All Episodes
Previous Next
May 16, 2016 - The Ben Shapiro Show
49:44
Ep. 118 - The Media Discover Trump Has A Penis

The rise of alt-right panderers, Democrats lose their minds in Nevada, and Ben Carson says silly things. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
So, last week, Gizmodo reported that former Facebook employees finally admitted what we conservatives always tacitly knew.
That the company used leftist editorial procedures to tamp down all the trending conservative topics and disadvantage stories from conservative websites.
Here's Gizmodo, quote.
Several former Facebook news curators, as they were known internally, told Gizmodo they were instructed to artificially inject selected stories into the trending news module, even if they weren't popular enough to warrant inclusion, or in some cases, if they weren't trending at all.
Among the deep-sixed or suppressed topics on the list, former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was accused by Republicans of inappropriately scrutinizing conservative groups, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, popular news aggregator The Drudge Report, Chris Kyle, and former Fox News contributor Steven Crowder.
Stories covered by conservative outlets including Breitbart, Washington Examiner, and Newsmax that were trending enough to be picked up by the algorithm, they were excluded.
Unless mainstream sites like the New York Times and the BBC and CNN also covered the same story.
So, now Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has invited a bevy of conservatives to meet with him in Menlo Park, California to chat about all of this, even though his top-level employees have denied the accusations.
Look, conservatives have pretty good reason to attend with a list of demands.
Demands like Facebook committing to an objective algorithm for choosing trending topics, Facebook seizing discrimination against conservatives and conservative outlets, Facebook redressing its past bias against prominent Facebook conservatives like Steven Crowder, and that a dollar spent by a conservative on Facebook should be treated in exactly the exact same way as a dollar spent by a leftist on Facebook marketing.
The meeting, in other words, is worthwhile, so long as conservatives go in with a real agenda.
But naturally, pro-Trump websites like Breitbart News and The Drudge Report and Gateway Pundit, they've chosen to lie about the nature of the conservatives going to the meeting instead.
Now all those outlets have a pretty good reason to be skeptical of Facebook's motives.
All conservatives should be, and several of those outlets, at least two of them, were named there.
But the meeting isn't about Donald Trump.
Nonetheless, here are the headlines about the Facebook meeting from those pro-Trump websites.
Gateway Pundit, quote, Facebook founder Zuckerberg to meet with conservatives this week, but only anti-Trump conservatives.
Breitbart News, Glenn Beck, anti-Trump conservatives to meet with Facebook's Zuckerberg.
Drudge Report linked to Breitbart, and here was their headline, anti-Trump, quote unquote, conservatives in Facebook meetup.
It's a conspiracy!
And just like all the other anti-Trump conspiracies, the elections being stolen and the media that gave Trump $2 billion in free media wanted to stop him from winning the nomination, and it's the Jews!
Just like all of those other conservative, supposedly pro-Trump conspiracy theories, it's nonsense.
The Hill reported this morning, quote, Barry Bennett, a senior advisor to the Trump campaign, will represent Trump during the meeting on Wednesday.
By the way, those of us who had heard about the meeting knew Bennett had been invited long before The Hill reported it.
And Breitbart News was invited too!
But, this all must have been just some big anti-Trump conspiracy.
See, this is how the Trump movement works.
They take issues that are important to conservatives, and then they pervert them into litmus tests about the Orange God King.
In the process, they let the apparent bad guys, in this case Facebook, off the hook, and they split conservatives into pro-Trump and anti-Trump factions.
All for publicity, all for political gain.
And then, as a capper, those like conman Stephen K. Bannon of Breitbart News, of whom Trump says, quote, if Steve is involved, it will be good, they say they're just turning down the invite because, quote, free speech is not for sale.
And neither are we.
I'm Ben Shapiro and this is The Ben Shapiro Show.
...tend to demonize people who don't care about your feelings. Alright, so it was a busy weekend and there's lots of amusing Trump material to get to and a lot of amusing stuff on the Democratic side to get to.
Everybody's focused on the Never Trump movement.
Less people seem to be focused on the Never Hillary movement among folks on the left.
Bernie Sanders' crowd is not thrilled with Hillary Clinton.
We'll get to all of that, but we start today with this late-breaking news.
Breitbart, Sunday night, wrote a piece.
They put up a piece that looked like this.
It looked like this, and in the headline, If you can't read it, folks, because you're not subscribed.
First of all, you should subscribe so you can see everything we're doing.
It makes the show twice as awesome and three times as wonderful.
And that's an exact calculation.
The headline says, Bill Kristol, Republican spoiler, renegade Jew, prepares third-party effort to block Trump's path to the White House.
This was the big headline over at Breitbart.com.
Renegade Jew!
And we renegade Jews were somewhat perturbed by this.
The piece was written by a former boss of mine, David Horowitz.
So, this is two former employers of mine getting together to do something deeply terrible and stupid.
So, let's first go through the piece that David Horowitz wrote, and then we'll get to why Breitbart does stuff like this.
And there is an incipient, a nascent anti-Semitic movement inside the Trump camp.
We've been talking about it for months here, and this is just more evidence that it's being pandered to by folks at Breitbart.
I'm kinda surprised at David because the reality is that David trying to call people out on their Judaism is a little bit weird.
So, here's the thing.
I'm Orthodox.
See this?
This means I'm Orthodox.
The funny hat on my head.
That means I'm an Orthodox Jew.
I've worn a yarmulke every single waking hour, essentially, unless I'm showering or sleeping.
Well, then I wouldn't be awake.
But every single waking hour, I've been wearing this yarmulke since I was about 11.
I was married in Israel.
My wife is Israeli-American.
She became a citizen about four years ago.
On Saturday, we held the Brit Milah Briss for my baby.
Right?
And all the Trump supporters spammed me after they found out about the birth with nasty anti-Semitic material because this is what a lot of Trump supporters do.
I've spent my career fighting boycott divestment sanctions from Israel.
I'm a leading critic of the Obama administration.
I'm the first person in America to call them anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish.
I haven't been shy about calling out Jews who I think are siding with the bad guys in the political scene.
I wrote a column, now it's been five years probably, called Jews in Name Only, about Jews who don't care about Israel and vote based on abortion and same-sex marriage.
I also don't back Donald Trump, and if you've been watching this show or listening to it, you know why I don't back Donald Trump.
But on a Jewish basis, I don't back him because I feel no compulsion as a Jew to back a man who said in open debate he makes no moral distinction between the Israelis and the Palestinians, who feigns ignorance of the Ku Klux Klan and David Duke, Who refuses to rip up the Iran deal.
He's one of only two candidates in the Republican race who refused to say that they would rip up the Iran deal.
Who flirts with the anti-Semite, Hitler-loving people on Twitter.
Who refuses to denounce anti-Semitic death threats against journalists.
Who refuses to stand by religious freedom restoration acts that would protect Jews and Christians.
Who treats women like garbage and lies non-stop, shifts his positions all the time, and insults the disabled in POW.
Sorry, as a Jew, this doesn't seem like it's indicative that I must support that guy.
Hillary's terrible for Israel, she's terrible for the Jews.
Trump is terrible for Israel, he's also terrible for the Jews.
What's worse is that Trump is carving the heart out of the only pro-Israel party, the Republican Party.
He's carving the heart out of it and replacing it with this heart of stone of Pat Buchanan, this isolationist, anti-Israel, anti-Jewish policy.
But according to David Horowitz, you're a renegade Jew if you don't back Trump.
So the whole article is specious.
It's really not a good article at Breitbart.
But the last paragraph is the one where he talks about why he's talking about Bill Kristol being a renegade Jew for trying to start a third party.
Here's what he writes.
He says, I am a Jew who has never been to Israel and has never been a Zionist in the sense of believing that Jews can rid themselves of Jew hatred by having their own nation state.
Okay, first of all, if David Horowitz truly believes that that's what Zionism is, he doesn't understand Zionism.
So right off the bat, he's disqualified himself.
Zionism was never about the idea that once there was a Jewish state, everybody would leave the Jews alone.
Zionism was about the idea that no one would ever leave Jews alone, including when there was a Jewish state, so you need a Jewish state so people have a place to go when they don't leave Jews alone.
Right, that's what it was about.
It was founded by Theodor Herzl on that basis after the trial of Dreyfus in France.
Zionism is about the idea that Jews will be persecuted everywhere, so they need a homeland somewhere.
That's what Zionism is about.
So he's wrong on that right off the bat.
It's Horowitz continues, he says, Half of world Jewry now lives in Israel.
The enemies whom Obama and Hillary have empowered, Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, ISIS, and Hamas, have openly sworn to exterminate the Jews.
Okay, I'm with you.
I'm also an American, and an American first, whose country is threatened with destruction by the same enemies.
So, I agree with all of that.
The only party that stands between the Jews and their annihilation and between America and the forces intent on destroying her is a political miscalculation so great and a betrayal so profound as to not be easily forgiven.
So I agree with all of that.
I just think that the people who are carving the heart out of the Republican Party for Donald Trump's benefit, those are the people who are weakening the only party that stands between us and the brink.
Beyond this, and I don't want to get personal with David, but when he calls people renegade Jews, it's sort of necessary.
David's an avowed agnostic, right?
I mean, David doesn't believe in God.
David doesn't believe in the Torah.
David doesn't believe in the Pentateuch.
None of that makes him a bad person.
But it certainly makes it weird that he's standing on the Moses Mountain holding the tablets.
I'm sorry, you don't get to do that, really.
And it doesn't make you a renegade Jew to not back Trump.
It actually sort of makes you a renegade Jew to reject every fundamental basis of Judaism and then say, well, as a Jew, X.
You can say, as a Westerner, I don't like, I think that Trump would be better for Israel than anybody else, but the whole as a Jew thing, when you don't believe in Judaism, it's a little bit awkward.
Okay, so that's David's article.
Then there's Breitbart.
So these are two different things.
David writes a piece, and David sort of assumes, because I think David is not internet sophisticated, he assumes that Breitbart is what Breitbart was.
Breitbart is not what it was.
Breitbart is now an alt-right white supremacist pandering site, and that makes me super sad to say because I was involved deeply in Breitbart's rise.
I still have love for Andrew Breitbart and his family, of course.
There's still people who are working there who I once considered friends, all the less of them now, and Breitbart has become a site that specifically panders to the sorts of people who see a headline like Renegade Jews and immediately start tweeting Nazi memes.
That's what Breitbart does now.
They openly pander to the alt-right.
Milo Yiannopoulos, one of their writers, he's a guy who has openly embraced the alt-right.
This is what he wrote, by the way.
He said, "There are many things that separate the alternative right from old school racist skinheads to whom they are often idiotically compared.
But one thing stands out above all else: intelligence." Yes, that's very encouraging.
There's skinheads who are smart.
Now I feel more comfortable.
This all began in sort of the comment section of Breitbart while I was there.
And while I was there and I was writing anti-Trump stuff, every comment was about what a cuck I was and all this nonsense and that plus the anti-Semitic stuff.
Now it's filtered up.
It's filtered all the way up to the top of the editorial echelon.
It's gotten so bad that even Jack Hunter, who's a paleo-conservative, a former Pat Buchanan, Rand Paul guy, right?
He's written how the alt-right supported by Breitbart, quote, turns you into a racist a-hole.
And he wrote that on Breitbart.
What Breitbart does, they play this game.
The same game that Trump plays.
And it's a game that you should spot.
It's an important game.
The game is this.
They run these editorials that are against the alt-right so they can say they gave both sides a hearing.
Trump does this too.
Trump sort of panders to the alt-right.
He panders to the anti-Semites, and to the racists, and to the KKK.
And then he says, okay, well, they're not my people.
I mean, I don't have anything to do with them, really.
But I don't want to be intolerant.
I want to be a bigot and just shut down the debate.
They're more than happy, Breitbart is, to take their clicks from the alt-right, because the alt-right knows what they're doing.
And Trump is happy to take their support, because the white supremacists know what Trump is doing.
And that's how you end up with Renegade Jew running in giant letters across a site that panders to the alt-right, people who like making Nazi memes.
This is what they do.
And, you know, I'm sorry, but David Horwitz throwing out the term renegade Jew to oppose Trump, to describe people who oppose Trump on pro-Israel and conservative grounds is bad.
Breitbart using that sort of language to drive the septic system segment of its base is, I think, significantly worse.
I want to start with that today because I think that this is going to become a larger and larger issue.
And it's really, this whole Cycle is just heartbreaking for people like me who have spent 15 years, you know, half my lifetime in this movement.
People who made friends all across the conservative spectrum.
To watch as people who I considered friends pander to some of the worst people on earth is really quite terrible.
Okay, so meanwhile, speaking of Donald Trump...
Donald Trump.
There's an article in the New York Times today about Trump and talking about Trump's history with women.
And we were having a discussion before the show with Andrew Klavan and Jeremy Boring, who's the managing editor at Daily Wire.
We were talking about this New York Times article.
And it's an interesting article for a couple of reasons.
So first of all, what they say is that Donald Trump has a history with women.
But then they don't talk about, like, the really bad stuff he's done.
They talk about basically how he was a womanizer and acted like kind of a sexist.
Like, for example, Apparently they opened with this story of this woman who was a who I guess was in one of his I guess she was in one of his Swimsuit routines, and so her name is Brewer Lane, Rosie Brewer Lane, I think?
Rowan Brewer Lane.
Rowan.
Okay, Rowan Brewer Lane.
And apparently he was having a pool party at Mar-a-Lago, and there were 50 models and 30 men.
So he apparently took one of them, Rowan Brewer Lane, in the back room, and he started showing her around the mansion.
He asked if she had a swimsuit.
She said no.
He took her into a room, he opened drawers, and then asked her to put on a swimsuit.
She's a 26-year-old model.
She did as Trump asked.
She said, I went into the bathroom and tried one on.
It was a bikini.
I came out and he said, wow.
And then he decided to show her off.
He brought me out to the pool and said, that is a stunning Trump girl, isn't it?
Ms.
Brulein said.
And then the New York Times says, Donald Trump and women.
The words evoke a familiar cascade of casual insults hurled from the safe distance of a Twitter account, a radio show, or a campaign podium.
Okay, a couple of things.
There are real things that Donald Trump says that are bad about women.
This one does not rise to the level of truly terrible.
First of all, she consented to putting on the bikini.
And if she didn't want him to treat her like a piece of meat, she could have said, no.
Also, she was hired to be a model at a pool party.
So, I mean, I assume that some of this goes along with the gig.
If you're hired to be a model at the Playboy Mansion and somebody says you're a Hugh Hefner girl, you kind of go, ah!
And if you're hired to go to a Trump party, then you're a Trump girl.
But the whole article is about stuff like this, and I just, I don't buy it.
Now, I will say that there is a tendency for people to go too far in all of this.
There's a tendency for people to say that stuff that actually is gross that he does, is not actually gross because he's just being a man.
So for example, the article buries, like this one to me is much worse.
And Lindsey, you tell, Lindsey's our official woman of the Ben Shapiro show.
So Lindsey, you tell me if this one's worse.
Temple Taggart, The 21-year-old Miss Utah was startled by how forward he was with young contestants like her in 1997.
As she recalls it, he introduced himself in an unusually intimate manner.
He kissed me directly on the lips.
I thought, oh my god, gross.
He was married to Marla Maples at the time.
I think there were a few other girls that he kissed on the mouth.
I was like, wow, that's inappropriate.
So that one seems to me a lot worse.
That's an actual unwanted physical touching.
That seems to me a lot worse than, come, I'm going to give you a tour of the mansion.
Here's a bikini.
Put it on.
She puts it on.
Oh, you look good in a bikini.
Correct.
She's a model, therefore, that here, she's a model, but she's not there to be made out with by the guy who's running the thing, right?
So this is, and apparently he then told her that she should go to modeling agencies and lie about her age.
She should say that she was 17 because that would make it easier for her to get modeling gigs.
And so there's some stories about how he was not particularly nice with women.
And, you know, there's stories here about a preoccupation with bodies.
This is one of the subheadings, a preoccupation with bodies.
He possessed an almost compulsive need to talk about the bodies of women he worked with.
There was one woman he was working with, and he apparently said to her at one point, you like your candy, because she was overweight.
And apparently he only wanted to feature his most beautiful employees in all the pictures and this sort of stuff.
Okay, so this is not like wonderful stuff.
It's not delightful stuff, but the idea that this is the worst stuff that ever happened, There's an actual credible accusation that Donald Trump actually raped his first wife, right?
I mean, that was actually made in a court filing.
She later backed off of it, but that's more credible and more damaging than any of this stuff.
But the media are so interested in getting Trump, they're willing to try.
I mean, if this is what they've got, this is weak tea.
If this is the best they can do, this is weak tea.
I mean, they talk about how Donald Trump talks about sex all the time at his office in Trump Tower.
Trump seemed eager for his colleagues to hear about his new companion, Ms.
Maples.
When the New York Post feasted on her supposed satisfaction with him in bed, captured in the headline, best sex I've ever had, Mr. Trump was unabashed.
He absolutely loved that.
He waved it around the office.
Did you see this?
Everyone who worked there was kind of horrified.
We all thought it made him look bad.
He didn't.
Why would that make him look bad?
She's a model and she was saying it's the best sex she ever had.
I'm not sure that there, I can't count on one hand the number of men who wouldn't be proud of that headline.
That's just silliness.
So, here's the thing.
They're so interested... This is so stupid.
They're saying, for example, that he calls women hun and deer.
Really?
Really?
Like, that's really where it is?
That's where it is?
So, they buried the rape accusation two-thirds of the way down in the article.
Okay.
So, here's the thing.
All of this is gonna backfire, because most people look at this, men and women, and they go, Am I supposed to be surprised?
Like, this has been Trump's image forever.
He was posing on the cover of Playboy years and years and years ago.
This is a guy who was on the Howard Stern show all the time.
Are we supposed to look at him calling women hun and deer?
He's done worse stuff than this in this campaign.
I mean, he called a reporter, he said she was bleeding out of her wherever.
And he tweeted out a picture of his opponent's wife saying that she was ugly.
Like, am I supposed to be shocked by any of this?
But this is what the media do, and then it backfires on them.
So apparently that Roanne lady, she apparently, she was on, first of all, Trump women do not age well.
I'm just gonna say that.
This is, for those who can't see, I'll go full Trump here.
She's not aged particularly well, but she's on America's election headquarters on Fox News.
She's the after photo in the Trump Wives collection.
What was your reaction when you read this article yesterday?
Actually, it was very upsetting.
of the Trump wives collection.
Why?
And here is Roanne, the former Trump girlfriend who actually dated Trump, talking about how the New York Times took her out of context.
- What was your reaction when you read this article yesterday? - Actually, it was very upsetting. - Why? - I was not happy to read it at all.
Well, because the New York Times told us several times that they would make sure that my story that I was telling came across.
They promised several times that they would do it accurately.
They told me several times, and my manager several times, that it would not be a hit piece, and that my story would come across the way that I was telling it, and honestly, and it absolutely was not.
What did they get wrong?
Well, they did take quotes from what I said, and they put a negative connotation on it.
They spun it to where it appeared negative.
I did not have a negative experience with Donald Trump, and I don't appreciate them making it look like that I was saying that it was a negative experience.
You knew him very well, right?
You dated him for several months?
That's correct.
Yes.
And he never made me feel like I was being demeaned in any way.
He never offended me in any way.
He was very gracious.
I saw him around all types of people, all types of women.
He was very kind, thoughtful, generous.
He was a gentleman.
Okay, so he was a gentleman, everything was great, and the media's out to get him.
Okay, so all this feeds into the perception that Trump is a victim.
He's a victim of the media, and all of this backfires on the media who are trying to get him.
And all of it ends up benefiting him in the end.
Even stories that are clearly just ridiculous, all of this ends up benefiting him because people look at this and they go, really?
This is the best you've got on this guy?
So here's another example.
So apparently, Twenty years ago, Donald Trump was asked about his sex life, basically, by the New York Post.
And the New York Post called him up.
I'm sorry, it was People Magazine.
There was a reporter named Sue Carswell.
It was 1991.
And she called the Trump office seeking an interview with Donald Trump.
She'd been assigned to cover the soap opera surrounding the end of his marriage to Ivana, his budding relationship with Marla Maples, and his rumored affairs with a bunch of celebrities who appeared on the gossip pages.
So, Carswell got a return call.
And Harry, what's your name again?
John Miller.
And you work with them?
Yes, that's correct.
John Miller.
Can you sort of, uh... I guess we're gonna try and put a story together if we have a dead item today, because our magazine closed.
Donald Trump's publicist, John Miller, is from 1991 talking to Sue Carswell at People Magazine.
John Miller.
He didn't want to make any commitment.
He didn't want to make a commitment.
He really thought it was too soon.
He's coming out of a marriage and he's starting to do tremendously well financially.
He's doing his licenses five to nothing the other day.
You know, totally unanimous.
He's really been working hard and doing well.
And probably, as you know, there's a real estate depression in the United States and he's probably doing as well as anybody there is.
And frankly, he wants to keep it that way.
And he just thought it was too soon to make any commitment to anybody.
So what is going to happen when Rasheed being asked to leave or she's going to be allowed to stay?
Well, he treats everybody well.
Okay, so we can stop it there.
It goes on for 15 minutes like this.
Yes, that's Donald Trump.
Okay, that's the voice of Donald Trump.
CNN actually... So Trump does what Trump does, which is he just lies habitually.
They ask him about this on air and they say, is that you?
And he goes, no, no, it's not me.
He admitted openly in 1991 that was him.
But now he's saying it wasn't him.
And so you've got Katrina Pearson on TV saying it wasn't him.
It definitely wasn't him.
Everybody just drops words like frankly, and totally, and the very best, and tremendous.
Everybody just drops these words in normal conversation.
This is a thing that they do, apparently, according to the Trump camp.
So the media made a big deal out of this.
And it is.
It's a ridiculous, stupid, unbelievable story.
And it demonstrates just how egotistical and narcissistic he is.
As I tweeted over the weekend, The reason that Hillary is not able to outdo him and he's not able to outdo her is because who takes the high ground in a battle between lying, egotistical, narcissistic, pains in the ass?
Like, who exactly gets to take the moral high ground there?
The media went nuts over this over the weekend.
Most people look at this and they laugh.
Like, yeah, it's crazy, and yeah, it's ridiculous, but it's also just kind of crazy and ridiculous.
Who cares?
Who cares?
And so what you're seeing here is the media's attempts to get Trump.
I know Clavin talked about it a little bit today.
Media's attempts to get Trump are actually backfiring on the media now because they're so desperate to get him.
They don't know.
They're like a small child.
Babies have a reflex.
I'm now in baby mode because I've been Putin Pete on about a thousand times between the last podcast and this one.
Babies have a reflex, which is that if you, and doctors test them on this, if you hold them up by their hands and then you drop them, they go, and they kind of spaz out.
Well, that's sort of what the media is doing with Trump.
They're now lashing out in every possible direction to get this guy.
And that includes not going after the lowest hanging fruit, like he's a corrupt charlatan, like he's a liar, like he's not a conservative, like he's a bad guy.
Instead of that, they go to, well, you know, his bikini models were not happy with how he treated them.
And he masqueraded as his own PR man in 1991.
Yeah, Bill Clinton was raping people in 1991.
Like, who cares?
It's so silly.
And this is why Trump is benefiting.
Paul Manafort, who is Trump's Putin agent slash campaign director, Paul Manafort says that Trump has... Hillary has a bigger problem with men than Trump does with women.
He says that to Jake Tapper.
Well, you know, this is one of these conventional wisdom facts that are not correct.
Yes, there's some high negatives on the part of Trump right now, who's just come out of a very spirited contest.
Hillary Clinton's got high negatives, too.
And when you look at the recent Quinnipiac polls that came out last week, which show Trump winning in Florida, and even or slightly ahead in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
You look at the gender gaps, and the real gender gap is a male gender gap on the part of Clinton, where she's got a bigger disparity between her support with men than Trump has with women.
So it's an issue.
It'll be dealt with.
We're coming through a healing process.
This is when we're unifying our party.
The national polls have all shown closure, where Trump now is either one or two points behind or one or two points ahead.
So this is way early and still already we're seeing convergence on the part of the electorate with Donald Trump.
And the meetings at the Hill with the leadership were very positive.
Okay, so he's saying that we're all coming together, everything is moving in the right direction, Donald Trump is going to become more conciliatory, Hillary has a problem with men.
Okay, it is true by the way.
That Hillary has a problem with men, and I point this out, I wrote a little pamphlet about how to win the 2016 election, and I actually sort of back the Trump strategy of you have to win a few more white voters, and you have to win more men, because it's going to be tough for you to close that gender gap with women, except on the safety issue.
Hillary Clinton alienates men, this is true both personally and politically, Hillary Clinton is not somebody who's going to draw a lot of men, so all of this is true.
Now, none of this makes up for the fact that Donald Trump is, in fact, not a conservative, so it's hard to watch this election unless you watch it as a comedy, right?
I mean, basically, Walter Kerr, he was a columnist on theater, and what Walter Kerr said is that comedy is the notion, the difference between comedy and tragedy is that tragedy is Man reaches for the star, but he's bound by his mortal being.
In the end, we all die, right?
That's tragedy, is that we do our best and we try to create, but in the end, we all end up in the ground.
Comedy is the idea that we try to do our best, we try to reach for the stars, but we all fart, right?
That's sort of the idea.
So this is the...
You can see this election as comedy or you can see it as tragedy.
I've been varying between the two.
I'm gonna try the rest of the way to see it more as comedy because otherwise it's just too depressing.
You know, we try to reach for the political stars and we end up with the political cancer of Trump and Clinton.
Or it's a political fart.
Or it's a political fart.
I mean, the only good news about comedy is that at some point the fart ends.
So that's one of the reasons why I would prefer for this election cycle to move quite quickly.
And it's hard not to laugh when it's Donald Trump masquerading as his own PR guy.
Now, the idea that the party is coming around Trump, it's one of the more disturbing things that I've seen because what I was always afraid of, what I was always afraid of, is that, you remember the old Mary Poppins, a spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down?
I was always afraid that a spoonful of Trump makes the absolute Horrible crap that he believes go down among conservatives.
And so, a lot of the terrible things that Donald Trump believes in and said, those things will get pushed off to the side.
You'll see people that you respect start pretending that conservatism is okay with a lot of the things that Donald Trump does, simply because they don't like Hillary and they just want- they'd prefer to have Trump to Hillary.
You'll see them soft-pedaling how bad Trump is in order to help Hillary.
Look, I don't soft-pedal Hillary.
I think Hillary's a disaster area.
I think Hillary is a moral demon.
I think that she's awful in every way it's possible to be awful.
I also think Trump is awful in pretty much every way it's possible to be awful.
And he has a significantly more authoritarian streak than Hillary does besides.
She's an authoritarian, but she's not stupid enough to believe that she can actually get away with it.
He's dumb enough to believe that he can get away with it.
All of which is to say, Changing the definition of conservatism to fit Donald Trump is really a problem.
It's one of the reasons I think there has to be a conservative movement outside of Trump.
You're about to see all these conservatives starting to swallow stuff they never would have swallowed just in order to help Trump, and that's the part that's disturbing.
So, on the left, the part that's funny is that the media is trying to get him with all of this nonsensical stuff.
On the right, the part that's disturbing is the right is trying to write off all of the flaws in Donald Trump because they're trying to make him win.
So, Reince Priebus says, number one, that he's the head of the RNC, who's now number one Trump lackey.
He says that Paul Ryan will indeed, the Speaker of the House, will indeed endorse Donald Trump.
Chairman Priebus, how confident are you that Speaker Ryan, in the end, will endorse Donald Trump?
And, you know, he keeps talking about a process.
How long is this process going to take?
Well, listen, I don't speak for Paul Ryan, but what I can tell you is that I think both of these guys came into the meeting expecting a good meeting, but I think they left and it was a great meeting.
I think they made a lot of progress and I would be, you know, I'd be surprised if we didn't get there.
You know, not too much longer in the distant future.
So I think it was a good meeting, and I take Paul at his word.
He wouldn't go do a press conference and say the things that he said just to say them.
He believes it, and he's sincere, but he wants to make sure it's real.
He doesn't want to just put on a show.
He wants to understand and make sure there's a real understanding of each other before he makes that endorsement.
So he says that they're all gonna get together, and that's going to involve writing off all of the foibles of Donald Trump.
So here is Priebus saying that all this stuff about Trump's personal life, and there's a lot there that's a lot more disturbing than him ogling women in bikinis, right?
I mean, as I mentioned, there's the rape allegation, there's him flying to Sex Slave Island with Jeffrey Epstein, there's him, what he said about his daughters in the past, he's, you know, he's kind of a yucky guy.
But Reince Priebus says we should ignore all of that, nobody's gonna care about any of that.
What I would say is that we've been working on this primary for over a year, Chris, and I've got to tell you, I think that all these stories that come out, and they come out every couple weeks, people just don't care.
I think people look at Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and say, who's going to bring an earthquake to Washington, D.C.?
I think the bigger issue when we make these judgments about people are whether or not individuals are throwing stones in glass houses.
And when people are hypocrites, obviously that's when these stories have an impact.
But I don't think Donald Trump and his personal life is something that people are looking at and saying, well, I'm surprised that he's had girlfriends in the past.
That's not what people look at Donald Trump for.
So I think the traditional playbook and analysis really don't apply.
But forgive me, it's not whether or not he had.
Girlfriends?
The question is whether or not he mistreated women, whether he made unwanted advances, whether he humiliated women in the workplace.
I don't understand why you say that people don't care about that, and are you going to look into the allegations?
Well, look, I'm not saying people don't care about it.
I'm just saying I think the reason he's where he's at is that he represents something much different than the traditional analysis of individual candidates.
And yes, everything bothers me, Chris, but I don't know the truth of these things.
I don't know.
So they're reading.
Everything bothers me.
But everything bothers me.
But how about I don't know the answer to that.
I'm sure that the Trump campaign will deal with that.
All right, how about that?
But this whole like, oh, we're going to write it off because he's our boy.
I'm not real fond of that as a general rule.
We're seeing a lot of that happening right now.
One of the things that one of the myths that I think is really quite amazing that's that's that's out there is that the anti-Trump people that the never Trump folks.
The reason we're doing this is for the money.
The reason we're doing this is because we've been paid off.
Okay, let's look at this for real.
Okay, the reason that the Trump people are doing this is because they have been paid off.
Okay, the reason that a lot of these Trump people are doing this is because they've been paid off.
Let's take, for example, Ben Carson.
So Ben Carson, as you recall, was called a pedophile by Donald Trump on the campaign trail.
And Ben Carson has openly stated that Donald Trump was going to give him a slot in his administration, probably as Secretary of Health and Human Services if Donald Trump becomes president.
And yet here you have Ben Carson lecturing people like me on a moral level.
Why can't you back Trump?
It's immoral not to back Trump.
It just shows how corrupt you are not to back Trump.
Here he is.
The Never Trump people have said from the beginning Donald Trump is not conservative.
He's not a traditional conservative.
There's probably some truth in that.
Now they're telling us that Mitt Romney and Mark Cuban might make good third-party candidates to run against Trump.
Are they more conservative than Donald Trump?
Is Mark Cuban more conservative than Donald Trump?
I'm getting confused.
Well, you know, there's a level of arrogance there that is almost incomprehensible.
We have a system in place that allows the will of the people to be expressed.
Now these people come along and say that people don't know what they're talking about.
Get them out of here.
We're the ones who know who the nominee should be.
And I hope people are taking note of that and who these people are.
Well, Mark Cuban has said that he doesn't want to do it.
In fact, it seems like the Never Trump people are having a hard time finding somebody who does want it.
I want to get your thoughts.
I mean, is it too late in the first place?
And would it ensure that Hillary Clinton gets the White House?
Well, of course it would fracture the party.
And, you know, that's the goal of some of the people who would actually prefer to have Hillary in place because she's a known quantity.
She's one of them.
I think a lot of the people have recognized that there's a political class.
It consists of both Democrats and Republicans and Independents who believe that they are in control and they should maintain control and they have a right to be in control.
Okay, so Donald Trump is part of that political class, but I love Ben Carson, right?
A guy who was basically bribed to join the Trump administration, now going out there The arrogance of these people even thinking that they can go out there and stump against Trump.
It's almost incomprehensible.
Almost as arrogant as running for president on the basis of no political knowledge or experience.
And then continuing to run for weeks after my campaign ended.
It didn't end.
I just wanted a nap in Florida in the middle of a campaign.
Amazing.
So speaking of people who have been paid off, Pat Buchanan hasn't been paid off.
But Pat Buchanan is seeing, for the first time, his philosophy now ascendant in the Republican Party.
Pat Buchanan was discredited years and years and years ago as a kook, as an anti-Semite.
And Pat Buchanan is really a nasty figure.
But he's back.
He's back.
And he's back thanks to the Trumpkins.
And here's Pat Buchanan saying that Paul Ryan is spoiling things.
They're spoiling things for everybody.
It's so terrible.
When Reagan did Grenada, they all came home and the economy took off, and they all went along with it.
Let me tell you what Ryan is risking doing.
Playing the Nelson Rockefeller spoiler role, showing up at the convention, you've got to condemn extremism, we can't have this in the party.
He wind up a dead dog along with George Romney's father.
Nixon went all out for a guy he disagreed with, Goldwater, in 1964, and wound up with two nominations for president and the new majority.
What a charming bunch those are.
- Take a walk. - Take a walk.
- Good, well let's see. - I knew Nelson Rockefeller, Paul Ryan is no Nelson Rockefeller.
- Oh, what a charming bunch those are.
I mean, 20 years ago, that was a fresher look, but not a great look for Pat Buchanan.
Eleanor Clift, I think, maybe?
But in any case, there's Pat Buchanan laughing it up because Paul Ryan and company, they have to just stop being Nelson Rockefeller.
First of all, Trump is not Goldwater, okay?
If you're gonna compare Nelson Rockefeller to Ryan, you have to make Trump Goldwater.
Goldwater was a small government guy, like a small government guy.
So small that he opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on the grounds that it forced private businesses to desegregate, right?
That it forced private businesses not to engage in discrimination, right?
That's how small government And I don't see any way that you're either for Hillary Clinton or you're for Donald Trump.
This is the way that Pat Buchanan operates.
Speaking of people, again, more people have been paid off.
Newt Gingrich is clearly lobbying for the VP slot and saying so openly.
He says, you're either with us or you're with Hillary Clinton.
And I don't see any way that you're either for Hillary Clinton or you're for Donald Trump.
If you're not for Donald Trump, you're functionally helping Hillary Clinton.
I think it's just that straightforward. - That's important.
Okay, and if I don't vote for Hillary, am I functionally helping Donald Trump?
Like, how does this work exactly?
If you give me a choice between a Coke and a Pepsi, and I say I would prefer the water, is that helping Coke or is that helping Pepsi?
Explain.
But there's a real reason that Gingrich is doing this.
He says he wants to be Trump's VP, obviously.
And here he is saying that, he says, yes, I would be his running mate.
There's been a lot of speculation, don't give me that look, about you running.
I thought you were above this.
No, I'm not above it.
This is what I do for a living.
And I know you didn't think I was above it.
There's a lot of speculation that he is going to ask you to be his running mate.
Now, if he asks you, you're certainly going to say yes.
Well, if he asks me, I'm certainly going to say I want to sit down and talk about it.
I don't think it's an automatic yes.
I think you have to think through what does he think the job involves.
And if he indicates, as I'm sure he would, you're going to play a big role.
If he can convince Callista and me that it's doable and that it's serious and that we would, in fact, contribute, I think we'd be very hard-pressed not to say yes.
Of course you'd say yes.
That's the whole reason you're doing any of this.
You used to be a conservative and now you're following a nationalist populist down this line.
Because you were discredited a couple of years ago, you were somebody who was irrelevant a couple of years ago, and now you're back in power.
And that's what's happening.
A lot of people, you're noticing a coalition of the dispossessed, right?
And it's not the conservative dispossessed.
It's a bunch of people who feel like they were marginalized and now they're coming back.
The Pat Buchanan's and the Newt Gingrich's.
You're seeing a lot of people who are coming back who were sort of from the political graveyard.
It's Night of the Walking Dead in Republican land.
And a lot of these people are coming back because Trump is revitalizing them and now he's going to trot around the inert body of Newt Gingrich in order to try and gin up conservative support.
So again, all of this is mildly troubling.
But we can laugh at it because, I mean, this is just how corrupt politics always is.
And the part that's actually kind of funny about this is that the Trump campaign claims they're not corrupt.
They claim they're the most honest campaign ever, and they're trotting out campaign surrogates to whom they've already made all sorts of promises.
The Chris Christies and the Ben Carsons.
I mean, Trump says he's the king of debt.
He's also the king of payoffs.
So the idea that it's people who oppose him who are being paid off is really quite ridiculous and absurd.
They're doing it for the payoff.
It's amazing.
Meanwhile, on the Democratic side of the aisle, utter chaos is breaking loose.
So the only thing that can make Donald Trump a palatable candidate is the fact that Hillary Clinton is so wildly unpalatable.
So I'm looking at the latest polls.
And here's what the latest polls show.
Rasmussen, which is always biased toward Republicans a little bit, has Trump up 2 on Clinton.
That was 41-39.
That was in late April.
And then there was the CNN-ORC poll that had Clinton up 13.
There's the PPP poll, that's the public policy.
It's a Democratic poll.
They show Clinton up 6.
And then there was a Gravis poll over the weekend that shows Clinton up 2, 48-46.
It's going to get closer before it starts to separate again.
The reason it's so close again is not because Trump is such Uh, an earth-shattering candidate, although he does bring the heat as far as the media.
It's also because Hillary just exudes, eh.
There's not even a word for it.
She just exudes, eh.
And so, look at what happened over at the Nevada Convention.
At the Nevada Democratic Convention, the Democratic National Convention was breaking down because Nevada Democrats who did not back Hillary Clinton feel dispossessed and disenfranchised, and they are ticked off.
Here's what it looked like.
As submitted by the penalty chairs, all the local voters say aye.
All the local pilots say no.
The business of a convention, this convention is concluded.
We have finished all of the big day.
We are in the...
Woo hoo!
Woo hoo!
And utter chaos breaks loose.
The sheriff's department is coming into the building and trying to force us to leave.
They have just entered from the back.
From back here.
And they have moved to the front.
Over here.
And they are literally going to force us to leave.
Okay, so we can cut it off.
So basically what happened here is that the DNC, right?
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she says she has nothing to do with this.
This is the state convention.
They were choosing caucus members and Bernie Sanders supporters wanted 64 rejected pro-Sanders delegates.
This is according to RealClearPolitics, listed in a minority report prepared by their campaign.
They wanted them to be able to participate in selecting delegates for the national convention.
This lady, as you saw right there, declared a voice vote, and then arbitrarily just declared what the result of the voice vote was, right?
She says, Ayes and Nays, you can't hear anything, right?
It's clear, you can't, there's no more A's than Nays for sure.
She just declares it over, smacks the gavel down, like, I mean, like, Bill Clinton slapping a model's ass, and it just takes the gavel and just whack!
And then she walks off all pissed off.
She walks out like a wrecking ball.
There's chaos inside the Democratic National Convention, inside the Democratic Party.
Here's a Nevada convention leader, and he's saying, look, you guys are disenfranchising us.
This is a Sanders supporter.
The credentials minority report is based on the challenge of 64 Sanders delegates.
Contrary to the procedures and precedents set by the committee, nearly none of these 64 people were presented with the opportunity to be heard by the committee or to demonstrate that they are registered Democrats.
We, the undersignees, as duly elected credentials, I should say duly appointed credentials committee members, submit a minority report that challenges the decision of the committee.
Without an opportunity to be heard, no delegate should be stricken.
It's all sorts of chaos over on the Democratic side of the aisle.
So what's making Trump competitive is the fact that Hillary is so terrible.
What's making Hillary competitive is the fact that Trump is so terrible.
And so we'll just laugh our way to the Armageddon, to the apocalypse, at both of these crazy characters.
And it is amusing.
Barbara Boxer, the senator from California, legitimately the dumbest woman in politics.
She was at this Nevada convention, and here she is whining about being booed.
I bring a message from Bernie Sanders.
And I bring a message from Hillary Clinton.
We need civility in the Democratic Party.
Civility.
Because the whole future of the country is at stake.
Now when you boo me, you're booing Bernie Sanders.
Go ahead.
You're booing Bernie Sanders.
Bernie is my friend.
Okay.
Enough of Barbara Boxer.
So chaos is in the Democratic Party too.
So while the media is focused on the chaos inside our party, which is worth focusing on, the Democratic Party has zones out of chaos.
They'll last one more election cycle.
They'll last one more election cycle and then this sucker breaks out into the open.
This is going to get very ugly for them in about four years.
So right now, they're going to hold it together because this is their last flailing grip.
But after this, imagine if Trump had actually been stopped at the convention.
This would have just bubbled for another four years and then broken loose.
So in a way, it's better that he takes the nomination so we can have this battle now.
Get this out of the way.
I'm somebody who believes that you get the bad stuff out of the way so you can get to the good stuff.
The Democrats are holding it off for another four years, but things will get very ugly on their side of the aisle.
Okay, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
So things that I like, I'm in the middle of Robert Kaplan's book, The Revenge of Geography, and it's very good.
It's basically, it's his argument about how we have all these highfalutin ideas about foreign policy going in, human rights, saving people.
And we have to understand the constraints of geography, that there are realities on the ground that are not just ideological, but that are actual physical geographies on the ground, making it difficult for us to control certain areas of the globe, and our machinery may not be comprehensive enough to do all of this without a long-term occupation, as we found out in Afghanistan.
Other things that I like.
Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court Justice, the most conservative Supreme Court Justice, the best Supreme Court Justice.
I think he was a better thinker than Justice Scalia.
Scalia is a better writer.
But here is Justice Thomas talking about political correctness at a graduation ceremony.
And this is the sort of clarity that we lack in too much of our politics.
As you go through life, try to be that person whose actions teach others how to be better people and better citizens.
Reach out to that shy person who's not so popular.
Stand up for others when they're being treated unfairly in small things and large.
Take the time to listen to that friend who's having a difficult time.
Do not hide your faith and your beliefs under a bushel basket, especially in this world that seems to have gone mad with political correctness.
Treat others the way you would like to be treated if you stood in their shoes.
Okay, we can stop there.
I mean, this is basic common sense stuff, but it's missing in both parties now.
Treat others decently.
No threats of violence.
No incentivizing riots.
No attempts to put the government gun to somebody's head because you disagree with them.
These are basic truths, and this is what I fear being lost on both sides of the political aisle.
I always thought it was their side, and what troubles me is what's happening on this side.
Okay, quick thing that I hate.
There's an MSNBC guest trying to explain why it is that we should all be totally cool with men in women's bathrooms.
Her name is Leah Rigour.
She's an assistant professor at Harvard Kennedy School of Business.
And here she is reacting to Obama's order that all public education facilities allow students to use the bathroom that matches the gender they identify with.
They don't have to change their sex.
They don't have to change it on their birth certificate.
They don't have to change their name.
Nothing.
They just get to say, here's how I identify.
They need maybe a note from home or something, which will never be forged, because kids never forge notes from home.
It's never happened.
I've never done that.
And here she is explaining why conservatives are going to have a problem with this.
This is a hot button issue amongst conservatives, right?
This is not necessarily an issue that needs to be, that shouldn't be kind of, I mean, it shouldn't be a radical thing.
And what conservatives really need to do, right, what they really need to figure out is how is this different, right, from the civil rights movement of, say, the 1960s, right?
Many of them, much of the language that is being used is identical to language that is being used during the 1960s.
Okay, just because you're using hijacking language of the 1960s doesn't mean that the underlying facts are the same.
It turns out that sex and race are two very different things.
It turns out that race doesn't have a lot of connection to anybody's capacity, doesn't have a connection to threat level, doesn't have a connection to anything.
But what does have a connection to how people behave is your sex.
It turns out that these things are relevant, which is why it was explicitly stated in Title IX of the Civil Rights Act that all these people are now trying to pervert that there would be separate facilities for men and women.
Listen, if you want to play this game, especially women, I don't know why women are on board with this.
This is for women to go along with the idea that now everybody should hold by the same common standard.
You understand, there will never be a women's basketball team again.
There will never be a women's baseball team again.
All the restrooms will look like garbage because men will be peeing on the floor.
So I hope that you enjoy all of this.
And beyond all of that, it really is evil how the left targets children for these sorts of moves.
Because what they do is, kids are easily confused.
Kids need guidance.
There's this idea on the left that people are inherently... Here's the amazing thing.
They assume that sexuality, gender identity, these things are unchanging and unimpacted by the environment in which people live, but your sex is totally malleable.
So I can change from a man into a woman, but in my head...
I never change at all based on my environment.
So they figure, okay, if we go into a public school and we tell kids that they can be either a boy or a girl depending on what they want to do, that's not going to confuse kids who are 8.
That's not going to confuse kids who are 7 and 5.
That's not going to confuse kids at all.
That's not going to be taking authority away from parents.
It's not going to lead to human suffering.
Because these kids were always going to be transgender.
Nonsense.
Nonsense.
What they do is they target children by claiming they're protecting a couple of kids.
So we have to protect these couple of kids who have a mental illness.
We have to protect them from other kids being cruel to them.
Which is, again, such silly nonsense.
The fact is that nobody is in favor of cruelty and suggesting that a girl who is a girl go to the bathroom in the girl's room If a girl thinks she's a boy, she has much more significant life issues, really.
Significant mental issues and health issues than where she pees when she's at school.
But the idea is that you're using the victimized children, these couple of victimized children, in order to victimize all the children by making them victims of this society, this sexless society that never exists except in the perverse heads of the people who push it.
It's a battle against reality by the left, but they never stop battling against reality.
Well, we'll be back with more tales from the Crypt tomorrow.
And I'm sure that there will be lots to talk about.
Donald Trump has apparently challenged the Prime Minister of Great Britain to an IQ test.
To an IQ off.
Which is not how IQ tests work, but he would know that if he had a high one.
But we'll talk about that tomorrow.
Always lots to talk about here in Trumpmerica.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
▲
Export Selection