and minds is to act well for the other people that you know.

00:47:34.000 Truly, if you live out your values, that is the best way to convince people that your values are something worthwhile and something worth preserving. - Yeah.

00:47:42.000 I think this is one of the reasons why so many folks on the left are unwilling to grant the basic humanity of their political opposition.

00:47:47.000 Truly unwilling to grant the humanity of their political opposition.

00:47:52.000 In a second, I'm going to give you an example of this and things that I hate.

00:47:55.000 But one of the aspects of living with each other in a society is that we get to learn what a good person looks like.

00:48:02.000 And very often that good person doesn't share your political values.

00:48:06.000 And so that makes you think, OK, well, that person can be good and not share my political values.

00:48:10.000 Well, maybe that means that my political values are up for debate and I can still be a good person.

00:48:14.000 So being a good person to the people around you is deeply worthwhile.

00:48:17.000 It's funny.

00:48:18.000 I got a note from somebody yesterday.

00:48:20.000 So I am a member of a club in Los Angeles called the Magic Castle.

00:48:23.000 I'm a brand new member.

00:48:24.000 It's fantastic.

00:48:25.000 I love it.

00:48:25.000 So I'm very into magic, sleight of hand.

00:48:28.000 It's an amazing skill set.

00:48:29.000 It's really, it's super cool.

00:48:31.000 So the other night I was over at the Magic Castle.

00:48:35.000 And Magic Castle has all of these different rooms where people are doing different magic acts.

00:48:40.000 And in one of the rooms, which is kind of off the main rooms, one of the cool things is that sort of in random corners, there are random magicians who are trying out their acts and working on them, and it's really cool.

00:48:50.000 There was a really young guy, I mean, under the age of 21, so he had a probably special dispensation to be there, and he was doing a magic act.

00:48:57.000 And this kid was terrific.

00:48:59.000 I mean, this kid was first-rate.

00:49:00.000 He was doing stuff I've never seen anybody do with cards.

00:49:03.000 He was doing tricks I have never seen.

00:49:05.000 His whole kind of act was really well thought out.

00:49:11.000 His manner was really unassuming.

00:49:13.000 Just amazing, amazing stuff.

00:49:15.000 So my wife and I and my parents were there and we were sitting in the back and we're clapping for him because he's terrific.

00:49:21.000 And he calls me and he has one of these tricks where there are four people sitting around the table.

00:49:24.000 He calls me up, I'm part of the trick a little bit.

00:49:27.000 And then I go back and I mean, the kid's amazing.

00:49:29.000 So he finishes and I go up to him and I say, you know, that was really amazing.

00:49:32.000 If you ever need any help, like getting anywhere to let me know, because I would love to help you out because you are first rate.

00:49:38.000 Okay, so don't know the kid from Adam at all.

00:49:41.000 Walk out.

00:49:42.000 A few days later, I get a note from a friend that this person has posted on Facebook that the person knew me.

00:49:47.000 I had no idea who this person was.

00:49:49.000 This person apparently knew who I was and disagreed with me politically, which is totally fine.

00:49:53.000 I live in LA.

00:49:54.000 Everybody disagrees with me politically.

00:49:56.000 And this person posted a long note. 0.99

00:49:59.000 About how he had sort of assumed that I would be a jerk because we disagreed politically.

00:50:03.000 And then when we actually met, we met in a different context, and it turns out that I was actually a decent person, like a nice person to him, and it made him sort of rethink things a little bit. 0.76

00:50:12.000 Now, that's not me complimenting myself, that's just me recognizing that there's been this political duality that's been set up, where if you disagree with somebody politically, then we are automatically to assume that they are a bad person.

00:50:24.000 And if we can get past that, if you can break down that barrier, then you can actually have some good, productive Conversations.

00:50:30.000 And in that particular situation, all it took was being a nice person.

00:50:33.000 And I would treat that guy the same whether I knew his politics or didn't know his politics.

00:50:36.000 He did a great act.

00:50:37.000 He's terrific at what he does.

00:50:39.000 Be a good person in your daily life.

00:50:40.000 That is the best.

00:50:41.000 Honestly, it's the best thing you can do to be a representative of your values and your politics.

00:50:44.000 Sean says, Hey, Ben, just started listening to you recently after enjoying you as a meme for so long.

00:50:49.000 Now I'm a huge fan.

00:50:50.000 Like you, I'm also a big fan of classical music.

00:50:52.000 I foolishly went to music school and got a degree in composition.

00:50:55.000 So did my dad.

00:50:56.000 I have a classical music question for you.

00:50:57.000 What's your opinion of atonal music like Schoenberg or Weber?

00:51:01.000 Best regards.

00:51:02.000 Gonna pick up the book soon.

00:51:03.000 So I don't know Weber's music very well.

00:51:06.000 I know Schoenberg's music.

00:51:07.000 So, Schoenberg's early music is really terrific, before he goes full atonal.

00:51:11.000 I am not a fan of fully atonal music because it seems to me to defeat the purpose of music.

00:51:15.000 The human ear is looking for a level of consonance in music that is not provided by the absolute dissonance of atonal music.

00:51:22.000 It's one of the reasons why, for example, I like Béla Bartók, who uses a lot of atonal music and then generates it toward consonance.

00:51:28.000 So, the first movement of Concerto for Orchestra, for example, the end of it, The entire first movement is incredibly dissonant, and then it comes together in this non-dissonant moment, and it's tremendous, because music creates tension and then relieves tension.

00:51:41.000 It's also why the interval of the seventh was considered basically forbidden in Western music for centuries, because it was considered the devil's chord, because it wants to resolve.

00:51:51.000 The seventh wants to resolve to an octave, and it's also one of the reasons why, for example, If you listen to Bach's music, very often he'll have a minor piece and it ends on a major chord.

00:52:01.000 The reason is because the undertones, there are undertones to every tone, the undertones in music like organ music, for example, the undertones resonate in churches.

00:52:12.000 And so if you finished on a minor chord, there would be dissonance to undertones.

00:52:15.000 And so you'd finish on a major chord to avoid the dissonance.

00:52:18.000 One of the purposes of music is to, again, have dissonance that resolves.

00:52:22.000 Or, to move toward consonants, I'm not a huge fan of atonal music.

00:52:25.000 Schoenberg was deeply talented, but I think the 12-tone method is a huge mistake.

00:52:29.000 Nick says, Hey Ben, I love your show a lot.

00:52:31.000 I'm 14 years old and currently taking a rhetoric and civics class for my high school.

00:52:34.000 The topic we are debating is U.S.

00:52:36.000 arms dealing and how the country that purchases the most weapons from the United States is Saudi Arabia.

00:52:40.000 We're debating if we should ban all arms sales there because they use those weapons to torture and starve their people.

00:52:45.000 What are your views?

00:52:46.000 Also, why was FDR such a bad president?

00:52:47.000 Didn't he get us out of the Great Depression?

00:52:50.000 Thanks so much.

00:52:50.000 P.S.

00:52:51.000 I've been using the Daily Wire articles for examples of credible sources.

00:52:53.000 I mean, we really try to work hard over at Daily Wire.

00:52:53.000 Good.

00:52:55.000 Okay, so that's actually two questions.

00:52:57.000 So question number one, should we ban all arms sales to bad countries?

00:53:00.000 No.

00:53:01.000 I mean, it's an unfortunate reality of the modern world and of the world generally that you do have to side with bad people very often to fight worse people.

00:53:07.000 So the Lend-Lease program in World War II meant that the United States was providing enormous support, material support to the USSR One of the worst countries in the history of the world, run by one of the worst people in the history of the world, Stalin, in order to fight probably the worst person in the history of the world, Hitler. 0.75

00:53:22.000 So, this is true throughout international politics, and it means that our allegiances shift and change.

00:53:27.000 So, there may be a time when we are arming people against Saudi Arabia, depending on what Saudi Arabia's interests in the region are.

00:53:33.000 Right now, we're arming Saudi Arabia against Iran, which is more threatening to American interests. 0.93

00:53:37.000 Realistic understanding of politics means that sometimes you have to work with bad people in order to achieve better ends.

00:53:43.000 Now, in an ideal world, would we be able to not arm any of these folks? 0.63

00:53:47.000 Sure, that'd be great.

00:53:48.000 But, in an ideal world, Iran wouldn't exist. 1.00

00:53:51.000 In terms of the Iranian government, Iran would still exist as a country.

00:53:53.000 Saudi Arabia's government would not exist the way that it does.

00:53:56.000 All these countries would be liberal democracies in an ideal world.

00:53:59.000 They are not, and so we have to make some decisions as to which values we seek to promote and which countries we seek to protect.

00:54:04.000 How about FDR? 0.99

00:54:05.000 FDR was a crap president. 1.00

00:54:06.000 He did not get us out of the Great Depression. 0.99

00:54:08.000 In fact, the Great Depression was lengthened, according to studies from UCLA, by at least eight years by FDR's crap economic policy, which was a terrible economic policy.

00:54:16.000 He's also set us on the road to bankruptcy with programs like Social Security.

00:54:20.000 Also, FDR imprisoned literally hundreds of thousands of Japanese people, which everybody seems to forget, during World War II.

00:54:26.000 He put them in actual concentration camps.

00:54:29.000 That seems like kind of a bad thing.

00:54:31.000 He was a very, very bad president.

00:54:33.000 He has given credit for his leadership during World War II, and he deserves credit for his leadership during World War II, and that's about it.

00:54:39.000 Otherwise, he was an incredibly divisive president.

00:54:42.000 He was a president who castigated the mere earning of wealth.

00:54:46.000 He was a president who went after his political opponents that would make Nixon look like nothing.

00:54:51.000 He was one of the worst presidents in American history, I think, bar none.

00:54:54.000 Mark says, hello, Lord Shapiro.

00:54:56.000 Wow, I've been knighted.

00:54:57.000 When talking about the census question of being a citizen, you briefly mentioned that the district's Congress should change.

00:55:02.000 What would happen if a large population moved, let's say, out of New York State to Florida?

00:55:05.000 Would New York districts merge together based on population size?

00:55:09.000 And if so, how would that work for, say, let's say AOC and a neighboring district congressperson battling it out?

00:55:14.000 Then would Florida create a whole new district?

00:55:15.000 Bottom line are the number of house seats locked in?

00:55:17.000 No, the number of house seats are not locked in.

00:55:19.000 They're based on the census, which is why there's so much controversy right now over the census and whether we should be able to ask about legal immigration status, as I explained yesterday on the program.

00:55:29.000 The reality is that we should base our district on the number of legal citizens living in the district.

00:55:34.000 It should not be based on the people living illegally there.

00:55:36.000 If you ask people whether they are living there legally or illegally, then you will end up with redistricting, which is what Democrats are afraid of.

00:55:42.000 They would prefer to stack up Democratic districts with illegal immigrants so they can have more of those Democratic districts and thus more Congress people. 0.83

00:55:50.000 Well, I appreciate the compliment, by the way.

00:55:52.000 And yes, we do put an enormous amount of time and effort.

00:55:53.000 I promise you, at the end of every day, I'm pretty much exhausted, at least until I get home and see my kids, because they don't care, and the energy has to pick up, or I'm not being a good father.

00:56:00.000 Love the show.

00:56:00.000 Thanks for all the time and effort you put into creating great content.

00:56:03.000 Well, I appreciate the compliment, by the way.

00:56:05.000 And yes, we do put an enormous amount of time and effort.

00:56:07.000 I promise you at the end of every day, I'm pretty much exhausted, at least until I get home and see my kids because they don't care.

00:56:12.000 And the energy has to pick up or I'm not being a good father.

00:56:14.000 Okay.

00:56:15.000 So as far as the Trump in prison talking point, yes, this is a way for Nancy Pelosi to avoid saying that she wants to impeach him because then she doesn't have to do anything.

00:56:24.000 Well, I don't know Section 35, so I can't speak specifically to that.

00:56:24.000 Thanks, Larry.

00:56:26.000 section 35 where individuals who are alcohol or substance abusers are forced to be treated.

00:56:30.000 Do you think this is an effective way for families to help their loved ones or does it impede on an individual's free will?

00:56:36.000 What would your solution be for families with this issue?

00:56:38.000 One issue I see with this is it will deter substance abusers from seeking medical treatment when it may be necessary.

00:56:43.000 Thanks, Larry.

00:56:44.000 Well, I don't know section 35, so I can't speak specifically to that.

00:56:47.000 I think that the making it more easy to involuntarily commit somebody who is mentally ill and a danger to self or others is a very good thing. 1.00

00:56:58.000 I think one of the big problems we have right now is that there's this perception that if you're a threat to yourself or others, you should simply be left out there and make it impossible to involuntarily commit people who desperately need help and who are not in control of their own minds.

00:57:10.000 As far as alcohol or substance abuse, If you are a substance abuser, there is a good shot that you are unable to actually reason that you... I mean, addicts are addicts.

00:57:21.000 I mean, this is a disease.

00:57:22.000 And like other diseases, this being treated as an act of will alone, I think could be a huge mistake.

00:57:28.000 Now, I think you have to very carefully apply this power, because obviously you don't want people being involuntarily committed because they have relatives who don't like them or something like that.

00:57:38.000 But if you're talking about somebody who is a deep drug addict who will not voluntarily check into a clinic, And is basically stoned out on the street, living in a tent?

00:57:47.000 It seems to me that that is not a bad solution.

00:57:50.000 Family members saying, we need to do something about this.

00:57:52.000 This person is a danger to themselves.

00:57:54.000 In that case, I am not against the idea of involuntary commitment.

00:57:57.000 Okay, Eric says, hey, Ben Kenobi, on the most recent backstage with Dave Rubin, someone asked a question about anti-discrimination laws in employment and whether political affiliations qualified.

00:58:07.000 You and Jeremy discussed how anti-discrimination laws protect against discriminations for people things cannot change, such as race and sex, but malleable things like political affiliations are not covered.

00:58:16.000 My question is, operating under the leftist narrative that sex is malleable, wouldn't that notion negate someone's sex from being protected under anti-discrimination law?

00:58:23.000 Thanks for all your- Yes!

00:58:24.000 Actually, yes, it would.

00:58:25.000 Which is why you're seeing the left try to broaden out anti-discrimination law in weird ways.

00:58:29.000 So, This is one of the sort of odd aspects of the way they're trying to broaden out anti-discrimination law.

00:58:34.000 So anti-discrimination law does not cover, for example, sexual orientation federally.

00:58:38.000 It does cover it in many states.

00:58:40.000 But sexual orientation is actually not about what you feel.

00:58:44.000 It is about how you are perceived and what action you take.

00:58:46.000 In other words, there's no way for me to tell what your sexual orientation is unless you tell me your sexual orientation. 0.73

00:58:51.000 There's no way for me to tell what your sexual orientation is unless I see you and you are with a boyfriend and you're a man.

00:58:59.000 There's no way for me to tell that, which means that now I'm supposed to not discriminate based on action, not on an immutable characteristic that I can detect objectively from the outside.

00:59:09.000 There's no way to do that.

00:59:10.000 Broadening that out means that they can also now broaden that out to more More choice of display driven things, like choosing your own gender, for example.

00:59:22.000 So I can't tell if you're transgender just by looking at you, unless you are actually dressed in the garb of the opposite sex, or unless you have undergone some sort of physical transformation. 0.99

00:59:33.000 What that means is that, you know, I can't detect what's in your head, in other words.

00:59:38.000 Anti-discrimination law was never meant to protect folks against what is in their head.

00:59:44.000 Now, that is not saying these things aren't real.

00:59:46.000 I mean, when I say in your head, I mean, like, I literally can't tell what you're thinking, not that it's in your head or you're crazy or anything like that.

00:59:51.000 OK, so my problem is that I don't really believe in anti-discrimination laws, period.

00:59:56.000 What I mean by that is that the government should not be allowed to discriminate, but the government should not be forced to allow private citizens forced.

01:00:02.000 The government should not be able to force private citizens to act in the way that the government wants them to act.

01:00:07.000 The solution to discrimination in private life is for people not to associate with people who discriminate, for people to boycott businesses that openly discriminate.

01:00:15.000 Listen to my podcast with Larry Wilmore.

01:00:16.000 I talk a lot about this, I've said for years.

01:00:18.000 I would have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1965 because it needed to happen.

01:00:22.000 The Civil Rights Act of 1964, rather, because it needed to happen.

01:00:25.000 But would I oppose on an individual level Title II, which deals with public accommodations and specific I don't think that that is my power.

01:00:34.000 I don't think it's your power.

01:00:35.000 individual private business owners to act in a way that the government wants them to act.

01:00:39.000 I oppose that on principle, even though I agree it is very bad and in fact evil not to allow black people to eat in your restaurant. 1.00

01:00:46.000 I don't think that I have the power to use the government to compel people to serve people.

01:00:50.000 I don't think that that is my power.

01:00:51.000 I don't think it's your power.

01:00:52.000 I don't think it's anybody's power.

01:00:54.000 I think that you have the right to do bad things that I disagree with so long as you are not depriving me of my rights and I don't have a right to make you That's just not a thing.

01:01:03.000 Hey, Elizabeth says, I was born in 1995, so I'm right on the edge between the generations, although I probably relate more to the boomers.

01:01:09.000 I keep waiting for Generation Z to decide that they want to be rebels and go against the millennials by leaning conservative.

01:01:13.000 Do you think I'm being too optimistic?

01:01:15.000 I don't.

01:01:16.000 I think that there are a lot of Generation Z folks who are looking at the Millennials, and they're saying, these people are woke-skulled, they're annoying, they're irritating, we can't have conversations.

01:01:24.000 They suggest that people that disagree with them are bad and evil, and can't be talked to. 1.00

01:01:29.000 And I think that that is obviously not only wrong, but stupid. 0.99

01:01:32.000 Well, first of all, he's great in John Wick. 0.97

01:01:34.000 with the John Wick trilogy and his appearance at E3.

01:01:36.000 I've noticed a rise in Keanu Reeves' popularity.

01:01:39.000 He's very popular for being wholesome in meme culture as well.

01:01:41.000 Why do you think this is?

01:01:43.000 What do you think of him?

01:01:43.000 Thanks for all you do.

01:01:44.000 Well, first of all, he's great in John Wick because he's perfectly Keanu Reeves.

01:01:47.000 It's just the perfect part for him.

01:01:50.000 Perfect part, perfect time in his life.

01:01:52.000 It's terrific.

01:01:53.000 I am noticing that the popularity of Keanu Reeves is largely related to the restoration of an idea of a movie star that existed in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, and 60s.

01:02:01.000 And that was that movie stars were protected from studios, so you didn't know much about their personal life.

01:02:06.000 What you saw of them, you saw on screen.

01:02:08.000 And then in their regular life, they were expected to act like just normal, decent human beings.

01:02:12.000 We didn't care all that much about We cared, but we didn't know much about their sex lives, or about whether they were alcoholics, or drug users, or their family lives.

01:02:21.000 The studios really guarded the image of their stars.

01:02:24.000 And the stars were what you saw on screen, which is why you would go see a Katharine Hepburn movie, because Katharine Hepburn was a star.

01:02:30.000 You didn't know anything about her other than what you saw on screen, and you saw some glamour shots of her in the paper. 0.99

01:02:34.000 That's basically Keanu Reeves.

01:02:35.000 He acts like a nice guy publicly, you don't know much about him and his personal life, he doesn't make his personal life into a political issue, and then he goes and makes movies that you like.

01:02:43.000 You want to restore the star system in Hollywood?

01:02:46.000 This is actually what you need to do.

01:02:48.000 It's very ironic that so many members of Hollywood think that the way to create stars is to put them in the public eye at every available opportunity and to make them as human beings the issue.

01:02:57.000 You want to create a star?

01:02:58.000 It's the image that matters, not the actual human being behind the image.

01:03:04.000 The way to wreck an image of a star is to turn the star into a human being.

01:03:08.000 You wouldn't turn Coca-Cola, the brand, into the group of people who work at Coca-Cola because that's not what you're buying.

01:03:14.000 You're buying the brand.

01:03:16.000 It's very weird that Hollywood doesn't seem to understand this dichotomy.

01:03:19.000 Okay, time for a quick thing I like and then a quick thing that I hate and we'll be out of here.

01:03:22.000 So, things that I like.

01:03:23.000 Speaking of Katharine Hepburn, there is a great old comedy.

01:03:26.000 Again, I've been on an old movie spate with my wife. 1.00

01:03:29.000 We watched last night Spencer, Tracy and Katharine Hepburn in their best movie together, Adam's Rib, which is a movie about Two lawyers, Spencer Tracy, a prosecutor, Catherine Hepburn, a defense lawyer, who basically try opposite sides of the case.

01:03:42.000 They're also married to each other.

01:03:43.000 The movie is is really funny and really good.

01:03:46.000 It's about the battle of the sexes. 0.85

01:03:47.000 It takes feminism very seriously, but it also takes the idea that the sexes are different seriously.

01:03:52.000 It was written by a man and a woman and Garson Kanan and Ruth Gordon, who ended up being, of course, an Oscar winning actress on her own.

01:03:59.000 And the and the movie is is really funny.

01:04:01.000 Here's a little bit of the trailer.

01:04:05.000 What?

01:04:05.000 Adam!

01:04:06.000 Don't you dare slam that door! 0.97

01:04:08.000 All right.

01:04:10.000 Hello, all you pleasant people.

01:04:18.000 This is a Smith named Pete yapping at you about a Tracy named Spencer.

01:04:23.000 The movie's really good.

01:04:24.000 So go check it out, Adam's Rib.

01:04:26.000 It's a lot of fun.

01:04:27.000 Okay, other things that I like.

01:04:29.000 Jim Acosta is on a book tour.

01:04:31.000 Now, I don't really like that in the sense that I think that his book is any good.

01:04:34.000 I highly, highly doubt that it is.

01:04:36.000 I have not read it.

01:04:36.000 So I will just express my doubts.

01:04:38.000 I'm open to having my mind changed, although we will.

01:04:41.000 Yeah, sure.

01:04:42.000 So Jim Acosta was doing an interview and he said, what I really want is for Republicans to read my book.

01:04:47.000 Oh, yeah, because you're such a reach across the aisle kind of guy, Jim Acosta.

01:04:51.000 I'm sure when you wrote this book, you weren't selling it in order to get all of your allies to pick it up.

01:04:55.000 All the people who hate Trump and think that you are a righteous crusader for truth rather than a self-aggrandizing boor.

01:05:00.000 No, you wrote it for Republicans, didn't you, Jim Acosta?

01:05:02.000 We're at each other's throats.

01:05:05.000 And as I write in the book, towards the end of the book, I don't want to give it away.

01:05:08.000 But, you know, I essentially end with the message, we've just got to get back to a place where we have more faith in one another.

01:05:15.000 We're all on the same team.

01:05:17.000 We're all Americans.

01:05:18.000 I am not your enemy.

01:05:20.000 You are not my enemy.

01:05:22.000 Some folks may accuse me of writing this book for the resistance.

01:05:25.000 I'll tell you, if you read this book, I'm writing this book also for the Republicans.

01:05:30.000 Uh, because I really feel, you know, deep down in my heart that, you know, Republicans are just as patriotic as everybody else, and they want a country handed off to the next generation that is just as strong as the one we inherited.

01:05:41.000 Okay, that language at the very end is so telling.

01:05:43.000 I believe deep down in my heart that Republicans are as patriotic as anybody else.

01:05:47.000 Oh, well, thanks.

01:05:48.000 Thanks for that, Jim.

01:05:49.000 And thank you for deigning to grant us the patina of legitimacy.

01:05:52.000 I really, I appreciate it.

01:05:54.000 When Jim Acosta says I'm patriotic, I can tell you my heart just warms up.

01:05:57.000 It just warms up.

01:06:00.000 What a good man Jim Acosta is.

01:06:02.000 And he might be a nice guy in person, I have no idea.

01:06:05.000 I can tell you that what he does for a living, which is basically grandstand, is really irritating.

01:06:10.000 Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.

01:06:15.000 Charlotte Clymer is a transgender woman who works for the Human Rights Campaign. 1.00

01:06:20.000 I just say she's a man who believes that he is a woman, because that's what transgenderism is, says that he's a woman. 0.88

01:06:28.000 Okay, in any case, Charlotte Clymer tweets out, So far, I actually agree with this.

01:06:31.000 Not all opinions are equally true.

01:06:32.000 Not all opinions are deserving of our time and consideration.

01:06:35.000 So far, I actually agree with this.

01:06:37.000 Not all opinions are equally true.

01:06:39.000 Not all opinions are deserving of our time and consideration.

01:06:41.000 Agree.

01:06:43.000 Here's where it starts getting weird for Charlotte Clymer, supposedly an advocate of tolerance and diversity. 0.99

01:06:48.000 Not all opinions should be given space in the public square.

01:06:51.000 If you push a belief that is directly harmful to others, you have moved past opinion and into a threat to public safety.

01:06:58.000 If you push a belief that is directly harmful to others... So who defines a belief that is directly harmful to others?

01:07:04.000 Beliefs aren't directly harmful to others.

01:07:06.000 Actions are directly harmful to others.

01:07:09.000 If you do an action that is directly harmful to somebody else, we call that a crime.

01:07:13.000 If you have a belief, the belief isn't directly harmful to others because it is in your mind.

01:07:18.000 This notion that this is now a threat to public safety, if you have a belief.

01:07:21.000 The belief itself is a threat to public safety, and thus we must shut you out of the public square.

01:07:25.000 This is the excuse every dictator ever has used in order to shut down political debate.

01:07:29.000 Now, a bunch of people jumped on Charlotte Clymer for saying this, and Charlotte Clymer immediately said, well, I was talking about vaccinations.

01:07:35.000 Well, there's nothing in that tweet about vaccinations.

01:07:38.000 I, as folks know, am very much in favor of vaccinations.

01:07:41.000 I think that anti-vaccination material is generally propagandistic.

01:07:46.000 I think that vaccinations have been responsible, based on the science, for the vast decrease in killer diseases over the past century.

01:07:55.000 But I think anti-vaxxers are allowed to have opinions.

01:07:58.000 I think people who are anti-vaccines are allowed to have opinions and allowed to express those opinions, even if I think those opinions are wrong, and even if I think that people acting on those opinions is dangerous to children and to others.

01:08:07.000 Because this is a battle that ought to be fought in the public space.

01:08:12.000 And that's not even an argument about legislation.

01:08:14.000 But this idea that you get to shut down opinions because the beliefs are dangerous?

01:08:18.000 There is no actual limit to that.

01:08:21.000 There's no actual limit to that.

01:08:23.000 I assume that Charlotte Clymer would suggest that because I say that Charlotte Clymer is a genetic man, because Charlotte Clymer is a genetic man, that this is a belief that is directly harmful to Charlotte Clymer.

01:08:33.000 Well, no.

01:08:34.000 It is a belief that happens to be based on biological fact, And it is not harmful to Charlotte Clymer that I believe this.

01:08:41.000 It would be harmful to Charlotte Clymer if I were to come and do something bad to Charlotte Clymer. 0.76

01:08:47.000 But me believing a thing is not inherently a threat to public safety.

01:08:54.000 The unwillingness to distinguish between thought and action in leftist thought is incredibly dangerous, and it is going to lead to a crackdown on speech and thought itself, and you're already seeing it in the way that the left treats folks.

01:09:04.000 It's pretty astonishing.

01:09:06.000 Okay, we'll be back here a little bit later today with two additional hours, or we'll see you here next week.

01:09:10.000 Have a wonderful weekend.

01:09:11.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

01:09:11.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

01:09:12.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Robert Sterling.

01:09:20.000 Directed by Mike Joyner.

01:09:21.000 Executive Producer, Jeremy Boring.

01:09:24.000 Senior Producer, Jonathan Hay.

01:09:25.000 Our Supervising Producer is Mathis Glover.

01:09:28.000 And our Technical Producer is Austin Stevens.

01:09:30.000 Edited by Adam Sievitz.

01:09:32.000 Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.

01:09:34.000 Hair and Makeup is by Jesua Olvera.

01:09:36.000 Production Assistant, Nick Sheehan.

01:09:37.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.

01:09:40.000 Copyright Daily Wire 2019.

01:09:42.000 Hey guys, over on the Matt Wall Show today, is it bigoted and homophobic that the Trump administration won't let American embassies fly gay pride flags at their embassies?

01:09:51.000 Well, of course it's not, but the left says that it is, and we'll talk about that today. 0.89

01:09:56.000 Also, Hollywood is continuing in its efforts to destroy your children.

01:10:00.000 We'll talk about the latest in that war.

01:10:03.000 And finally, a woman on Twitter.

01:10:05.000 Basically just says that she wants to be a good wife one day to her future husband and this sends the left into a tizzy.

The Ben Shapiro Show - June 14, 2019

Agents Of Foreign Influence | Ep. 801

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript