The Ben Shapiro Show - Ep. 271 - Courts Go Rogue, Battle Trump on Immigration

Officer Darren Wilson admitted to using the N-word, but he didn't admit to any of the other things the media have alleged he said. Is there any truth in what he said to investigators about what happened in the aftermath of Michael Brown's shooting death by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014? Or is there something else Wilson said that changed everything? Ben Shapiro explains what happened, and why it doesn't add up. Plus, a federal judge strikes down a temporary ban on President Trump's executive order on immigration and refugees, and much, much more! All that and much more on today's episode of the Ben Shapiro Mailbag! Subscribe to Ben Shapiro's new show, "The Ben Shapiro Show," wherever you get your mailbag, to get the latest news and discuss the most important things going on in the world. Subscribe and comment to stay up to date on all things Ben Shapiro! The Daily Wire's newest podcast, "Daily Wire" is now available on all major podcast directories, including Apple Podcasts, PodcastOne, Overcast, and Overcast. Subscribe, wherever you listen to your favorite podcast platform, to be notified when new episodes are available. You can also become a supporter of the show by becoming a supporter! If you like the show, consider pledging a patron! It helps spread the word out there about the show! . Thanks for listening and spreading the word to the world of Ben Shapiro, Ben Shapiro and his amazingness everywhere else! Thank you Ben Shapiro. - Thank you for listening! - Your continued support is so much more than you could ask for a chance to be included in the show Ben Shapiro will get a shoutout in the next episode of The Ben Shapiro mailbag? - Ben Shapiro s Daily Wire podcast! and Ben Shapiro is a big thank you, too much more... - The Root's new book is out now! by Ben Shapiro: and a special thank you for your support is much more important than the rest of the world can do more than that, Ben's review is much better than you'll get more than enough than you can imagine. Ben s review of the movie "Thank you, Ben shave me out there, Ben says so much so much in this guy gets it, Ben gets it in the rest, Ben s saying so much, right he says it, and Ben s got it, right?

00:00:00.000 On Wednesday, Michael Harriot of TheRoot.com ran a shocking piece titled, everything you think you know about the death of Mike Brown is wrong, and the man who killed him admits it.

00:00:09.000 Provocative!

00:00:10.000 Sally Cohen of CNN, she of hands-up-don't-shoot fame, tweeted out the article with this caption, we all need to read and reckon with how our media, courts, everything believed white cops' lies over black kids' truth.

00:00:21.000 All of which means that you'd think the article would actually substantiate the headline.

00:00:25.000 After all, most people think Michael Brown attacked a police officer, Darren Wilson, inside his vehicle after being pulled over, then tried to grab the officer's gun, then ran when a shot was fired in the car before turning around, charging the cop, and being shot.

00:00:36.000 That's what all the witness testimony said.

00:00:38.000 Repeatedly.

00:00:39.000 From Black Witnesses. 1.00

00:00:40.000 So what did Officer Wilson say that changed everything?

00:00:43.000 According to TheRoot.com, reporting on a court document originally obtained by Wesley Lowry of the Washington Post, a guy who, by the way, reported in laudatory terms about the unrest in Ferguson at the time, Wilson stated that he reached through the window of his car and grabbed for Brown's body during the encounter.

00:00:58.000 Of course, Wilson never said anything different.

00:00:59.000 He always maintained Brown punched him in the face, at which point he grabbed at Brown as Brown leaned into the car.

00:01:04.000 He pulled his gun.

00:01:05.000 Brown attempted to grab his gun.

00:01:06.000 He fired his gun, and the rest of the events ensued.

00:01:08.000 But here's how The Root describes the events.

00:01:10.000 Two men are walking down the street.

00:01:12.000 A cop pulls in front of them, blocking their path.

00:01:14.000 Instead of calling for backup or radioing in a traffic stop,

00:01:17.000 He opens his car door and either Brown closes it or ricochets off of Brown's body.

00:01:21.000 The officer then chooses to reach through his window and grab the suspect by his arm and body.

00:01:25.000 Wilson had a gun and Brown is hanging inside the car. 0.55

00:01:27.000 Brown does not reach for the officer's gun and the cop admits that Brown's only weapon was his big scary black self. 0.75

00:01:33.000 The next part of the testimony will confound the conservatives who stated that Wilson did not shoot Brown in the back.

00:01:37.000 Wilson admits that after the first shot, Brown started running away from him and he fired another shot which missed Brown.

00:01:42.000 Wilson basically admits that he fired at Brown and the bullet hit a building close by.

00:01:47.000 Then, The Root alleges that Wilson admits to having used the N-word.

00:01:51.000 Other headlines have repeated this.

00:01:52.000 They neglect to mention that Wilson explicitly says he only used the N-word in order to repeat a, quote, racist remark made by someone else, but I have not made a racist remark against another individual while on duty as a police officer, unquote.

00:02:04.000 Oops.

00:02:04.000 But what about the rest of this narrative?

00:02:06.000 It's just not true.

00:02:08.000 Wilson doesn't admit any of the things the Roots says he admits, as Wesley Lowry himself tweeted.

00:02:12.000 Here's what Lowry tweeted.

00:02:13.000 The court documents reveal none of these things.

00:02:15.000 Wilson has asked specific questions.

00:02:16.000 He's not asked others.

00:02:25.000 Can't infer entire narrative by filling in the blanks based on things he's not asked.

00:02:29.000 Wilson admits that Brown did not try to remove your gun from your holster.

00:02:32.000 This is not the same as admitting Brown never reached for the gun.

00:02:35.000 Nowhere in this document does Wilson address who initiated contact.

00:02:38.000 Admits at some point he reached through the window.

00:02:40.000 Doesn't address the timeline.

00:02:41.000 There is nothing I've seen in December 28th admissions from Darren Wilson that materially alters and contradicts his previous version of the story.

00:02:48.000 Lowry is honest and reports this correctly.

00:02:50.000 I've read the entire document.

00:02:52.000 It is clear that the Root, and by proxy Sally Cohn, are confabulating Wilson's testimony into a story of their own making, a narrative repeatedly debunked by third-party witnesses and the Department of Justice itself, which found no wrongdoing by Wilson.

00:03:04.000 This is how leftist narratives spread.

00:03:07.000 And there will be violence spurred on by such narratives, because the hard left likes its riots, just so long as the riots are aimed at the establishment, meaning in this case, the cops.

00:03:14.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:03:15.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:03:20.000 Oh, well, today is mailbag day, and so that's very exciting.

00:03:22.000 We'll be doing that a little bit later, which is why you need to become a subscriber over at dailywire.com.

00:03:27.000 We're also going to be talking, I'm going to break down this awful, awful court decision from a judge in, a federal district judge in Hawaii, striking down or at least putting a temporary hold on Donald Trump's executive, President Trump's executive order on immigration and refugees.

00:03:41.000 I will break that down for you.

00:03:42.000 Awful, awful decision. 1.00

00:03:44.000 I mean, I read the decision twice because it's so bad that it took twice just to comprehend all the stupidity inherent in it. 0.99

00:03:49.000 But first, we have to say thank you to our friends and sponsors over at Lyft. 0.97

00:03:53.000 So, if you need to go somewhere and you're looking for the best ride-sharing app there is, Lyft is it.

00:03:59.000 And if you've tried Lyft, you know what I mean.

00:04:00.000 It's high-quality drivers.

00:04:01.000 All the cars are new.

00:04:03.000 They show up in three and a half minutes on average.

00:04:05.000 Every Lyft driver is fully vetted through a 10-point safety standard, including criminal and DMV background checks.

00:04:10.000 You know you're gonna get around quickly and safely.

00:04:12.000 We use Lyft all the time in my family.

00:04:14.000 I use it.

00:04:14.000 My wife uses it.

00:04:15.000 More important to me that my wife uses it because sometimes she's coming home late from the hospital. 0.80

00:04:19.000 She's really tired.

00:04:20.000 And as a young and beautiful woman, it is important to me that my wife is picked up by people who I know that I can trust with safety.

00:04:25.000 And same thing for her. 0.91

00:04:27.000 And that's why she uses Lyft. 0.98

00:04:29.000 You can also tip in the app, which means that the drivers are happier.

00:04:32.000 9 out of 10 Lyft rides get a perfect 5-star rating from the passenger.

00:04:35.000 It's a better all-around experience.

00:04:37.000 The quality is really, really high.

00:04:53.000 Promo code Shapiro and again you get a $30 value three free rides up to $10 each promo code Shapiro And it is the best ride sharing app there is lift and we thank them for being our sponsors obviously use that promo code Shapiro in order to get the discount and also to let them know that we're the ones who sent you okay

00:05:11.000 Okay, so one of the worst judicial decisions in recent memory came out yesterday from a district court judge in Hawaii and he struck down Donald Trump's revised executive order.

00:05:20.000 Now, we didn't really talk too much about Donald Trump's revised executive order because basically what the revised executive order on immigration and refugees did is it got rid of a lot of the things that the Ninth Circuit objected to and the federal district court in Washington objected to originally in the first executive order.

00:05:35.000 So, first things first, the first executive order was fully constitutional and it was fully legal.

00:05:40.000 The court struck it down anyway.

00:05:41.000 They said that it affected green card holders, which was a problem.

00:05:44.000 They said that it was religiously discriminatory, which really shouldn't have been a problem, but they said it was.

00:05:48.000 So, the new version got rid of all language with regard to Islam and Christianity.

00:05:53.000 The new version got rid of its application to green card holders.

00:05:56.000 The new version broadened the ability for the Secretary of State to grant admission to people on the basis of exceptions to the rules set up.

00:06:03.000 It's a, it's a facially neutral statute, meaning it has no differentiation between Muslims and anybody else.

00:06:09.000 That didn't stop the court.

00:06:10.000 So, this federal district judge basically decides, and this is basically what the decision comes down to, it's an amazing thing.

00:06:16.000 The decision comes down to, I don't like Donald Trump, therefore the executive order is bad.

00:06:20.000 And that is not much of a simplification.

00:06:22.000 The entire decision rests on the idea that he's not actually going to read the verbiage, not going to read the actual wording of the executive order.

00:06:30.000 Instead, they're just going to look at stuff that Donald Trump has said over the past two years and say, look, it looks like Donald Trump doesn't like Muslims.

00:06:36.000 Therefore, even though this particular executive order doesn't discriminate against Muslims, even though this particular executive order only applies to people from six of the most terror-rich countries on earth, originally named by Barack Obama,

00:06:47.000 We're still going to impute to Donald Trump some sort of nefarious motive to ban Muslims because he doesn't like Muslims.

00:06:53.000 So, in other words, we're not going to look at the law, we're going to look at what they said about the law.

00:06:58.000 And not even what they said about this law, we're going to look at what he said a year ago about different stuff.

00:07:02.000 And now, if the courts had held this about Obamacare, Obamacare would have been struck down, obviously.

00:07:06.000 Obamacare should have been struck down anyway, because Obama was telling the truth when he said Obamacare was not a tax, it was a fee.

00:07:12.000 But the courts specifically ignored Obamacare being a fee and not a tax in order to rewrite the statute and protect Obamacare.

00:07:19.000 So they ignored everything Obama said in order to ensure that Barack Obama's signature law remained law.

00:07:25.000 In this case, they're taking something that is obviously and perfectly legal, and they are saying that it is now illegal because they don't like what Donald Trump said.

00:07:33.000 So let's go through some of the dumber things about this decision, and it is demonstrative of the fact that Congress needs to crack down on the jurisdiction of federal courts.

00:07:41.000 Federal courts should not have this type of jurisdiction.

00:07:44.000 The 9th Circuit should be broken up as a Circuit Court of Appeals.

00:07:48.000 This is a long-standing opinion of mine.

00:07:49.000 This is not something that is brought about by this particular decision.

00:07:52.000 I wrote my entire third-year law paper at Harvard Law, which I've been attempting to dig up for a while now.

00:07:56.000 I wrote the entire thing on why judicial review is a constitutional error, and why it actually has nothing to do with the Constitution of the United States.

00:08:04.000 That said, this decision is perfect evidence of why you cannot have a group of judges who think they are an oligarchic super-legislature.

00:08:12.000 They think they're lawmakers.

00:08:13.000 They're not lawmakers.

00:08:14.000 So, what does this actual decision say?

00:08:16.000 Well, first, it says that the Constitution bars religious discrimination against foreigners.

00:08:20.000 It says the Establishment Clause applies to people who don't even live in the country. 0.86

00:08:25.000 It doesn't apply to American citizens alone.

00:08:27.000 It applies to some random dude on a hilltop in Yemen. 0.94

00:08:30.000 So, in other words, if you have a policy that says, random dude on a hilltop in Yemen, we're not letting you in because you are a radical Muslim. 0.99

00:08:36.000 They say, well this would violate the establishment clause because you obviously prefer Christians to Muslims. 1.00

00:08:42.000 This is asinine. 0.98

00:08:43.000 First of all, the provisions of the Constitution do not apply to foreigners. 0.94

00:08:47.000 The Constitution only applies to people who are citizens of the United States.

00:08:51.000 It does not apply to people who are living any random place in the world.

00:08:55.000 If the Constitution has to grant rights to people to immigrate, regardless of religion, regardless of viewpoint, 0.59

00:09:01.000 Imagine this, okay?

00:09:02.000 The First Amendment of the Constitution also says you have freedom of speech, it says you have freedom of religion, and it has the Establishment Clause that government cannot establish religion.

00:09:09.000 So, let's say the Constitution were to apply to people all over the world.

00:09:13.000 And that applies to everyone.

00:09:14.000 Well, the First Amendment also says you have freedom of speech.

00:09:17.000 So, that means that, presumably, that applies to anybody abroad.

00:09:21.000 And those people, we can't discriminate against them based on viewpoint, right?

00:09:25.000 The government is not allowed viewpoint discrimination against you or me.

00:09:28.000 It can't shut me down because of what I'm saying.

00:09:30.000 If we took the same logic that this court is applying to the Establishment Clause and applied it to the Free Speech Clause, what you'd end up with is anyone anywhere on earth has a right to enter the United States no matter what they think about things.

00:09:41.000 Okay, that's how crazy this court decision is.

00:09:43.000 Other things that this decision says.

00:09:45.000 As I say, the court actually says that motivation matters, not text.

00:09:49.000 They explicitly acknowledge, explicitly acknowledge, that there is nothing in this executive order that discriminates against Muslims.

00:09:57.000 They then try to make the claim that it discriminates against Muslims even though it clearly does not discriminate against all Muslims.

00:10:02.000 The court says, the illogic of the government's contentions is palpable.

00:10:05.000 The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed.

00:10:11.000 That doesn't make any sense at all.

00:10:13.000 If you're demonstrating animus for a group of people, obviously you have to demonstrate animus for the entire group of people.

00:10:19.000 If I have a law and it only affects a certain percentage of black people,

00:10:23.000 But it doesn't affect 99% of black people.

00:10:25.000 It's very difficult to say that the law is actually motivated by animus against black people.

00:10:30.000 That seems relatively logical to me.

00:10:32.000 And in fact, the court then goes on to make exactly the same case that they're saying is illogical.

00:10:36.000 They then say this is obviously a Muslim ban because it applies to countries that are largely Muslim.

00:10:41.000 You can't make a statistical argument like that if you're just claiming that statistical arguments are irrelevant to the question of animus. 0.92

00:10:48.000 They quote Donald Trump from March 2016 saying, I think Islam hates us.

00:10:52.000 Okay, March 2016, he was still a candidate.

00:10:55.000 He wasn't even president then.

00:10:56.000 They quote Trump's infamous Muslim ban press release from late 2015, and they say all of this is the backdrop to this executive order.

00:11:03.000 And then they say that because Donald Trump says mean things about the Muslims, that means that the executive order is illegal.

00:11:08.000 And then they quote the 10th Circuit.

00:11:11.000 On this issue.

00:11:11.000 And here's what they say.

00:11:12.000 They basically say that maybe at some future point he could pass the exact same executive order and we wouldn't strike it down.

00:11:18.000 We wouldn't put a temporary restraining order on it because we would know that he actually is not a mean guy.

00:11:25.000 So now they're judging Trump as a person.

00:11:26.000 He's a mean guy.

00:11:27.000 Right?

00:11:27.000 This is what they say.

00:11:28.000 From the above principles, we conclude that a government cure should be one, purposeful, two, public, and three, at least as persuasive as the initial endorsement of religion.

00:11:36.000 It should be purposeful enough for an objective observer to know unequivocally that the government does not endorse religion.

00:11:41.000 So, in other words, if Donald Trump spends the next two years talking about how Islam is just awesome, then they might allow him to pursue this executive order.

00:11:49.000 But until then, until he goes out and says publicly that Islam is the best religion that ever was, and he loves Islam like no other,

00:11:55.000 That it is a big league, in his own words.

00:11:57.000 Until he actually does that, they are going to ban this executive order.

00:12:00.000 So they're going to mind-read Donald Trump, which is a challenging thing under any circumstances. 0.99

00:12:06.000 It's particularly stupid when the people attempting to mind-read Trump are obviously not mind-reading Trump. 0.98

00:12:10.000 They are mind-reading themselves in their perceptions about Trump. 1.00

00:12:14.000 Okay, other things that are idiotic about this decision. 0.94

00:12:16.000 So they reinforce in this decision this notion pushed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and that federal district judge in Washington that a state is able to sue and get immigration policy held up if it doesn't benefit the state to have more immigration. 0.95

00:12:32.000 So the state said, one of the big issues in lawyering is something called standing.

00:12:38.000 I can't sue the government based on some random law that doesn't affect me.

00:12:42.000 I can't sue Mathis today based on the fact that I get food poisoning from a separate restaurant.

00:12:47.000 I don't have standing because Mathis hasn't done me any harm, right?

00:12:50.000 Standing means that the person you're suing has some connection with the harm that is being inflicted upon you.

00:12:56.000 So what the court does here is they broaden the issue of standing because, really, the state doesn't have any standing to sue the federal government based on immigration policy.

00:13:04.000 They don't.

00:13:05.000 If they could, then presumably the state of Arizona could have sued the federal government long ago for not enforcing its immigration laws, affecting the state of Arizona in negative ways.

00:13:12.000 They weren't able to.

00:13:13.000 But now the court finds standing to open the borders.

00:13:16.000 Why?

00:13:17.000 Because universities in states like Hawaii won't be able to recruit that dude on the hilltop in Yemen. 0.95

00:13:22.000 Seriously, this is what it says.

00:13:24.000 It says, the state has preliminarily demonstrated that its universities will suffer monetary damages and intangible harms.

00:13:31.000 So now we are now measuring the state's standing based on intangible harms, things that can't be measured or felt.

00:13:37.000 I don't

00:13:55.000 He's $500,000 in debt after going to med school, and instead of actually starting a real practice, he starts conducting free therapy sessions for patients that he finds on Craigslist.

00:14:05.000 And the series is really, really funny.

00:14:08.000 You should go check it out right now.

00:14:09.000 It's critically acclaimed.

00:14:10.000 You can watch the trailer over at YouTube.

00:14:12.000 The series is called Shrink, but you can only do that, you can only actually watch the series if you subscribe to Seeso.

00:14:17.000 So Seeso is your one-stop shop

00:14:19.000 We're good to go.

00:14:43.000 We're good to go.

00:15:09.000 And you can access their content from everything including Amazon Fire and Apple TV or Android or iOS.

00:15:14.000 You can get it anywhere.

00:15:15.000 So check it out.

00:15:16.000 See so.com and remember use that promo code Ben at checkout so that you can number one signal that you listen to the show and number two so that you can actually get that one month for free and see if you like it. 0.96

00:15:25.000 Okay, so the stupidest thing of all about this ruling... I should say the second stupidest thing. 0.99

00:15:30.000 The stupidest thing is this whole feelings routine. 1.00

00:15:32.000 This routine that Donald Trump's feelings about Islam shape how the court rules on an executive order. 1.00

00:15:38.000 I'll tell you the reason that that's the stupidest thing. 1.00

00:15:40.000 The reason that's the stupidest thing is... 0.99

00:15:42.000 If people can now sue the President of the United States and say that he is violating the Establishment Clause simply because he has quote-unquote animus for some group outside the United States that violates the Establishment Clause, then you could theoretically have somebody sue Trump to stop him from pursuing military action against like Al-Qaeda and ISIS because he doesn't really hate Al-Qaeda and ISIS, he hates all of Islam. 0.98

00:16:05.000 Right?

00:16:05.000 They could use exactly the same logic they're using right now on immigration.

00:16:08.000 The logic they're using on immigration, Trump says, I want to stop Al-Qaeda, I want to stop ISIS, I want to stop terrorists from coming into the country.

00:16:13.000 And they say, no, what you really mean is you hate Muslims.

00:16:16.000 Why couldn't you use that exact same logic with regard to what he's doing in war? 0.65

00:16:21.000 Why couldn't you say, well, what he really means is, he doesn't hate Al-Qaeda or ISIS, he hates all Muslims. 0.97

00:16:25.000 He wants a war with Islam. 0.95

00:16:27.000 And that means I'm going to sue him because the Establishment Clause doesn't allow him to make policy that discriminates based on religion.

00:16:34.000 This is crazy talk. 0.96

00:16:35.000 The second stupidest thing in this ruling, however, is the granting of standing to the plaintiff, a guy named Dr. Ismail El-Sheikh. 0.98

00:16:45.000 Dr. El-Sheikh is an American citizen of Egyptian descent. 0.95

00:16:48.000 There are two issues that make him not ripe for standing here, that don't grant him standing in this case.

00:16:52.000 One, he's an American citizen.

00:16:54.000 The executive order does not apply to American citizens.

00:16:56.000 Two, he's from Egypt.

00:16:58.000 It doesn't apply to Egyptians.

00:17:00.000 Egypt is not one of the countries on the list.

00:17:02.000 So, there are two separate reasons why... So, number one, he's an American citizen.

00:17:06.000 It doesn't apply to him.

00:17:07.000 Two, even if it didn't apply to American citizens, it still wouldn't apply to him because he's from Egypt.

00:17:12.000 So who does it apply to?

00:17:13.000 He's suing because his mother-in-law is from Syria and she wants to come visit.

00:17:17.000 Seriously.

00:17:18.000 First of all, this alone should mean that he never gets standing because no one wants their mother-in-law to visit.

00:17:23.000 But second of all, the idea that he's getting standing based on his mother-in-law living in Syria is insane.

00:17:29.000 How does the court come up with the idea of standing?

00:17:31.000 They say he has standing because, this is a direct quote, he thinks that the executive order is devastating to me, my wife and children, since it saddened him.

00:17:40.000 I am not making that up.

00:17:42.000 That is in the court decision.

00:17:43.000 The court decision says that this guy has standing to sue the federal government because the policy of the federal government made him sad.

00:17:50.000 Okay, I am now going to sue the federal government for every law and regulation it has passed in the last 20 years.

00:17:55.000 Because they all make me sad. 0.99

00:17:57.000 Because they all suck. 1.00

00:17:58.000 It doesn't work that way. 0.99

00:17:59.000 This is not how law works.

00:18:01.000 This is a usurpatious court.

00:18:02.000 This is a court that is usurping, obviously, the power of the presidency, and it's about time for Congress to step in and do something about it, because this is fully crazy.

00:18:12.000 This is fully crazy.

00:18:13.000 We'll talk more about that.

00:18:14.000 We'll also do the mailbag, but in order for you to do that and see that, you're going to have to go over to dailywire.com and become a subscriber.

00:18:20.000 If you go over to dailywire.com, $8 a month allows you access

00:18:24.000 To watch the rest of the podcast live and in living color.

00:18:27.000 You can become part of the mailbag too.

00:18:28.000 You don't get your questions answered unless you are one of the members of our special, special coterie of geniuses.

00:18:35.000 And you only become part of that coterie, you only get your special Decoder badge when you go to Decoder Ring, when you go to dailywire.com and you become a subscriber for $8 a month.

00:18:44.000 You can become an annual subscriber as well.

00:18:46.000 Right now, we are giving out copies of the Runaway bestseller.

00:18:50.000 Reasons to Vote Democrat by Michael Knowles.

00:18:53.000 This is the book that is soaring.

00:18:55.000 It's still number one on Amazon.

00:18:56.000 It's been number one on Amazon for a week and a half, and it is literally a blank book of pages, but you get a free copy of it because it is hilarious, and I will take partial credit because I put my quote on the front that says thorough.

00:19:08.000 In any case,

00:19:09.000 We're good to go.

The Ben Shapiro Show - March 17, 2017

Ep. 271 - Courts Go Rogue, Battle Trump on Immigration

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript