All Episodes
Previous Next
June 21, 2016 - The Ben Shapiro Show
45:52
Ep. 137 - Democrats Think You're All Terrorists

Democrats call us all terrorists, Trump releases his campaign financials, and we play Good Trump/Bad Trump Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
So, you remember that time an anti-LGBT activist attended a Hillary Clinton rally and then tried to grab a cop's gun to shoot Hillary Clinton?
Neither do I, because it didn't happen.
You remember that time an illegal immigrant went to a Donald Trump rally and tried to grab a cop's gun to shoot Donald Trump?
You probably don't.
It happened.
On Saturday.
According to the Associated Press, the prospective assassin was an illegal immigrant.
He'd overstayed his visa from the United Kingdom.
This would-be John Wilkes Booth told the cops that he drove all the way from California to Vegas to kill Donald Trump.
This, however, has not spurred a national conversation about whether leftist rhetoric drives violence.
In fact, it'll probably drive the media to question whether Trump did something to provoke the perpetrator, just as they have every time anti-Trump rioters riot and try and hurt pro-Trump people, they ask whether it's Trump's fault.
It's actually amazing.
Everything bad in the universe happens because of conservatives.
If a Muslim who says he is a Muslim commits a terrorist act, the media come up with an alternative narrative in which white Christians are responsible.
If a British mental case with right-wing associations kills a left-wing politician, the media immediately declare it a political killing.
If someone without any political affiliation commits an act of violence against schoolchildren or theatergoers or a congresswoman, the media blame the NRA or Sarah Palin.
Presumably the only reason this particular British illegal immigrant would want to kill Trump then is because Trump had it coming.
Or maybe the network media will just continue to ignore the attempted assassination.
After all, it's kind of inconvenient for their anti-right-wing story.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show. - I tend to demonize people because they don't care about your feelings. - So, here we are and it's a new day You should subscribe, by the way, at DailyWired.com so you can see all of the magical things that we do on this podcast each and every day.
And I think we're going live next week, so you'll be able to watch part of this online live at Facebook, but if you still want to get the whole thing and be able to get your questions in via the mailbag, then you have to subscribe at DailyWired.com.
And we will save all of Lindsay's dancing for the latter portion of the show, so you still have to pay for that.
So basically, we're an online pornography site, is what I'm trying to tell you.
No, we're not Lindsay.
No, we're not.
We're not going to do any of those things.
Okay, so Lindsay is too good a person to do those things, aren't you?
Well, maybe.
Okay, so today it's a new day and that means that it's time for the Democrats to grab your guns all over again.
It's just a romantic brand new day.
So yesterday there were four different Gun control measures that are brought up on the floor of the Senate.
Two from Democrats, two from Republicans.
The two from Democrats, one is sponsored by Dianne Feinstein.
This is a measure that would require that anyone who's been on the terror watch list in the last five years, they have to take five years after you're off the terror watch list before they will allow you to buy a gun.
Which is called destruction of due process of law.
In this country, you actually have to be proved guilty of something before we can just take away your rights, your Second Amendment rights, where we can't just decide to put you on the terror watch list.
I think Jonah Goldberg's been on the terror watch list, and Teddy Kennedy was on the terror watch list, which actually makes sense since he killed a woman, but Jonah Goldberg didn't.
And the idea here is that The left doesn't believe that you should have to show any evidence that I'm a bad person or even a terrorist.
There's no evidence of criminality necessary in order for you to take away my rights.
So we'll start with Dianne Feinstein.
Her amendment was voted down yesterday.
Listen carefully to what Dianne Feinstein said on PBS NewsHour about Americans and what rights they have.
It's pretty amazing.
The argument that many of your Republican colleagues have made about this is that there is still the potential that people who are innocent are on a watch list, and they would be prevented from buying a gun.
Well, then you can petition and prove that you're innocent and get off of the watch list.
But, you know, if we want to prevent this, You know, this bill was drafted actually during the Bush administration, when a man, a terrorist, went back to Syria, an American, and said to everybody, now exploit the loopholes in America's laws and buy weapons.
Well, we've got huge loopholes.
And it's wrong, and we've got to begin to close them, one by one by one.
The terrorist bill, no guns for terrorists, is a first step.
Assault weapons is a second step.
This man should not have... So the part of this that's relevant is where Dianne Feinstein, you may have missed it because it was kind of quick, there's part of this where Dianne Feinstein actually dropped the line, and it's pretty amazing.
She actually dropped the line that you can always prove yourself innocent.
You can appeal and prove yourself innocent.
Well, I wasn't aware that in the United States, you have to prove yourself innocent in order to exercise your rights.
I thought that you were innocent until proven guilty under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
I thought that that was sort of the basis of all criminal justice in the United States, is the government has to prove something before they can take away your rights.
Dianne Feinstein reverses the polarity, and she suggests that she can take away your rights just because she feels like it.
And this is the entire Democratic move now.
Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat from New Hampshire, she was on the radio, and she says that anyone who wants to buy an AR-15, the only reason you'd possibly want to buy an AR-15 is because you want to do bad things with it.
I mean, if we can't even expand background checks or expand the list of people who can buy weapons, how is it possible that we could ever even make ground when it comes to the types of guns that people own?
Well, I think people need to have their voices heard, and what I've heard from people in New Hampshire is that they think there's reasonable legislation that we can pass, including things like looking at the types of weapons that are so easy for people to get.
You know, the fact is, the AR-15, the gun that Mateen used, that's a weapon of war.
It's advertised as being able to do Technologically, advances in killing people that previous weapons have been unable to do.
And somebody who's buying that kind of a weapon isn't buying it for target shooting.
They're not buying it to go out and hunt deer.
You don't need an AK-47 or an AR-15 to hunt deer.
They're buying it to do bad things.
And we need to recognize that and address it.
Okay, so she says that the only people who want to buy an AR-15 are people who are violent and want to do terrible things to you.
Okay, well, we in the office have a gal named Candace.
And Candace is a lovely person who also happens to be at 100 pounds soaking wet, if that.
And she looks more like 90 to me.
And Candace is like a champion marksman with an AR-15.
She just came in third in, I think it was a statewide competition, shooting the AR-15.
Is that because she's a cold-blooded killer?
She's gonna go to a gay nightclub and start shooting people up, or is it because she wants to be proficient with a rifle?
Because it turns out that there are plenty of reasons you'd want to be proficient with a rifle, ranging from home defense to defense against tyranny, which actually maintains, you know, that's why the founders wanted you to have a gun, to hunting.
There are plenty of reasons, but according to the left, there's no good reason.
So, we've now heard a couple of excuses from the left for gun control.
One is that they don't actually have to prove you guilty, you have to prove yourself innocent, which, by the way, is called proving a negative.
You can't do that.
There's no way to prove yourself innocent of anything.
If I say to you, three years ago, sometime that year, you raped a small child, and then the onus is on you to prove yourself innocent, you'd have to prove where you were every minute of the day for three years ago that entire year, right?
There's no way to prove yourself innocent.
You can't prove a negative.
So, that's number one.
Number two, anyone who buys an AR-15 is evil and terrible, of course, nonsense.
And finally, the Democrats come right out and say it, and they just say, well, the Republicans just want to sell weapons directly to ISIS.
So, Senator Chris Murphy from Connecticut, he comes out and he says this in an interview with the Washington Post.
He says, that's what they've decided to do.
He says, Republicans have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.
ISIS has decided the assault weapon is the new airplane, and Republicans, in refusing to close the terror gap, refusing to pass bans on assault weapons, are allowing these weapons to get in the hands of potential lone wolf attackers.
We've got to make this connection and make it in very stark terms.
So it's our fault.
It's our fault because the terrorists are getting weapons.
First of all, I thought until 24 hours ago, Democrats weren't allowed to mention ISIS, right?
They were doing the omitted routine.
If we mentioned ISIS, they were telling us we can't mention ISIS because that increases terrorism.
But I guess that's exciting.
Now they get to tell us that ISIS exists, so that's good.
But if we're going to talk about people who actually gave weapons to ISIS, we have to start with the Democrats.
I wrote a book Last year called the people versus Barack Obama and in it is a section from the book quote on March 30th 2011 ABC News reported that President Obama had secretly signed a presidential finding to send covert aid to the Al Qaeda linked rebels the same day as the ABC News report the Washington Post announced an Obama secret finding including an authorization to the CIA to carry out a clandestine effort to provide arms and other support to Libyan opposition groups.
As you recall, that would include terrorist groups.
Libyan terrorist groups began receiving arms shipments and money from Qatar.
So if you want to talk about who's arming ISIS, who made ISIS powerful, the only people who did that were Democrats.
As Democrats, who actually gave guns to ISIS, who actually gave guns to Al-Qaeda.
That would be the Democrats.
But no, it's our fault, and now you've got the White House defending Chris Murphy on this, saying, yeah, these evil Republicans, all they want to do is give guns to terrorists.
Right, right.
Like we wanted to give guns to the gay people to kill the terrorists, but we were the ones who wanted to give guns to terrorists.
Here's Josh Earnest, the misnamed Josh Earnest.
Josh, this is Thomas Roberts.
I just want to ask you about what Senator Murphy of Connecticut had to say about the Republicans and the fact that we've got to make this clear, the constant case that Republicans have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.
Is that how President Obama feels in light of the fact that we saw these measures fail?
Well, Thomas, I think what is clear is that there are individuals in the United States right now that our law enforcement officials are concerned could have ties to terrorism, are susceptible to being radicalized by the online recruitment efforts of ISIL, and right now there is not a law on the books that prevents those individuals from walking into a gun store and buying a gun.
So does the President specifically blame Republicans for failure in acting and in doing so that allows isis to buy assault weapons Look, it's a pretty open-and-shut case.
It is clear that Republicans have refused to act on a common-sense measure that would prevent individuals with suspected ties to terrorism from being able to buy a gun.
Right now, those individuals who we have concluded are too dangerous to board an airplane can walk into a gun store and buy a gun.
That doesn't make any sense, and why Republicans allow that to happen is just beyond me.
It makes no sense unless you factor in the fear that they have of the NRA.
So it's only the NRA, the evil, evil, terrible NRA.
So an Orlando jihadist who, by the way, expressed his support for Hillary Clinton in this presidential race.
It's the NRA's fault that that guy was able to get a gun.
It's worth noting, I mentioned, there were four different gun measures that were up, right?
Two from the Democrats.
There were also two from the Republicans.
The two from the Republicans would have added the ability for mental health to be added to the designation of whether somebody ought to get a weapon.
The other one was a 72-hour hold if you're on the terror watch list.
So the government now has 72 hours to prove you guilty before they can deny you sale of a weapon.
Democrats voted against both of those things.
So Democrats decided not to push any form of gun control, demonstrating once again that I guess Democrats want terrorists to have weapons.
I guess that's what Democrats want.
They want terrorists to have weapons.
So this is all nasty, ridiculous stuff from Democrats, and it's really gross.
All of which means that Donald Trump should be pummeling them.
He should be pummeling them right now, right?
I mean, now's the time.
Now, if any time were the time, now would be the time.
So it's time to do our daily episode of Good Trump, Bad Trump.
Good Trump, Bad Trump.
Yay!
Everybody loves Good Trump, Bad Trump.
Okay, so we'll start with Good Trump, and then we will get to Bad Trump.
So, Good Trump.
Donald Trump attacked Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren has been going out there saying crazy things.
Elizabeth Warren and Democrats, they've been tweeting out this hashtag, I think it's Disarm Hate, which I have to acknowledge that when I saw the hashtag Disarm Hate, I immediately flashed to Monty Python and the Holy Grail and the Black Knight being disarmed.
Also, what if hate knows jujitsu?
I mean, have they thought of that one?
I mean, disarm hate.
What if hate is a jujitsu master?
You gotta really think this thing through.
So they've been pushing out this disarm hate stuff, and Elizabeth Warren has been hitting Donald Trump very hard, and Donald Trump reads the smoke signals, and then he's asked about calling her Pocahontas, which he calls her mockingly, and here's his answer.
Do you regret calling her Pocahontas?
Do you regret that?
I do.
I do regret calling her Pocahontas because I think it's a tremendous insult to Pocahontas.
So, to Pocahontas, I would like to apologize to you.
Okay.
This is a funny bit.
And he continues along these lines.
He's asked by Bill O'Reilly about President Obama.
He had hinted last week, as you recall, that President Obama was secretly allied with ISIS.
He knew something the rest of us didn't know.
O'Reilly asks him about this and Trump does a good job.
I don't think you believe that he's a quizling, that he's someone who wants Islamic terrorism to prosper.
You don't believe that, do you?
I don't believe it.
I do say, though, when I see a deal like was made with Iran, this horrible, horrible deal where we're giving them back $150 billion, to the best of my knowledge, and I tell you what, I've studied that thing pretty closely, we're getting almost nothing out of it, they're going to end up with their nuclear weapons and lots of other things, whatever they want, and then I see the way he treats Israel, I say, wow, what's the... there seems to be a double standard.
I'm not happy about it.
A lot of other people aren't happy about it.
I can tell you the people in Israel I don't like it.
So I look at things and I see what's going on and I'm a common sense person and I don't like it.
I don't like it.
I don't like it one bit.
Okay, so all of that's fine and all of that's good.
Okay, so that was good Trump.
And then we get bad Trump.
So bad Trump is, yesterday we mentioned that Donald Trump had tossed his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski.
And I just wanted to recall, this is Donald Trump on Corey Lewandowski back in March, when Corey Lewandowski was under suspicion of having grabbed a reporter, Michelle Fields, and bruised her arm, and here was Donald Trump at the time.
I know it'd be very easy for me to discard people.
I don't discard people.
I stay with people.
That's why I stay with this country.
That's why I stay with a lot of people that are treated unfairly.
And that's one of the reasons I'm the frontrunner by a lot.
Okay, so he says he always sticks with people, even if they're treated—especially if they're treated unfairly.
Fast forward to yesterday.
Donald Trump fires Corey Lewandowski, and then he's on TV, and here's what he has to say now.
He's out.
What happened?
He's a good man.
We've had great success.
You know, I got more primary votes than anybody in the history of the Republican Party by a tremendous amount, not by a little bit.
I think Cory's terrific.
I watched him before.
He was terrific toward me.
Said I was a talented person.
And he's a talented person.
He's a good guy.
He's a friend of mine.
But I think it's time now for a different kind of a campaign.
We ran a small, beautiful, well-unified campaign.
It worked very well in the primaries.
I think I'm probably going to do some of that.
I want to keep it a little bit very much in control.
As an example, I have 73 people.
Hillary Clinton has like almost 900 people.
And we're in the same position.
So, you know, there's something nice about that.
I got criticized for that.
I said, wait a minute, I've spent much less money than her.
And the results so far is the same.
I should be credited for that.
But with Corey, I'm really, really proud of him.
He did a great job.
But we're going to go a little bit of a different route.
So it's a different style, and you're bringing in some... A little different style, yeah.
A little different style.
He just lets it go at that.
There are rumors flying all day yesterday that Corey Lewandowski is ousted because he's doing poorly in the polls.
Trump is.
Corey Lewandowski is ousted because the family doesn't like him.
And O'Reilly just nods along with Donald Trump.
By the way, that answer was nonsensical.
Why are you getting rid of Corey Lewandowski?
He's a great guy.
So why are you getting rid of him?
Well, listen, we ran a really slim campaign, like a campaign with only 70 people, and I think that that's the way we ought to run a campaign.
So why are you getting rid of him?
Well, he's a great guy!
Okay then, I guess.
So Corey Lewandowski is on TV to talk about this, and Corey Lewandowski has to have some sort of non-disclosure agreement with the Trump campaign, and so you're gonna see Corey Lewandowski go full Manchurian candidate here.
Donald Trump is the kindest, gentlest, warmest, most wonderful human being he's ever met in his life.
It's kind of amusing.
What happened to that loyalty?
Trump said he doesn't discard members of his team?
No, it's not a question of loyalty.
That's not the question of Donald Trump is a loyal person.
What is it a question of?
And I'm loyal to him.
And, you know, the decision to build the campaign bigger and broader is a good decision because you want to take on the Clinton juggernaut.
What we have been able to achieve is smaller and leaner.
So getting rid of you is a good decision, though, Corey?
No, I didn't say that.
What I said is my philosophy has been smaller and leaner and more efficient and ensuring that our resources are spent as best as possible.
And there are people who think that building a bigger, broader coalition, a bigger, broader campaign to compete with the full-time staff of 732 paid people on the Clinton campaign is the right direction.
And that's perfectly fine.
So what in particular is the reason that you're being fired right now?
The loss in Iowa can't be the reason why.
Look, Peter, I don't really want to get into the specifics of it, but what I think is fair to say is that I've had the privilege of being part of something which is much bigger than any one individual, and the opportunity to move this campaign forward is something that's very important.
That is a dude with a non-disclosure agreement right there.
He gets ousted, and he's sitting there still talking in the talking points from the Trump campaign.
Wow.
I mean, the Trump campaign could have sidelined him.
They could have kept paying him as a consultant or something.
Instead, they just fire him and have him escorted from the building, and he's still mouthing these platitudes.
So that's bad Trump.
But worse Trump is what happened last night.
So the Trump campaign is just not competent.
They're just not competent.
So yesterday, we mentioned this yesterday morning, they fired Corey Lewandowski.
And I say, okay, why did they fire him on a Monday morning?
If you're going to do this right, you fire him on a Friday afternoon, like 4.30 in the afternoon.
Nobody has time to react.
We talk about how rejiggering the campaign over the weekend.
You come back next weekend.
It's all fresh.
So they fire him instead on a Monday.
So people are saying, oh, maybe that's Manafort, Paul Manafort, the new campaign manager, kind of sinking his hooks into Lewandowski.
Maybe it's Ivanka who wants it clear that she's now in charge.
Okay, whatever.
Monday night, the new Federal Elections Commission report on the Trump campaign comes out.
This is the new information about Donald Trump's campaign.
And this is legitimately, legitimately, The worst financial report any presidential candidate in modern history has ever put out.
I mean, it is awful.
So, just as background, Trump is talking to O'Reilly, he's talking up the fact I have a slim campaign and I'm running even with Hillary.
First of all, dude, you're not running even with Hillary.
You're running somewhere between 6 and 10 points in the polls behind Hillary Clinton.
You're running about even with Hillary in Ohio.
You're running a little behind her in Pennsylvania.
You're getting beat by 8 in Florida.
You're starting to lose Arizona, you're starting to lose Kansas, and you're starting to lose Utah.
Okay, and if you want to close that gap, you would assume, okay, fine, drop some money of your own, right?
I mean, Trump said back in 2011 that he was going to dump $600 million of his own money into the campaign.
And that sounds like a lot of money, unless you're worth $10 billion.
If you're worth $10 billion, you have $10 billion in assets, and you spend $600 million, proportionately speaking, that's if you make $100,000 a year, and you take $6,000 and spend it on something.
It's a lot of money, but it ain't the end of the world.
If Trump has $10 billion, $600 million is a lot of money.
It ain't the end of the world.
So far, Trump has lent his campaign.
He didn't give his campaign.
He lent his campaign.
That means that he says to the campaign, here's some money.
When other money comes in, you have to repay it back to me.
He's lent his campaign somewhere in the neighborhood of $40 million.
This is the equivalent to a $10 billion guy.
This is the equivalent of a $100,000 Okay, fine.
Donald Trump, she has now spent $23 million dollars reserving ad time in Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and New Hampshire.
spend more than that on his own campaign.
Okay, fine.
Donald Trump, she has now spent $23 million reserving ad time in Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and New Hampshire.
Donald Trump has spent this many dollars.
Zero.
He has spent zero dollars.
Not one, zero.
He's not reserved any ad time in this wing state.
He has 70 national campaign employees.
She has well over 700.
That's the tip of the iceberg.
So, here's the bad news in the latest Federal Election Commission's report from the Trump campaign.
And this is just devastating.
This is bad Trump.
This is bad Trump at its finest.
So, Among other problems, Donald Trump, he clinched the nomination, as you recall, May 3rd.
He clinched it right after Indiana Ted Cruz dropped out.
It was obvious he was the nominee.
You would imagine that in the month of May, he would do some pretty heavy lifting in terms of fundraising, right?
He'd get on the phone.
He'd make some calls.
He'd get people to give money.
He was obviously the nominee.
They were consolidating around him.
And I can tell you, gang, as somebody who's very plugged into all of the various kind of conservative media outlets, I can tell you that there is an Absolute effort, top-down effort at lots of conservative media outlets to push Donald Trump, to tell people who are anti-Donald Trump that they ought to jump aboard the Trump train.
This is a real thing that's happening all across the conservative media spectrum.
It's not unique to any one company, but it is definitely happening.
It is definitely happening.
And to all the people I'm talking to, it's definitely happening.
So Trump had his shot, right?
I mean, in the last six weeks, he had a shot to consolidate, to raise lots of money.
So you'd figure he would do great last month, right?
He finally locks this thing up.
We're going to get presidential Trump.
Well, in May, Donald Trump raises a grand total of $3.1 million.
Now, by way of contrast, Mitt Romney, who'd sewn it up a little bit later than Trump, right?
By contrast, Mitt Romney, in the month of May, May 2012, Mitt Romney raised $78 million.
$78 million.
Hillary Clinton in the month of May, even though she's still battling, she only finished off Bernie Sanders in California in June.
In the month of May, Hillary Clinton raised $28 million.
Donald Trump raised $3.1 million in May.
$3.1 million.
Okay, that is sad sack crap.
I mean, that is bad news.
And there are a couple of reasons for that.
One is that he's an erratic candidate.
People don't want to put their money behind him.
Two is that they don't think that Trump is wealthy and they don't think he's going to put his own money behind himself.
One of two things is true for Trump, right?
Either he's inordinately wealthy, but he doesn't think he's going to win until he's not dumping his money into his campaign.
Or, he's not wealthy.
In which case, he's not going to be able to self-fund.
In which case, he's got a problem, and half of his case for being the nominee is basically gone.
Ted Cruz, who stopped running at the beginning of May, he stopped running at the beginning of May, he has $6.8 million cash on hand.
Donald Trump raised $3.1 million, and then he spent $2 million of it, and he has $1.3 million cash on hand.
There are state Senate candidates in this country who have more cash on hand than that.
That's question one.
Why can't you raise any money?
Question two, where did all the money go?
Well, let's explore, shall we?
So, Donald Trump spent one-third of all campaign expenditures on his own firms and travel reimbursements for his children.
That's right, gang.
You gave Donald Trump money, and he then took the money and spent it on his own properties.
He spent it on his own kids.
Right, this is called a scam.
He spent $423,317 to rent a facility, right, for his campaign.
Which facility did he rent?
He rented Mar-a-Lago, which he owns.
So he paid himself $430,000 to rent a facility he already owns, in which he could donate as an in-kind contribution.
He spent $350,000 on TAG Air.
But, you ask, who owns TAG Air?
Oh, that's right, it's Trump.
It's Trump.
Trump owns TAG Air.
I don't know what TAG stands for.
It must be like Trump Air.
Great!
He even spent $4,000 on wines from his son's wine company.
Donald Trump spent $200,000 on hats.
On hats.
I mean, it's like the Kentucky Derby over there.
The dude loves hats.
He's just got stacks and stacks of Make America Great Again hats sitting somewhere.
Trump paid himself a salary.
He paid himself a salary.
Now, if you were really, really super-duper wealthy, would you pay yourself a salary from your campaign revenue?
Would you do that?
I wouldn't.
My favorite thing here is that the Trump campaign signed a $35,000 check to an advertising firm called Draper Sterling.
What, you ask, is Draper Sterling?
Well, for those of you who have seen Mad Men, you know that Don Draper and Roger Sterling are two of the main characters in Mad Men.
It's an advertising firm that doesn't exist.
It's currently registered at a residential address in New Hampshire.
People are tracking this down.
It looks basically like a buddy of Corey Lewandowski's may have been funneled a bunch of money for basically nothing.
That's what it sort of looks like.
But you say, okay, so Trump isn't raising a lot of money for himself directly, but he's for sure raising a lot of money for like the RNC.
The RNC says, no, we're raising all that money ourselves.
And you might say, well, you know, When we say Romney raised $78 million, he didn't raise $78 million just directly for his campaign.
He raised a bunch for his super PAC, right?
So how much did he raise for his super PAC?
The Great America PAC, which is the greatest of all Trump's super PACs.
It's huge.
They raised $1.4 million in May.
They have half a million dollars cash on hand.
Half a million dollars cash on hand.
I could take a personal loan against my home value for that amount of money right now, today.
Okay, this is crazy towns.
This is crazy towns.
Trump is not competent.
And this raises some questions.
This raises some questions.
And it raises one big question, which is, for all you people out there who are saying, well, you have to sacrifice principle to oppose Hillary.
You have to sacrifice principle to back Trump.
Okay, that logic works if Trump is gonna win, or if he has a shot at winning.
What if Trump gets creamed?
What if you sacrificed your principles to watch a guy just get absolutely shellacked?
I mean, just get crushed?
This is a real consideration, and coming up to the convention, there are now stories in the Washington Post, there's some concern among delegates, there may be a delegate revolt against Trump.
And there are a lot of questions to be asked here.
Is Donald Trump even that wealthy?
Mark Cuban today, he says, you know, if Donald Trump were that wealthy, he'd just sign himself a $200 million check.
I could do it.
And I think Cuban's worth like a couple billion dollars.
Why not just sign himself a $200 million check?
He says, I don't think he's worth that much money.
Trump isn't doing it, obviously.
He's also not releasing his tax returns.
This is kind of stingy material for a dude who's supposedly worth $10 billion.
Second question.
Does Trump even want to win at this point?
If Trump really is that wealthy, why isn't he spending the money?
Maybe he thinks he's going to lose.
And maybe he would prefer to blame everybody else.
Maybe he thinks that he is not going to win this campaign, and so instead of spending his money on his campaign, he's just gonna spend his money elsewhere.
He's gonna up his brand, and then he's gonna go do other things after he's done, which would kind of fit the MO.
Right now, he's busy blaming Republicans, right?
I mean, Donald Trump is out there blaming Republicans for his campaign.
Well, it's people like me.
It's my fault that Donald Trump sucks at campaigning.
It's not my fault that Donald Trump isn't signing himself a check.
It's his money.
It's not my fault that Donald Trump isn't calling up donors.
Politico reported last week, quote, In recent days, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has privately grumbled his advice doesn't seem welcome with Trump.
While Trump had promised Priebus he would call two dozen GOP donors, when RNC Chief of Staff Katie Walsh recently presented Trump with a list of more than 20 donors, he called three before stopping, according to two sources familiar with the situation.
But according to Trump, it's all of our fault.
It's my fault.
It's Paul Ryan's fault.
It's Ryan Priebus' fault.
Here's Donald Trump on Fox & Friends saying just that.
I need support from the Republicans.
I mean, in some ways I get more support from the Democrats than I do the Republicans.
Some of the Republicans.
Not all.
Some have been phenomenal.
I don't want to build that up in one way because I have got so much tremendous support from congressmen and from senators and from lots of other people.
But we do need support.
And by the way, Reince and the RNC have been terrific.
But it would be nice to have full support from people that are in office.
I mean, full verbal support.
He's talking about Paul Ryan there, obviously.
That's passive-aggressive.
It would be so nice if everybody would just get behind me and shut up.
I'm old enough to remember five minutes ago when he was saying he didn't need Republicans.
I mean, he could do it all on his own.
And the Republicans are running screaming from him because not only does he say stupid things, but he doesn't have the capacity to run a campaign.
Again, the reason, folks, the reason that I'm going after Trump here is because I think it's important to do a couple of things.
One, to be honest, but two, I think it's important to recognize that the anti-establishment notion, we need to get rid of the Republican establishment, doesn't mean that you also get rid of every capacity to win.
It doesn't relieve you of the burden of having to run a real campaign.
Just shouting cuck online over and over and over isn't going to win you a campaign.
I understand there are a bunch of people online who are like small children watching Peter Pan.
They think that if they clap for Tinkerbell, Tinkerbell lives.
Well, if you shout cuck enough, that's not going to make Trump the president.
Trump actually has to do the legwork.
He actually has to do the things he needs to do.
And what's very frustrating about this is the worse a campaign Trump runs, the more the establishment wing of the Republican Party looks at the rest of us who are anti-establishment, even anti-Trump, anti-establishment people like me, they look at us and say, well, you guys just aren't professional.
I mean, this is humiliating.
I don't like Trump, right?
I don't, I'm not going to vote for him.
But the fact is Hillary is highly vulnerable.
She's super vulnerable.
And Trump, I mean, we said this yesterday, Trump is blowing it and he's blowing it every single day.
And Republicans who even support Trump are now running from him.
The New York Times contacted a bunch of top Republicans.
This is kind of hilarious.
They contacted a bunch of top Republicans because they wanted to get comment.
And these top Republicans were afraid that they would be asked about Trump.
Here are their responses.
Lindsey Graham.
Says to the reporter.
His spokesperson says he sort of had his fill talking about Trump.
Rick Perry, who backs Trump.
Thanks for thinking of him.
Ted Cruz.
Not great timing on our end.
Mitt Romney.
You are kind to think of me.
Chris Christie.
We are going to take a pass this time.
Charlie Baker of Massachusetts.
The governor won't be available.
Mike Lee of Utah.
Senator Lee would love to talk to you about the state of the GOP and conservatism in general.
We are free anytime after November 8th.
You have to love the stones on that one.
Okay, so we've already asked a couple of questions.
One is, does Trump want to win?
Two, is Trump even that wealthy?
Third, is Trump even a good businessman?
His entire pitch was, he's a great businessman, he's going to come in, he's going to revitalize the economy, he's going to do a wonderful job because he's so good at business.
He can't even put together a team.
He can't even put together a team.
His team is chaos.
We talked about this yesterday with Lewandowski.
It's absolute chaos inside.
Finally, is this all a scam?
Are you all being played?
Is this just a giant scam?
And I think this is important to discuss.
Did you fall for a scam?
Did a lot of people fall for a scam?
It's not you, just because you backed Trump.
There are a lot of people who fall for politician scams.
But this is pretty bad.
And there's speculation mounting in recent weeks that the only reason Trump ran in the first place was to enhance his brand viability.
But this fundraising report really kind of puts that on the table.
This fundraising report puts, it puts the Trump campaign behind the eight ball.
Now Trump is saying, well, we'll recover, we'll be fine.
He put out a statement where he said that our fundraising has been spectacular this month.
I don't know what to believe.
I don't know whether to believe that or not.
I mean, he was saying that his fundraising was spectacular last month, that he was getting all sorts of support.
All of which is to say, if you want to win, it requires two things.
Yes, you have to be a fighter, but two, you also have to be a professional.
Two, you also have to be a professional.
And if Trump isn't going to be a professional, it's going to be very difficult for him to win this election.
It's going to be very brutal for him to win this election.
I think that this is going to be an object lesson for Republicans going forward.
First, I think it's important to answer the question as to whether I think Trump should be ousted by the party at the convention.
Let's put it this way.
If you want to win in 2016, yeah, he should be ousted.
Trump isn't going to win.
Trump's going to get killed.
He's going to get killed because he can't turn this sucker around.
Trump is still Trump.
Now, if Trump could turn this around, it would be a minor miracle.
But if Trump turned this around, imagine this.
If Trump is behind six points right now and he's spending no money, what would happen if he actually dumped a bunch of money into his own campaign and stopped making gaps?
He might be competitive.
He might actually be able to win.
But he's not going to do any of those things.
So, should they dump him?
I don't know.
I don't know if they should dump him.
I mean, I'll be honest with you, if they dump him right now before the convention, there's the real possibility that Donald Trump then complains about it all the way till the election, the Republicans lose, and the Trump wing comes back in four years.
I mean, Trump's, it's funny to say this, but he's 70, he's not 80.
Trump could come back in four years and do this all over again, just to make a fuss about it.
I don't think he would, but it's possible that he could do this all over again.
His movement certainly would live on.
If you let him have it and you let him get creamed, then people have to live with the decisions that they make.
But the good Trump-bad Trump dichotomy, I don't think that's going to end anytime soon, and it obscures the fact that Hillary is terrible on everything, that she's awful, and the media are just dying for her.
They are dying for her.
There's a chyron today On MSNBC, that was the craziest chyron I've ever seen, okay?
Actually, yeah, it's on MSNBC, okay?
It's Hillary Clinton speaking, she's wearing the flag, and it says, breaking news, you ready for this?
This is what it says on TV.
Clinton, speaking for first time as grandmother of two.
That's what the chyron says.
And you think the media are going soft on Hillary?
You bet the media are going soft on Hillary.
The only way to fight that is to go directly to the population.
The only way to go directly to the population is to spend some money.
Trump isn't doing that.
And so Trump's in real trouble here.
And it just goes to show you, all the people who jumped aboard the Trump bandwagon, even in the last couple of weeks, all the people who jumped aboard in the last couple of weeks to try and consolidate behind Donald Trump, If he's raiding his own campaign coffers in order to pay his family, you're being scammed.
I mean, that's scuzzy stuff.
It really is.
It's pretty scuzzy stuff.
Okay, time for a couple of things I like and then some things that I hate.
Okay, things that I like.
So, I just started watching the series.
I haven't finished it.
I know Clavin recommended it also, but the first couple episodes are really good.
The Night Manager on AMC with Tom Hiddleston and, uh, and what's his name?
Hugh Laurie, the guy from House.
Um, and, uh, and it's, it's very compelling TV.
Uh, it's, it's, it's a spy thing.
It's, it's, uh, John le Carré, I believe is how it's pronounced.
Uh, it's based on one of his novels.
Uh, and, uh, and here's what the trailer looks like.
You're a spectator sport.
We are emperors of Rome.
What do you want, Miss Byrne?
I want to make you an offer.
Bring down Richard Roper.
I want to put you inside his operation.
My name's Fyne.
I'm the night manager.
Daniel!
You bring the money to us, we give you back the boy.
You'll be in so deep, you'll worry that you'll never get out.
I got nothing to lose.
You saved my boy.
Welcome to the family.
You come into our lives, everyone's attracted to you.
We just need you and me.
I've got a new asset.
You've got any idea how dangerous that is?
Murder, theft, you're on every wanted list on God's Earth.
My main man, my star.
I think you might be playing both sides.
We need Richard Roper.
So the series, I've only watched the first couple, excuse me, of episodes, and they're very good.
They're very well produced.
And it's Tom Hiddleston auditioning for James Bond, which apparently he's going to be the new James Bond.
So it's really good.
I will say the one thing that bugs me is it's amazing how Hollywood goes out of its way.
Every villain in Hollywood must be a white male.
All of them.
There can never be anybody who's not a white male villain in any of these spy stories, particularly.
So this whole thing is about how House, after being a doctor and healing his leg, House has become an arms dealer.
And so now he's selling arms, and he's the bad guy because he's the arms dealer.
And Hollywood loves to bash the arms dealers.
Which is fine and dandy, but the reality is the people on the other end who are using the guns are more of a problem.
The same way that Hollywood likes to bash the gun shops instead of bashing the jihadists.
In this case, these are illegal gun sales, but there's one point in one of the early episodes where they're talking about the Arab Spring, and they're talking about shutting him down because he's an arms dealer and the British government knows about him, and they say, well, we don't really necessarily want to shut him down because he may be arming the people who are going to be fighting the religious fanatics.
And this is sort of dismissed, right?
This is sort of dismissed like, oh, that's so terrible.
How could they possibly think that?
Well, if you recall history, the Arab Spring did not end well in Egypt.
Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood took over the country, and then the generals came back in and took back over the country, probably with the help of arms dealers like the bad guy in this particular series.
So, it's, it's, you know, it's funny.
Hollywood likes to pretend that it sees shades of gray in politics, but really, Hollywood only sees You shoot black and white, and the black and white is white people are the villains, and brown people are not.
So if you have two brown people, one of whom is bad and one of whom is good, the brown bad guy is not really the bad guy, it's the white bad guy, right?
And at the very beginning, this isn't giving anything away, in the first episode, Tom Hiddleston sleeps with a girl, and she ends up being killed.
And she's killed by an Arab guy.
She's killed by a Muslim guy, who's a bad guy, right?
Tom Hiddleston doesn't set his sights on that guy.
Tom Hiddleston sets his sights on Richard Roper, who's the arms dealer, the white arms dealer.
That's the guy who really has to be taken down, as opposed to this guy who's part of this really rich Muslim family in Egypt.
Why?
No one really explains.
But, you know, there you have it.
So, okay.
Other things that I like, Daniel Radcliffe, who I've been told I bear a resemblance to, I don't see it at all.
Certainly not with the beard.
But when he was, I think that, I've gotten the Harry Potter routine a couple of times.
And Daniel Radcliffe was on with one of the least funny people in America, Seth Meyers.
And Seth Meyers asked him about one time that he met Donald Trump, and it's a little bit funny.
Then I heard, is this true, your first talk show appearance, you're very young, you meet Donald Trump backstage.
Yes.
Yeah.
The true story?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
It was my first time in New York, and I was doing the Today show, and I was, like, really nervous and 10, 11 years old and, like, never been on live TV before and just terrified.
And they said, and he was a guest on it, and presumably somebody went up to him and was like, you want to meet the kid that plays Harry Potter?
And he was like, yeah.
Or probably with less enthusiasm than that.
He's probably like, yeah, fine, I don't care.
He was like, I am the biggest fan of Harry Potter.
And so they marched me over to him.
And I remember saying, like, having some idea of who he was, but not really, you know, full concept.
And I said, I was just like, oh, he was like, how are you?
And I was like, I'm really nervous.
I don't know what I'm going to talk about on the show.
And he just said, you just tell them you met Mr. Trump.
Which I was just like, to this day, I'm like, I can't even relate to that level of confidence.
Imagine if, like, I said to Billy, I was just like, oh, just talk about me when you do your interview.
Don't worry about it.
Like, yeah, I am interesting enough to be everyone's story.
Yeah.
Especially on a day he just got interviewed and left.
Yeah.
And then you would come out and say, anything interesting?
I just met Donald Trump.
Yeah, that's how it works.
He was here and you met him.
And also just, like, how weirded out would they be for, like, that young British kid loves Trump.
He's really into, like, real estate and stuff.
I don't know.
So, you know, that's funny stuff, but it's also a little bit telling about Trump.
For Trump, everything revolves around Trump, obviously.
Obviously, obviously.
Apparently, there's a story today that was pretty funny that Donald Trump was, when he was helping do this, he was helping write the material for SNL.
Apparently he wasn't particularly helpful, but the one thing that he did add in terms of notes is when they came to him with his statements about his vast wealth, he went back to him and he doubled all the figures.
That was his vast...
statement of wealth.
So, Donald Trump being Donald Trump.
Again, folks, when I rip on Trump, this does not mean that Hillary is good.
It means Hillary is the worst.
Hillary is the worst.
Why can't we have someone who can beat her and who isn't terrible?
Why?
Why, God?
Why?
Why Republican voters?
Why?
Okay, so...
Time for some things that I hate.
I wish that we had an alternative candidate.
We don't.
Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is just awful.
So he was asked, this libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, who's a nut job, right?
Former governor of New Mexico, former Republican.
He was asked about smoking weed because he's been very open about the fact that he smokes pot.
And by the way, if you're a 50-year-old man and you don't have cancer and you're smoking pot, you're a loser, by definition.
By definition, okay?
It's not the same thing as taking a drink.
It's making a cultural statement about what a loser you are.
If you're a 50-year-old man, you're either living in Marin County and you're a hippie, or you're just some guy who's super wealthy and just saying F it to life and you're just smoking pot because... or you're super poor and you're an incredible loser.
There's no real in-between.
Gary Johnson was on MSNBC and he explained that he has eaten edibles and blown a little smoke.
He said he wouldn't do that in office.
How long has it been since he has had pot?
Since he has done any of this?
They ask him.
He says it's been a grand total of seven weeks.
So, seven weeks clean for Gary Johnson.
Make that man president of the United States.
Also, things I hate, going back to the gun thing, Van Jones, who is the communist on CNN.
Really, he's a communist.
Van Jones, he was I just think it's very interesting that we're talking about racially profiling in the context of mass shootings.
goes straight back to the Democrat talking points about how it's all the fault of Christians basically. - I just think it's very interesting that we're talking about racially profiling in the context of mass shootings.
The vast majority of people who are doing the mass shootings in America are not Muslims at all.
So exactly, the young white men, It turns out that even the people who are ideologically motivated, you mentioned ideology, you are seven times more likely to be killed by a right-wing extremist, a racist or an anti-government nutjob, seven times more likely to be killed by that person than by a Muslim.
Is that ideology important to your consideration?
Yes, it is.
Well, sure, sure, but I'm just saying before we even just go down the road of should we racially profile Muslims or not, if I came on TV and said let's start racially profiling white men, let's start racially profiling young white men who are loners with bowl haircuts, people would think, wow, that's a pretty unfortunate a conclusion for you to come to, certainly is a better way for us to move forward.
So I just think it's important for us to recognize- - Okay, so we can stop it there.
Okay, first of all, we probably should, if a loner who's creepy with a bull haircut and is white and he's 18 years old, and walks into a gun shop, maybe we should take a second look at that guy, right?
I mean, maybe we should.
If he's acting all weird and stuff, maybe we should.
Second, Islam is not a race.
It's a religion.
So you can't racially profile Muslims.
You can religiously profile Muslims.
You can't racially profile Muslims.
Third, the statistic he gives that you're seven times more likely to be killed by a right-wing extremist, this is a widely debunked statistic.
It's not true.
It's lumping in a bunch of people who have nothing to do with conservatism into right-wing It's also ignoring, you have to date it after 9-11, because if you include 9-11, then by far it's radical Muslims killing people that are the grave danger.
And if we're just going to talk murder across the board, you're most likely to be killed in the United States, just generally, you're most likely to be killed by a young black man, because 50% of all murders in the United States are committed by young black men.
All of which is to say that if we're trying to prevent terrorist attacks, all shootings are not the same.
All shootings are not the same.
If we're trying to prevent Columbine-style shootings, then if a creepy, loner white kid in a bowl haircut shows up at a gun shop and tries to buy a rifle, and he's acting a little weird and wearing all black, maybe you ought to think twice and call the FBI.
Sure.
If you're thinking about how to prevent terrorism, and a guy walks into your gun shop, and he starts talking into his phone in Arabic, and trying to buy large amounts of ammunition, maybe you should do what the gun shop in Florida did, and call the FBI, and the FBI shouldn't suck at its job.
If you are trying to prevent gang killings, which are the vast majority of, or at least the vast plurality of killings in the United States, maybe you ought to have stop and frisk in places like New York.
In other words, this isn't all one big problem.
One of the things I hate about the discussion of crime Is lumping all crime together as though it's all of one piece.
It isn't.
There are many different types of crime and they all have to be dealt with in different ways.
But the idea that you can just restrict anybody on the so-called terror watch list from buying a gun and this is going to solve all your problems, it's just not true.
It's just not true.
It didn't work for the Orlando Jihadists.
It wouldn't work for the Tarnievs.
Even San Bernardino, they weren't on the terror watch list, so it wouldn't work there either.
So none of this actually works in any real way.
Well tomorrow we'll be back and we'll be talking about Hillary Clinton gave a big speech on the economy so it'll be bashing Hillary tomorrow.
Today was Trump's turn through the ringer because the news is about Trump.
But tomorrow I'm sure we'll be talking about Hillary's big speech on the economy and Trump is supposed to unleash a diatribe against Hillary Clinton about all of her foibles about her unfitness for office.
I'm looking forward to that because now we can have more good Trump than bad Trump in the good Trump bad Trump segment.
That'll be really exciting.
So come back for that.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
▲
Export Selection