Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

July 11, 2016 - The Ben Shapiro Show

01:00:38

Ep. 147 - Racist, Lawless Obama Lies About Racism, Cops

Ben explains why police ought to turn their backs on Obama, talks with Dinesh D'Souza about his new film, and explains why Republican must STOP catering to feelings. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	In 2014, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio ripped the NYPD after the death of Eric Garner, who was subjected to a submission hold by the police during an arrest for selling loose cigarettes and then died of a heart attack.
	De Blasio, if you remember, went on national TV and he said, quote, He's trained them to be very careful when they have an encounter with a police officer.
	He then said he told his own son, who's black, about the supposed racism of the police.
	He said, quote, with Dante, very early on, we said, look, if a police officer stops you, do everything he tells you to do.
	Don't move suddenly.
	Don't reach for your cell phone.
	Because we knew, sadly, there's a greater chance it might be misinterpreted if it was a young man of color.
	It's different for a white child.
	That's just the reality in this country.
	That isn't actually the reality in this country, by the way.
	A New York Times piece today quotes a study saying that black people are significantly less likely to be shot by cops than white people in similar circumstances.
	20% less likely, actually.
	But those lies matter.
	Days after de Blasio made his statements, two NYPD officers, Wenjin Liu and Rafael Ramos, were murdered in cold blood by black criminal Ismael Brinsley, who pledged to put, quote, wings on pigs.
	When de Blasio attended the funeral for Ramos, hundreds of officers openly turned their backs on him.
	De Blasio wasn't responsible for the officers' deaths, but he was certainly responsible for slandering them before their murders.
	In Dallas, officers should do the same to Obama.
	Obama's supposed to stop by tomorrow and give the eulogy for five officers who were murdered last week.
	Obama's not responsible for the murder of Dallas police officers.
	I wrote that last week.
	But, like Bill de Blasio, he is absolutely responsible for slandering them before they were murdered.
	Hours before the massacre, Obama said that cop shootings in Louisiana and Minnesota, both of which were under investigation and about which Obama said he knew nothing, were, quote, not isolated incidents.
	They're symptomatic of a broader set of racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system.
	Obama then reeled off a list of stats designed to show systemic racism against black people by cops, ignoring, of course, higher rates of criminality in the black community.
	He added, quote, When incidents like this occur, there's a big chunk of our fellow citizenry that feels as if because of the color of their skin, they're not being treated the same, and that hurts.
	But that should trouble all of us.
	But there are a large number of cops who feel, rightly, that because of the color of their uniform, they aren't treated the same.
	The president doesn't wait for evidence before he says they're racists.
	He doesn't separate off the bad apples from the rest of the community.
	He simply talks about institutional racism and provides no solutions, and then he postures for the cameras.
	After the Dallas massacre, Obama is still pretending that he's bewildered at the motivation for the shootings.
	He says, quote, I think it's very hard to untangle the motives of the shooter.
	He had no such problems ascribing motivations to police officers without any evidence at all.
	And he's been doing this for years.
	Back in 2014, just before the shootings of Lou and Ramos, Obama condemned the cops.
	He said racism was, quote, something deeply rooted in our society.
	It's deeply rooted in our history.
	There's a reason that the vicious, vacuous Black Lives Matter movement has taken off under Obama.
	He's incentivized them, he's backed them, he's supported their evidence-free argument that the criminal justice system is inherently racist.
	That movement, with Democrat help, has dramatically polarized race relations in the country, and that has a real predictable effect, including less trust of police in black communities and greater anger at police departments.
	Police have every right to be angry at President Obama, the president who slanders them.
	They should show it instead of allowing President Obama to use their funerals for the officers he slandered for his own brand of political agitprop.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show. - I tend to demonize people because they don't care about your feelings.
	All right, so here we are.
	It was a terrible weekend all the way across the board.
	It was an awful weekend, obviously.
	We've seen a spate of shootings and attacks on cops.
	In about 15 minutes, Dinesh D'Souza, who's the director and producer of Hillary's America, is gonna be stopping by.
	That movie comes out just before the Republican Convention, so we'll be talking with Dinesh about Hillary, about the convention, about all this stuff, and we can't wait for that.
	So it'll be about 10 minutes here, so stick around for that.
	We're doing an extra special long version of Facebook Live today, so congratulations to you.
	Because you're the lucky ones.
	But let's start off with the situation in Dallas.
	So over the weekend on Friday or Thursday night, 11 cops get shot, 5 are killed by this black terrorist, essentially, who says that he's doing it in revenge for the killings of Elton Sterling in Louisiana and Philandra Castile in Minnesota.
	Now, we played the tapes of those on the show last week, and as we said, the evidence just wasn't out.
	I mean, neither case do you actually know what happened.
	In one case, actually in Philando Castile's case, there are new facts coming out suggesting that when the police officer pulled them over, he pulled them over not for a broken taillight, but he pulled them over rather because he thought that Philando Castile was an armed robbery suspect, actually.
	But, which changes the scenario because you're going to go in a little bit more geared up to get violent if things go wrong, if you're pulling over an armed robbery suspect as opposed to a broken taillight.
	But putting all that aside, 11 cops get shot, and President Obama, all of a sudden President Obama doesn't know why this is happening.
	He can't understand why any of this is happening.
	So, I want to start with the lead-up, because the timeline here really matters.
	The timeline here really matters.
	So, let's start with President Obama.
	This was last Thursday, and he says, no, you know, the shootings of Philando Castile and Alton Sterling, these shootings are not, they aren't isolated incidents.
	There's nothing new about this.
	Here's President Obama last Thursday morning.
	But what I can say is that all of us as Americans should be troubled by these shootings.
	Because these are not isolated incidents.
	They're symptomatic of a broader set of racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system.
	Okay, so first of all, that's not true.
	Right?
	It's not true.
	These are isolated incidents.
	You know how I can tell these are isolated incidents?
	Because I know all their names.
	I know all their names.
	You know, when there's a scandal in the IRS to target all of the various conservative groups, can you name the names of the groups that were targeted?
	You can't, right?
	Because there are hundreds of them.
	When you talk about wrong police shootings, controversial police shootings, you can name them off.
	I can too, right?
	You can talk about Walter Skye, you can talk about Tamir Rice, you can talk about Alton Sterling, you can talk about Philando Castile, you can talk about Freddie Gray, right?
	We know all the names, even in situations where the cops didn't do anything wrong because they get blown up by the media into these massive stories.
	But the reality is that there is no great spate of innocent black people being shot by the cops.
	It just doesn't exist.
	It is made up.
	This New York Times study today says so.
	It says openly, they call it surprising, it's only surprising for people who are idiots or have a political agenda.
	It's not surprising at all that there's no great spate of black people being shot who are innocent by the police, just like there's no great spate of wrongfully arrested black people going to prison in the United States.
	Black people are going to the prison in precisely the numbers that black people are committing crimes in the United States.
	Crime reports, not arrests, crime reports line up directly with convictions almost.
	And this has been true for 30 years in this country.
	And there's no bias in crime reports.
	It's the person who's the victim of the crime calling it in.
	But the left doesn't want to say anything about that because then the left would actually be forced to come up with actual solutions.
	So President Obama says that, right?
	He says that to cops, it's a widespread systemic problem.
	I would argue there's a bigger problem with black people committing crimes and then getting into confrontation with cops.
	The fact is that if you're a cop, the average cop is 18 times more likely to be shot by a black man than a black man is likely to be shot by a cop in the United States.
	And President Obama doesn't care about actual statistics that matter.
	He just throws out statistics like they're more black people than white people in prison on a proportionate level, which is irrelevant.
	The question is what level of crime is being committed.
	But he goes out there and he says there's a systemic problem.
	I don't know anything about these cases.
	I love that when he says, I don't know anything about these particular cases, but I can tell you everybody's a racist.
	I don't know, but everyone's a racist.
	So he does that routine.
	Hours later, 11 cops get shot.
	Eleven of them, right?
	In the biggest assault on cops since 9-11.
	Seriously, this is the single greatest cop death incident since 9-11 in the United States.
	And then the president comes out, and suddenly cops are heroes.
	Suddenly cops are wonderful people.
	Here is President Obama on Friday.
	He comes out the next morning.
	And not only are the cops wonderful people, but he can understand that, you know, he actually knows the real reason behind the shooting.
	And the real reason wasn't anti-white, anti-cop bigotry.
	No, the real reason was something else.
	Here's President Obama Friday morning.
	I also said yesterday that our police have an extraordinarily difficult job, and the vast majority of them do their job in outstanding fashion.
	I also indicated the degree to which we need to be supportive of those officers who do their job each and every day, protecting us and protecting our communities.
	Today is a wrenching reminder of the sacrifices that they make for us.
	Okay, so suddenly the cops are the heroes, right?
	The vast majority of cops are wonderful.
	Remember, his original statement was, the vast majority of cops are wonderful, but... And you know, one of the rules here on the Ben Shapiro Show, if you say but, everything that came before the but doesn't matter.
	He says, the vast majority of cops are wonderful, but...
	There's a systemic racism problem.
	Well, you can't have it both ways.
	Either the vast majority are wonderful and there's no systemic problem, or there's a systemic problem and that means that you can't trust the cops, really.
	Because that systemic problem has to exist somewhere, unless there's some sort of subgroup of every police department.
	Some rogue cops in every police department who are organizing on their own.
	The idea is that it's a top-down problem, right?
	If it's a top-down problem, you can't say all the cops are great.
	But now all the cops are his best friends.
	And not only are the cops his best friends, but the real reason behind the shooting in Dallas had nothing to do with anti-cop bigotry.
	It didn't have to do with racial polarization, helped along by this president.
	In 2010, I think it was only 13% of Americans considered race relations to be a serious problem in the country.
	By April 2016, it was 35%.
	That's because of President Obama and his rhetoric.
	Not because anything on the ground has changed.
	There have been less deaths on the ground every year up to 2014 when Obama's rhetoric started to take hold, when the Ferguson movement started to take place, when Black Lives Matter came around, and crime started to rise.
	Crime both against cops and generally.
	But President Obama knows the real reason behind the Dallas shootings.
	The real reason is, you guessed it, gun control.
	Yes, lack of gun control.
	See, the guy had a gun.
	That was the real problem.
	We also know that when people are armed with powerful weapons, unfortunately it makes attacks like these more deadly and more tragic.
	And in the days ahead, we're going to have to consider those realities as well.
	Okay, so, just to be straight here, When a white guy shoots up a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, that's the fault of the Confederate flag and Christian conservatives.
	When an Orlando jihadist shoots up a gay nightclub, that's the fault of guns and white Christian conservatives.
	When Gabby Giffords gets shot, that's Sarah Palin's fault, and also the fault of guns.
	When a Planned Parenthood is targeted in Colorado by a crazy person, that's the fault of the pro-life movement.
	But, it's never the fault, it's never the fault of the guy who is out there shooting at cops when you push anti-cop rhetoric.
	That's never the fault, and then it's the gun again.
	It's amazing how this works, isn't it?
	It's just, it's so curious.
	Just like, if there are rogue cops, if there are cops who do bad things, they're not bad apples, they're evidence of a systemic problem.
	But, if a guy who sympathized with Black Lives Matter goes out and shoots a bunch of people, that has nothing to do with the Black Lives Matter movement.
	You noticing the double standard here?
	Here's my view.
	The Black Lives Matter movement is not responsible for this guy shooting cops.
	They're responsible for an increase in confrontations with cops.
	They're responsible for an increase in crime.
	They're responsible for cops pulling out of inner cities.
	They're responsible for all those things.
	But they're not responsible for that violence, because unless you're actively promoting violence, you're not responsible for the violence.
	That doesn't mean you're not doing anything wrong, however.
	And President Obama has done something deeply wrong.
	He slanders cops on a daily basis.
	He's literally been doing it for years.
	And he's not the only one.
	Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton did the exact same thing.
	He doesn't wait for the facts to come in on Philando Castile, this story in Minnesota.
	He doesn't wait for any of that to come in.
	He immediately declares that if Philando Castile had been white, he would still be alive today.
	The governor went a step further.
	Would this have happened if those passengers, the driver and the passenger, were white?
	I don't think it would have.
	Okay, well, thank you for that wonderfully ill-informed opinion, Governor Dayton.
	That was definitely useful.
	Even the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Jay Johnson, even he came out and he said, it's totally premature to say anything about that shooting.
	We don't know anything yet.
	Do you agree, Mr. Johnson, with what Governor Dayton of Minnesota said?
	That if Philando Castile had been white, he'd be alive today?
	I'm not in a position to comment on that.
	That matter is under investigation.
	Very often situations like this are pretty complicated.
	And so I want to resist labels like that that may be premature.
	I think we ought to let the investigation play itself out.
	There ought to be something that's That's fairly swift, transparent, and, if necessary, accountability.
	Well, that's awkward.
	That's awkward.
	But here's the thing.
	The only thing that's actually going to help is more evidence, not less, more cops, not fewer.
	That's the only thing that's going to be a solution here.
	But the left isn't interested in solutions.
	The left is interested in posturing and preening and posing about the racism of the system.
	Ask yourself this.
	What's their solution?
	Have you heard any solutions from them?
	All they keep saying is, if you don't recognize the plight of black people, you're part of the problem.
	Okay, but you have to give me a solution to the problem in order for me to be part of the solution.
	So I guess the solution is that we're supposed to sit around and talk about our feelings?
	Is that the solution?
	Because that's all I get from these folks.
	Is if you don't recognize our feelings, then you're part of the problem.
	And we're going to talk about the whole feelings aspect of this in a minute, in a little while.
	Because the fact is, I think that Republicans and Democrats are now, we're all part of this feelings society, where facts don't matter at all.
	As you know, I don't care about feelings, hardly at all.
	If you're not a member of my immediate family, Really don't care about your feelings.
	I have very little interest in your feelings.
	You're not my wife, you're not my children, I don't care.
	You have family of your own, that's what they're for.
	My job is to tell you the truth regardless of what your feelings are, and I know that sounds harsh, but the problem is when you have politicians who claim that they care about your feelings, they don't care about your feelings, they're lying to you.
	What they're really saying is, we're going to play to your feelings so we don't have to do the things for you we're supposed to do.
	We don't have to change the facts on the ground.
	All we have to do is scream about racism and continue to maintain that the inner city should be crap for the next 50 years, as they have been for the last 50 years.
	All these Democrats out there screaming about racism.
	Obama screaming about racism.
	Has life gotten better for black people?
	Under President Obama?
	Of course not.
	Of course not.
	Violence is going up, not down.
	And there's President Obama saying the real problem isn't him, it's the white folks who refuse to acknowledge the genius of his rhetoric.
	We're going to stop there right now.
	We're going to bring in Dinesh D'Souza.
	He's got a new movie out.
	Hillary's America and and he is obviously the the producer director of 2016 Obama's America and and the multiple New York Times best-selling author And and Dinesh is is one of the geniuses of the movement and I think the best analyst of the Obama era So now I guess I'll be the best analyst of the Hillary era too because as you know I'm a pessimist on everything which means that I'm always right eventually And so I think that Hillary Clinton will probably be the next president which makes me want to vomit and never stop vomiting
	But that also means that Dinesh is going to be vital in sort of exposing what the Hillary era is all about.
	So Dinesh, thanks so much for coming on.
	Really appreciate it.
	It's good to be here.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And to all the people who are watching on Facebook Live, Dinesh D'Souza, obviously.
	Okay, so let's talk about Hillary's America.
	So this comes out July 22nd.
	Do you think that, you obviously analyzed President Obama through the perspective of his anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist background.
	Which is a deeply ideologically rooted background.
	Do you think that Hillary is an ideological animal or is she just driven for her own self-aggrandizement or both?
	I think that Hillary is driven by a kind of gangsterism, and by that I mean self-aggrandizement, not just in terms of money, but power and control.
	This is a woman who would enjoy having a kind of mob boss rule over the United States.
	Now, there's a gangsterism, as you know, in Obama, but it's different.
	I think with Obama it's a gangsterism of means.
	So Obama has ideological goals.
	Shrink America's wealth and power.
	He's willing to skirt around the law, the immigration law, the Defense of Marriage Act, welfare reform, even Obamacare is selectively implemented.
	That's the gangsterism of means.
	But I think with Hillary, you have a gangsterism of means and of ends.
	That makes her different.
	Okay, so does that mean that she's going to be better or worse in terms of America?
	Because Obama, in my opinion, is the worst president in the history of the country.
	The only one who even comes close is James Buchanan.
	If that's true, do you think it's better that she's non-ideologically gangsterish?
	I mean, if she's only out for herself, then presumably she's corrupt.
	Maybe we can pay her off or something.
	Well, this is it, actually.
	You know, Plutarch has an essay on flattery, and he actually talks about how you can use flattery with a tyrant to basically make him feel good about himself and temper his appetites.
	Look, I think that would work with Bill Clinton.
	If you look at Bill and Hillary, they're both gangsterish.
	And they've been gangsters together, sort of Bonnie and Clyde, if you will.
	But in this case, Bonnie, namely Bill, has a more circumscribed set of ambitions.
	He's more limited.
	If you kowtow to Bill, if you give him the biggest office, if you give him women to service him and so on, he's happy.
	That's it.
	That's all he wants.
	Hillary is not like that.
	Hillary's ambitions, I think, are much more totalitarian, if I may use that word, more tyrannical.
	She actually enjoys sort of having other people under her thumb.
	She's not content with the kind of normal human satisfactions that, say, Bill would be.
	She has a totally different agenda.
	She's scarier, in my view, than even Obama.
	So where do you think this springs from, this sort of totalitarian ambition of Hillary Clinton's, this corruption?
	Well, here's an interesting thing.
	When we talk about Alinsky, now Alinsky is a sort of interesting mentor of both Obama and Hillary, but Obama never knew Alinsky.
	Obama kept going back to Chicago, he kept hearing about Alinsky, but he studied under the Alinskyites.
	Hillary met Alinsky in high school and then brought him to Wellesley, wrote a thesis on him.
	Now, Elinsky, we always talk about Elinsky.
	He was a radical and he was a leftist, but he was also a kind of a gangster-ish guy.
	He was a thief.
	He was a petty thief on the streets of Chicago.
	When he was in college, he said he figured out all these rackets for how he could eat for free and he would hold seminars on how you could eat for free.
	And then later, he hung out with the 42nd Street Gang and the Capone Gang.
	And then he says, I took all these lessons about extortion and I applied them to politics.
	You know, now, but interestingly, Hillary had a big fight with Alinsky.
	And Alinsky told Hillary, basically, Hillary, you got to join me from the outside.
	We will push, push, push and get power.
	And Hillary told Alinsky, no, Alinsky, you're wrong.
	We will take over the government, use the apparatus of government to push from the inside.
	So this is, I think, where Hillary is going now.
	Hillary got a whiff of this as Secretary of State, where she took the kind of local level corruption that we're used to, Tammany Hall, the Daily Racket in Chicago, and took it to the level of renting out American foreign policy.
	I mean, who's done that before?
	Nobody.
	But even that is one step short of being in the White House, when you basically have innumerable SWAT teams at your disposal.
	You have an unbelievable military apparatus of power that you can deploy, in this case, against your own citizens.
	It's almost terrifying to contemplate.
	So what do you think her priorities are going to be as president?
	I mean, we talk about personal self-aggrandizement, but she obviously has political priorities, too.
	I mean, there have been demagogues from the right.
	Presumably, she'll be a demagogue from the left.
	So what are her top priorities, do you think?
	Well, I think she's gonna, and I think Obama sees this, I mean, there was no love lost between the Clintons and Obamas, but I think Obama decided at the end of the day, you know, sort of, Hillary is my, sort of, successor godfather.
	If you're gonna have the godfather ceremony, it's gotta be Hillary.
	Can't be Biden.
	It's not gonna be, you know, Bernie Sanders, Rip Van Winkle, who just got off his neighbor's couch after a 20-year nap, you know.
	It's gonna have to be someone as tough as, you know, Hillary's tenacious.
	She's nothing if not tenacious.
	This is a woman who puts her head down and marches, and you have to bludgeon her to the ground and sit on her, otherwise she's going to keep going.
	And Obama sees that and he goes, you know, that's what I want.
	So I think for Obama, ideology is the goal.
	Hillary likes the ideology because the ideology supplies her with the power.
	In other words, the degree the government has control over the education industry, the healthcare industry, the energy industry, that allows Hillary to tell everybody what to do.
	Right, so it's a vehicle for her, basically.
	Right.
	Okay, so that being the case, let's assume that Hillary wins.
	Is there anyone who can even stop her at that point?
	Because the executive branch has become so incredibly powerful over the course of the last hundred years.
	Can Congress do anything to stop her if she's the president of the United States?
	And if not, What I'm seeing and what I'm unfortunately going into a little bit of Nostradamus mode, what I'm seeing here is states beginning to resist the federal government and the real possibility of things getting very ugly in this country pretty quickly.
	I mean, we might be talking about the case for peaceful secession.
	Look, here's the thing.
	There are times when there are incidents in American politics that wake people up.
	Before the Civil War, it was John Brown.
	Not just John Brown, the caning by Preston Brooks of Sumner on the Senate floor.
	This told the North that you couldn't deal with the South, that things were out of hand and that you had to go to sterner measures.
	These Republicans have been so sluggish and lethargic.
	And Hillary is meanwhile emboldened.
	Every time she beats the posse, so to speak, in this latest vindication, the FBI, she's like, I did it again!
	So it licenses her and it tells her, I can get away with anything.
	And so this is a woman now empowered and unleashed, I think, in a way that we need to take notice of.
	So Hillary's America is the name of the movie, and it's not just about Hillary.
	It's also about the Democratic Party and its rather nefarious history.
	So how deeply do you delve into the history of the Democratic Party?
	Why do you think it matters what Andrew Jackson did to what's happening 170 years later?
	Let's take that example because I think it's illuminating.
	So Andrew Jackson, now Andrew Jackson, there's a big debate about Andrew Jackson and his patriotism and so on and should he be on the $20 bill.
	Here's something interesting.
	While Jackson was conducting his sort of wars with the American Indians, there's a whole side of Jackson that is not well known.
	And Jackson basically would send in his own surveyors.
	Because he knew I'm going to be vacating all these acres of Indian land.
	And then he'd say, go survey the land and determine its value.
	Come tell me.
	They'd come tell him.
	And then he'd go to investors and say, guys, this land is going to be put up for sale in three months.
	Let's be first in there and put in our bids.
	And so Jackson went basically from dead broke To becoming one of the richest men in the United States, having a huge plantation.
	He had 150 slaves.
	And how did he afford that?
	He did that because he got rich off of politics.
	So here's my point.
	There's a straight line to be traced from the land stealing policies of Andrew Jackson right to the Clinton Foundation.
	In a sense, the modus operandi is not that different.
	Do you think there's any optimism for the future of the country when people like this are being elected?
	I mean, we've had eight years of Obama.
	The polls right now show that Hillary is beating Trump in virtually every poll except for Rasmussen.
	Is there any hope for a comeback here, or are people too dependent on a government this corrupt and this bloated?
	You know, I don't know the answer to that.
	I mean, as you know, I've been a writer and speaker most of my career.
	I've been a think tank guy at AEI and the Hoover Institution.
	The reason I'm going to make movies is I feel like this is a way to reach people.
	Not just reach more people, but reach people not just through the head, but through the heart.
	You were a little harsh on feelings.
	That's my shtick.
	You make up your mind by your feelings and your intellect reinforcing each other.
	And a movie can engage your eyes, your ears.
	It sort of pulls all your senses into it.
	And I believe you can walk out of a 90-minute film and, in a sense, be a little transformed on the inside.
	Now, we can get this movie to conservatives.
	We need to get the movie to independents and the kind of people who are on the fence.
	But one way to help us is to go see the movie early.
	It's a sort of dirty secret of movies that if a movie blows it out and does fantastically opening weekend, it explodes all over the country.
	And Hollywood watches it.
	And so, if you're planning to see this film, go opening weekend because you can put fuel in our rocket.
	Okay, so the movie comes out July 22nd and obviously that's right before the convention.
	What do you think is going to happen?
	You're going to be in Cleveland for the convention.
	We'll be in Cleveland for the Republican and then we'll be in Philadelphia the following week.
	We're opening the movie in between.
	You have good security.
	Yes, we do.
	To me, also being on the front line is part of the way I protect myself because if the producer and narrator of Hillary's America disappears, who's the main suspect?
	The point is that we're opening it because the Democrats will put on this big, preposterous narrative that they've been doing now for generations.
	We're the party of equal rights and civil rights and human rights.
	We're the party of the little guy and minorities.
	And of course, this is a big charade.
	And so it's great that we're opening this movie with a counter-narrative running right alongside their narrative in 1,500 theaters across the country.
	Well, hopefully it'll also provide—that counter-narrative is going to be very important because obviously the left is going to be hell-bent on focusing on anything and everything that Donald Trump says at the convention so that they can pick it apart, whether it's good or whether it's bad.
	And so having a concerted counter-narrative from somebody who's a good—an articulate spokesperson for conservatism is definitely going to be worthwhile.
	So Hillary's America is the name of the film.
	It's Hillary'sAmerica.com.
	It's Hillary's America, the movie.com.
	The movie.com.
	Okay, so you can check it out there.
	And it should be, and it's going into wide releases.
	You say 1,500 theaters across the country in just about a week and a half.
	So that should be really, really exciting.
	Is there going to be an accompanying book?
	Usually there's an accompanying book with these.
	Yeah, Regnery is publishing a book by me, same title.
	And the book has chapter and verse.
	I mean, people have seen the movie in previews, their jaws drop, and they go, is this really all true?
	And I'm like, yes, it is true, and it's all very well supported.
	I mean, this is a genius, the intellectual genius of the Democrats is they've taken all the things they did.
	And blame them on the South, or the Republicans, or America.
	America did this.
	America did that.
	No, America didn't do it.
	You did it.
	If America did it, we're still going on.
	But obviously there were some Americans that stopped it.
	Right?
	So one group of Americans did these things.
	Slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, lynching, forced sterilization, the internment of the Japanese.
	I could go on.
	You've got this huge sorted list of crimes.
	And the Democratic Party is deeply implicated in the worst horrors of American history.
	A story that is simply left out of our textbooks.
	What do you think is the through line for the Democratic Party there?
	Because what they would argue is, oh, we repudiated all of our racism back in the 1960s with the Civil Rights Act, and we repudiated slavery in the 1960s based on the Civil Rights Act, and we've repudiated our various totalitarian tendencies because we're so tolerant and open about everybody and everything.
	Do you think there's been any change in the Democratic Party?
	Or what unifies the ideology that undergirds all of those activities?
	Well, first of all, I'd say two things about that.
	First of all, if you look at the civil rights legislation, not just the Civil Rights Act of 64, but the Voting Rights Act of 65, the Fair Housing Bill of 68, more Republicans proportionally voted for those things than Democrats.
	If the Democratic Party was the only party in America, and there were no Republicans in the House or the Senate, none of those bills would have passed.
	The main opposition to all that civil rights legislation came from Democrats.
	So, those are three significant facts about the Civil Rights Bill.
	Now, the Democrats have, in a way, changed their racket.
	They haven't changed who they are, but they've changed the way they go about things.
	Remarkably, what they've done, and you alluded to this a little bit earlier, they have recreated the plantation in the urban areas.
	Not just for blacks, by the way.
	You have, true, you have ghettos and urban plantations.
	You have reservations for the Indians.
	You have ghettos, barrios, and slums for immigrants and Hispanics.
	And all these areas, as you said earlier, they've been run by Democrats for 50 years.
	Democratic mayors, Democratic superintendents, Democratic this, Democratic that, and And if you look at the life over there, and then look at life on the old plantation, think about it.
	There's a kind of chilling similarity.
	Ramshackle housing, high rates of crime, the family structure in disarray, illegitimacy is a way of life.
	Everyone is sort of provided for.
	Even under slavery, if you got sick, they called a doctor.
	So everyone is provided for, but nobody gets ahead.
	It's sort of a school from which no one ever graduates.
	And the Democrats have it, and they have it under their control, and it works for them politically.
	And so, in a way, you can even find interesting similarities between the old John Calhoun, slavery is a positive good, slavery is good for the slave.
	And you look at the justifications now for the misery of the inner city, for which the Democrats won't take responsibility.
	There's a kind of beautiful way in which all of this comes together, and I think it's gonna get people thinking.
	There's an intellectual content to this movie that's gonna be arresting.
	So as we say, it's Hillary's America, it's coming out July 22nd.
	You should take not only your family and friends, you should try and find an independent and drag them there.
	And if you can find a Democrat and drag them there, first of all, don't be friends with them.
	But if you're going to be friends with Democrats, find a Democrat to be friends with and drag them to see Dinesh's new film.
	It's opening in wide release, 1,500 theaters, and I'm sure that it's going to blow out the box offices the last couple have.
	So, Dinesh, thanks so much for stopping by.
	It's really wonderful to see you.
	My pleasure.
	And we'll see you at the premiere night, hopefully.
	Look forward to it.
	That'll be a lot of fun.
	Okay, folks, so that comes to the end of our Facebook Live here.
	If you want to watch more, go to dailywired.com, and that's where you can subscribe to our podcast.
	You can also download the rest at iTunes and SoundCloud.
	And we're going to be talking a lot more about Dallas very shortly.
	We're going to talk about Republican response to Dallas and all the rest.
	So go over to dailywired.com right now.
	You can watch the rest, subscribe, and pass $8 a month.
	So, back to the story on Dallas.
	So, it's not just Democrats who have been trotting out this false narrative about Dallas.
	right now.
	It's sad, but they'll be okay.
	But only if you pay, otherwise we'll just beat them.
	So that's the way this works.
	Okay, so back to the story on Dallas.
	So it's not just Democrats who have been trotting out this false narrative about Dallas.
	It was gun control, we don't know the motive, we don't know what was behind all of this.
	They've been ripping on cops for generations, right?
	Cops are racist.
	Cops are terrible.
	Cops are awful.
	And then as soon as something bad happens to cops, oh, well, no, cops are wonderful.
	We love cops.
	Cops are just the best people on earth.
	They're just terrific all the way through.
	There's this, the police chief in Dallas, the Dallas police chief.
	What we're doing, what we're trying to accomplish here is above challenging.
	spoke to the media today and he talked about what cops are asked to do.
	This is clip 23.
	What cops are asked to do in our society.
	And he makes his name is David Brown.
	He makes some points that I think are well worth making.
	If you can't see him, he's a black guy.
	And here's what he says about the job of cops.
	What we're doing, what we're trying to accomplish here is above challenging.
	It is we're asking cops to do too much in this country.
	We are.
	We're just asking us to do too much.
	Every societal failure, we put it off on the cops to solve.
	Not enough mental health funding.
	Let the cops handle it.
	Not enough drug addiction funding.
	Let's give it to the cops.
	Here in Dallas, we've got a loose dog problem.
	Let's have the cops chase loose dogs.
	Schools failed.
	Give it to the cops.
	70% of the African-American community is being raised by single women.
	Let's give it to the cops to solve that as well.
	That's too much to ask.
	Policing was never meant to solve all those problems.
	And I just ask for other parts of our democracy, along with the free press, to help us.
	To help us and not put that burden all on law enforcement to resolve.
	Okay, and that's exactly right.
	That's exactly right.
	Every problem gets thrust on the cops, and then when things go wrong, it's all the cops' fault.
	You overburden the cops, and you shouldn't be surprised when things go dramatically wrong, because it turns out that the cops are human beings, too.
	This new New York Times study that talks about the rates of violence that cops use against particular people, they're ignoring a couple of pertinent facts.
	One is, if you're under-policed, if you're understaffed in high-crime areas, don't you think that people are going to be more aggressive with people they suspect of having committed crimes?
	With suspects?
	Think about it this way, okay?
	Spike Lee calls Chicago Chi-Rack, right?
	He made a whole movie called Chi-Rack about how Chicago is just like Iraq.
	Okay, think about the soldiers in Iraq.
	When they go into a town, knowing that that town has high rates of violence, that they're probably members of the enemy in that town.
	When we're talking about the enemy domestically, we're talking about criminals.
	When you know there are high rates of enemy activity in a particular area, do you think that the soldiers in those situations are going around on high alert, or are they going around just like they would in the middle of the military base?
	Are they on high alert or are they not?
	Think about yourself.
	Think, you're a cop for a second.
	Or you're a soldier.
	And you're going into an area where there's high levels of enemy activity.
	And someone pops out of the woodwork, and you suspect there's something wrong.
	Do you go over and question them slowly?
	Or are you afraid someone's gonna pop around the corner?
	Are you afraid that maybe they're lying to you?
	Do you push them up against a wall?
	Right?
	This is, the statistics that show a disproportionate amount Of kind of low-level abuse by cops against black people.
	The idea they're using handcuffs more often or pushing with hands more often.
	Isn't that more a reflection of the crime in the communities?
	My guess is that if you did the same study with regard to high crime areas in West Virginia, you would find that high crime areas always have more aggressive cop tactics being used.
	Because if you talk to cops, they'll tell you this is how they operate.
	Of course they're more aggressive.
	They have to be more aggressive to survive and come home at the end of the day.
	And that doesn't mean that it's always pretty and it doesn't mean that it's always right.
	But it does mean that you have to have a little more sympathy for cops than assuming that they're automatons and the reason they're doing this is because they see a black face.
	As opposed to they're just in a high-crime area and they're reacting like most human beings would react in a high-crime area.
	Which, by the way, is why black officers also do the same sorts of stuff.
	It's not because of this wall of blue.
	It's because that's their job.
	Their job is the same as the white guy's job in that situation.
	I mean, is the idea that black people are just as racist as white people as soon as they put on that uniform?
	This is really unsustainable stuff.
	But the amount of pressure on the cops doesn't let up.
	Jake Tapper, he did an interview with this police chief, and he's asking him, did you really have to shoot that bad guy?
	Did you really have to kill that bad guy by using a bomb robot?
	Did you really have to do all that?
	It's just, this is the kind of pressure you put on cops, and then you're surprised when people don't want to be cops, or police, or go into dangerous areas?
	What insanity.
	I want to just ask briefly about the decision to send in this bomb robot, which you said that you would make the same decision.
	Again, as you know, it's prompted a lot of discussion among law enforcement officials about whether or not there should be some sort of discussion nationwide about the use of this type of robot.
	Just to ask a question about this.
	Could something else have been used other than a bomb that would have killed the shooter?
	Obviously, in a situation like that, law enforcement has every right and ability to take out the shooter any way he can.
	But could, for instance, some sort of riot gas been used instead of something that killed the gunman?
	I just don't give much quarter to critics who ask these types of questions from the comforts and safety away from the incident.
	You have to be on the ground and try and determine.
	I've got former SWAT experience here in Dallas and you have to trust your people to make the calls necessary to save their lives.
	It's their lives that are at stake.
	Uh, not these critics lives who are in the comforts of their homes or offices.
	So, you know, that's not worth my time to debate at this point.
	We believe that we saved lives by making this decision.
	And, you know, again, I appreciate critics, but they're not on the ground and their lives are not being put at risk by debating what tactics to take.
	And I'll leave that to them.
	And of course, that's exactly true.
	That's exactly right.
	And the amount of pressure that these cops are under is insane.
	Now, that hasn't stopped Republicans from jumping on the stupid bandwagon, because this is what Republicans do.
	Republicans think the reason they're losing is because they're seen as unfeeling.
	I think the reason Republicans are losing is because they're pansies.
	That's my general perspective, is that Republicans, it's not they look unfeeling, it's that they look manipulative and they look weak.
	So, Newt Gingrich and Marco Rubio both came over and they started mirroring over the weekend Black Lives Matter talking points.
	Here's Senator Marco Rubio, who's running for re-election in Florida now, speaking in the aftermath of both the Dallas shootings as well as the killings of Philando Castile and Elton Sterling in Louisiana.
	Here's Rubio.
	...video the death of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile and then last night we witnessed the coordinated and cowardly ambush and the assassination of five brave Dallas police officers.
	Those of us who are not African-American will never fully understand the experience of being black in America but we should all understand why our fellow Americans in the black community are angry at the images of an African-American man with no criminal record who was pulled over for a busted taillight Slumped in his car seat and dying while his four-year-old daughter watches from the backseat.
	All of us should be troubled by these images and all of us need to acknowledge that this is about more than just one or two recent incidents.
	Despite decades of progress on many fronts, millions of our fellow Americans feel that they are treated differently because of the color of their skin.
	And after seeing videos like the one this week, they are scared that the next time they get pulled over One wrong move could be the last thing they do.
	We also need to confront it by recognizing that our law enforcement officers are human beings who every day see and interact with the worst of our society.
	They deal with tragedy and violence and criminality.
	Continues along these lines now praising the cops.
	So first of all, he says, what he said there that's relevant is he says, those of us who are not African-American will never fully understand the experience of being black in America.
	We have to acknowledge this is about more than just one or two recent incidents.
	And then he talks about feelings, right?
	Then he says, how black Americans feel is a reality we cannot and should not ignore.
	Newt Gingrich says the same thing.
	He says, if you are a normal white American, the truth is you don't understand being black in America.
	You instinctively underestimate the level of discrimination and the level of additional risk.
	Black Lives Matter would in fact try to be a corrective, which initially white people reject because it's not in their worlds.
	And the only reason that we don't agree with Black Lives Matter is because we're white.
	According to Newt Gingrich, the whitest person who ever walked the planet.
	Marco Rubio there saying, if we're not black we can't understand what it's like to be black.
	I hate this argument.
	The reason I hate this argument is because it's the end of politics.
	This is the same argument as, you can't talk about abortion because you're not a woman.
	Or you can't talk about Israel because you're not a Jew.
	Or you can't talk about any policy because you're not a member of the subgroup that is most affected by that policy.
	We're human beings.
	I can look at that Philando Castile video, and I did last week, and talk about how horrifying that was, and it was a horrifying video.
	I can talk about how Walter Scott was a racist incident, and looked like a racist incident from the very beginning.
	I can talk about all those things.
	Because I'm a human being, and you're a human being too, and you have the capacity to sympathize with other human beings.
	You do.
	And you have the capacity to determine what's good policy.
	But if we start breaking down into these groups, where you say, I feel discriminated against, and I say, well, I need to see evidence of the discrimination, and you say, you just don't get it because you're not black, we've now moved beyond the realm of facts, we've moved beyond the realm of evidence, into the realm of feelings.
	And once we've moved into the realm of feelings, and we don't talk about whether the feelings are justified or not, all feelings are justified in this view.
	Right?
	If you feel bad, we have to do something about this.
	Hey, this is the perspective of a two-year-old.
	I feel bad, therefore you have to do something about this.
	It's not that I'm wrong to feel bad.
	It's not that I have to look at the justification for my feeling and examine whether I'm right or wrong to feel bad.
	My feelings are paramount.
	Feelings are the only thing that matters.
	President Obama says the same thing.
	If black people feel that there's discrimination, well, we have to treat that as though it's the same as discrimination.
	Except, how do you do that?
	You can't.
	One of the basic rules in life, in any relationship, you cannot be responsible for another person's feelings.
	All you can do is behave well.
	You can't be responsible for somebody else's feelings.
	If you act right, and somebody is offended by that, that's not your responsibility.
	If you tell truth, and somebody feels bad about that, that ain't your problem.
	If I say to my wife, if I'm nice and polite and I behave well to my wife, and she's in a bad mood anyway, It's not my fault.
	I can try to bring her out of that bad mood because I care about her, but it doesn't mean that I've done something wrong.
	The implication for all these people is, if there's a wide group of Americans who feel they're being victimized by the cops, we have to act as though they're being victimized by the cops without evidence.
	Remember, Obama said in that early clip that we played, he didn't know what happened in these two shootings.
	It didn't matter.
	Because people feel bad, that means that something has to happen.
	Well, here's the problem.
	It's a catch-22 now.
	Nothing can happen to change feelings.
	What could happen that could change feelings?
	What?
	Not arrest any black people anymore?
	Even if they commit crimes?
	Presumably that's the solution.
	Since Obama cited all of these racial statistics showing that there are proportionally more blacks than whites in prison, what are we supposed to do?
	Just pretend that blacks aren't committing more murders on a proportional level than whites?
	50% of all murders in the United States are committed by young black men.
	Of all of them?
	Okay, that's like 7% of the population committing somewhere between 40 and 50% of all murders in the society.
	Are we supposed to let everybody go because it needs to be 7%?
	Is that the solution?
	Is the solution that we only have black cops police black communities?
	Or is that racism?
	And how's that going to work if you can't recruit enough black cops because they're sick of being targeted as Uncle Toms if they police their own communities?
	And what happens then?
	Then they blame the police department for not putting enough cops in the inner city when they can't recruit?
	What happens if those black cops act exactly like the white cops do?
	Do they just claim that they've been brought into this evil white system that's going to target people?
	Here's the truth.
	No one wants to talk solutions because solutions are uncomfortable.
	Solutions are testable in the marketplace.
	If you propose a solution and you try it and it fails, you're held responsible for that.
	What you're never held responsible for politically is saying, your feelings matter to me.
	Your feelings are justified.
	Marco Rubio won't lose his job because he says your feelings are justified.
	He will lose his job if he says, we need more cops in the inner city community, and there are more cops in the inner city community, and all that happens is racial conflict goes up, right?
	You propose a solution, now it can be held responsible.
	Democrats know this, and that's why they propose feelings for the last 50 years in the inner city.
	Instead of saying, you know what'd solve this?
	Less run-ins with the cops.
	More cops, get married, get a job.
	Instead of doing that, which would actually be a testable hypothesis requiring something of their voters, instead they say, the reason you feel bad about your life is because there's a big bad guy out to get you, the cops.
	There's a big bad guy out to get you.
	That evil racist American DNA is out to get you.
	These buzzwords get black people killed.
	You want to know why the inner cities are poor?
	It's not because businesses hate black people.
	It's because businesses don't want to invest in a place that could get burned down in three years in a race riot.
	Or that's going to be routinely looted.
	Or routinely robbed.
	That's why businesses are not moving into Compton.
	I mean, this is one of the things that was hilarious.
	When they did Straight Outta Compton, which was supposed to be about black liberation, one of the ironic stories is there's not a single movie theater in Compton.
	You couldn't even watch it.
	Why?
	Because no movie theater in their right mind would open a theater in Compton.
	Because there's too much crime.
	People would try to bring guns into the movie theater.
	People would presumably be committing crimes at the movie theater.
	They didn't open a theater there because they can't sustain it.
	You want a sustainable community economically?
	You need to have first a sustainable community in terms of law and order.
	You want a sustainable community in terms of law and order, you need cops in there.
	You want cops in there?
	You're gonna have to make sure that you stop ripping on the cops every time they go in for an arrest.
	You can't label the cops the bad guy and then expect them to risk their lives on a regular basis to police petty crime in bad areas.
	They're not going to do it.
	And that's why you're seeing crime escalate over the last two, three years.
	Heather McDonnell calls it the Ferguson effect, and she's exactly right.
	It is the effect of Ferguson, but it's more than that.
	It's an uptick that President Obama has pushed that has a real consequence.
	So you got Gingrich and Rubio now pushing this feelings crap too, because they think it's going to get them elected.
	I have to give all credit to Rudy Giuliani here.
	Rudy Giuliani is the former mayor of New York, one of the few guys speaking truth to power on this particular subject.
	He obviously implemented stop-and-frisk in New York.
	He implemented all these theories of more policing, more policing of low-level crime, ensuring that there isn't a lawlessness that runs throughout New York City, which by the way is now returning.
	Here's Rudy Giuliani talking about the Black Lives Matter movement.
	You said that the Black Lives Matter movement has put a target on the back of police officers.
	When members of the African American community see videos as they have this week, they feel like there is a target on young black men.
	Explain your response about how they put a target on police officers, how that can match up when people see these videos.
	Well, when they talk about killing police officers.
	But they don't.
	Well, they sure do.
	They sing rap songs about killing police officers, and they talk about killing police officers, and they yell it out at their rallies, and the police officers hear it.
	But Mr. Mayor, what you seem to be doing is taking... Please, please let me finish.
	And when you say black lives matter, that's inherently racist.
	Well I think there are... Black lives matter, white lives matter, Asian lives matter, Hispanic lives matter.
	That's anti-american and it's racist.
	Of course black lives matter and they matter greatly but when you focus in on one percent of less than one percent of the murder that's going on in America and you make it a national thing and all of you in the media make it much bigger than the A black kid who's getting killed in Chicago every 14 hours, you create a disproportion.
	The police understand it, and it puts a target on their back.
	Every cop in America will tell you that if you ask them.
	And that, of course, is exactly right.
	But the media don't care about that.
	You notice that the media have been equating the killings in Louisiana and Minnesota of these black guys by the cops.
	They've actually equated that with the guy who was targeting police officers.
	Only one problem.
	There's no evidence that these guys were targeted, right?
	The police officers were targeted.
	They were specifically targeted because they were white cops.
	There's no evidence that these white cops, one of them wasn't even white, one's a Latino, right?
	Or that they were, the one in Minnesota's a Latino guy.
	That they were out there, and they went out there that morning, I'm gonna kill a black guy.
	This guy went out there that morning and thought, I'm gonna kill some white cops.
	I'm gonna go out there, I'm gonna kill some white cops.
	And in Tennessee, and in Georgia, and in Missouri, and in St.
	Paul, where there were a bunch of Black Lives Matter protesters, who as I said before, were throwing cinder blocks at the cops, one of whom broke his vertebrae.
	Okay, so this moral equivalence is absolute nonsense.
	Fact and fiction are not the same thing just because you feel the same way about them.
	They're not.
	And the fact that people refuse to acknowledge this, this is why we have such a problem in the country.
	Giuliani continued, he says that there's obviously a concerted effort to paint our police officers as brutal and racist.
	Whenever one police officer is killed, it's like a shot at all of us because they're the people who protect us.
	They're the people who put their lives on the line every day they get dressed up and they might not come home that night and you and I get dressed up and you know they protect us and our children and our grandchildren and to lose so many of them at once in a slaughter like that has to indicate there's something seriously wrong with the way we're presenting the police in the United States.
	There's a concerted effort to paint our police officers as brutal and racist.
	And the simple fact is, they are not.
	Our police officers are us.
	They come from us.
	They're the people who protect us.
	And that's exactly right.
	That's exactly right.
	But it doesn't matter.
	The left has an agenda and the agenda must be pressed forward no matter what.
	I love that the leftists are trying to find somebody to blame other than themselves for these cops being shot because they know it's a bad story for them.
	So naturally, they're blaming Donald Trump because they're all-purpose blaming.
	Now, I think Donald Trump is terrible, as you know, but Donald Trump is not to blame for cops getting shot in Dallas by an anti-white, black terrorist.
	That has nothing to do with Donald Trump.
	In fact, Donald Trump's statement on the police shootings is actually pretty good.
	Here's what Donald Trump had to say about the police shootings.
	The shooting of the 12 police officers in Dallas, Texas has shaken the soul of our nation.
	Just a few weeks ago, I met with many of the men and women in the Dallas police force during my visit to Texas.
	They're not just police officers.
	They're mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, sons and daughters.
	And they're all on my mind today.
	They're on everybody's mind.
	A brutal attack on our police force is an attack on our country and an attack on our families.
	I stand in solidarity with law enforcement, which we must remember is the force between civilization and total chaos.
	Every American has the right to live in safety and peace.
	So he's right.
	So this is all good.
	This is all good.
	But it doesn't matter.
	The left is blaming him anyway.
	The left is going after him anyway.
	So here is Jesse Jackson blaming Donald Trump for what happened.
	You have said that you think Donald Trump, at least in part, has contributed to a very divisive mood in this country.
	You called part of that an anti-black mood.
	I want to play a little bit of what he said in response to the shootings and events of the last few days and then get your reaction.
	A brutal attack on our police force is an attack on our country and an attack on our families.
	The deaths of Alton Sterling in Louisiana and Philando Castile in Minnesota also make clear how much more work we have to do to make every American feel that their safety is protected.
	Reverend, what do you make of his remarks?
	Well, those are significant remarks, but I submit to you that when you do the birther movement on the president, which is a dog whistle for kind of anti-black, the anti-Mexican, the deportation of 15 million people, of families, the disruption, anti-Muslim, that kind of rhetoric has helped to seed these clouds.
	I hope that Mr. Trump will maintain the level of rhetoric that we just now heard.
	Okay, so basically, if we had subtitles, what he would be saying is that this seeded the clouds, seeded the clouds for the sort of attacks that you saw in Dallas.
	But what you never see is the Democrats saying that Hillary Clinton seeds the clouds for these sort of attacks.
	So, for example, here's Hillary Clinton talking about, the real problem here is that white people just don't understand black people well enough.
	Uh, but I will certainly take a hard look about what more we can do because what I'm interested in is bringing our country together, not deepening the divides.
	And I want white people to understand how African-Americans feel every day.
	The anxiety and fear, particularly sending off their children, particularly young men, not knowing what's going to happen to them.
	I want people to put themselves in the shoes of police officers and their families who get up every day and go off and do a very dangerous job.
	You know, we need to start looking at each other as fellow Americans.
	And we need to be listening and working together to try to stem the violence, the hatred, the divisive rhetoric.
	And yes, I'm going to do my best to try to bring that about in my campaign and then in the White House, working on specific ways to try to create, you know, more understanding.
	So Hillary Clinton does this routine now where white people just need to just need to look more and more closely at the experience of black people.
	How about this?
	How about this?
	We'll recognize, when you show us evidence of officers doing bad things, that they should go to jail, and that bad things should happen when they do bad things.
	And you recognize that evidence would be a good baseline standard of behavior.
	How about that?
	How about we start with some facts and some evidence?
	I don't understand why this is foreign.
	You say facts and evidence, and the left looks at you as though you're a racist now.
	That's the way this works.
	If you cite a fact, you are a racist.
	If you say, how about some evidence?
	You're a racist.
	If you don't buy into the narrative that they're pushing forward, you're a racist.
	How the conversation has turned from, in the space of a week, has turned from two cases where it's unclear that the shoots were bad in the first place, to we don't know if the shoots are racist, but we're going to claim that all the cops are basically racist, to the cops getting shot, to we don't know what happened.
	I mean, what happened here?
	I mean, clearly what should have happened is we should have understood black people better.
	It's amazing, the level of dominance by the left of the narrative is incredible and utterly incoherent and destined to get more black people killed.
	Because I promise you, cops are not going to join the force, they're not going to go into bad areas, they're not going to police crime, they're going to think to themselves, do I really feel like losing my career or my life or my health today based on trying to help a group of people who the media say hate me and want to kill me?
	And who they say I make them feel uncomfortable?
	And then the natural human response to that by cop, by anybody else would be, fine, screw it.
	Do it yourself.
	Right?
	If you have an option, do it yourself.
	I'm not going to go in there for a bunch of people who hate me and try and save them from themselves.
	I mean, that's their job.
	But less people are going to be taking up that job, especially knowing that their own police chiefs will undermine them.
	Thank God for this Dallas police chief who's not doing that.
	He's great.
	All right.
	Thing I like, and then a couple of things that I hate really quickly.
	So, this week we're going to do surprise endings.
	So surprise endings in movies, because hopefully there will be a surprise ending at the Republican National Convention.
	We don't have time to talk too much about that.
	We'll talk about that, I'm sure, tomorrow a little bit more, but there is a movement afoot to stop Trump at the convention.
	It takes 28 votes in the Rules Committee to refer out for a minority report, which would mean that now a majority of the delegates voting in favor of unbinding the delegates means that none of the primaries basically counted and we have a brand new primary at the convention.
	One of the people who's behind that movement told us over the weekend at the Daily Wire that they have the votes to make that happen, so it could get really, really interesting.
	So, surprise endings!
	So, and by the way, if you actually want to beat Hillary Clinton, you should be in favor of the surprise ending because he's getting killed in the polls, folks.
	I mean, he's down four in Nevada.
	It's bad.
	Okay, so, surprise endings.
	If you haven't seen The Sting, I was shocked that Andrew Clavin did a whole week of Paul Newman films, and he missed what I think is Paul Newman's best performance, and that is in The Sting, this one best picture in 1973, maybe?
	And it's a really, it's a fun, terrific film.
	Paul Newman, Robert Redford, great movie.
	Chicago was the place to be in 1936.
	In those days, the Big Con was a dying art.
	Until a first-class grifter on the lam from the FBI and a young gaffer from Joliet joined forces to con the Big Mic.
	He's not as tough as he thinks.
	Neither are we.
	Paul Newman as Henry Gondorf.
	There wasn't a con he couldn't run.
	And there wasn't a sucker he couldn't gaff.
	Robert Redford is Johnny Hooker, a young drifter with plenty of moxie.
	Three grand on the rent, Jimmy.
	But he's a sucker for lady luck.
	Tough luck, kid.
	And a sap for lady love.
	Thanks for the big evening, Hooker.
	Next time you want to spend 50 bucks on me, mail it.
	Robert Shaw is the mark.
	In the underworld, he's the big mick.
	Name's Lolligan.
	It's a great movie.
	You don't have to play the whole preview.
	It's terrific.
	It's a really, really fun movie.
	If you haven't seen it, it's got a great ending.
	Robert Shaw is one of the great underrated actors in the history of film.
	I love Robert Shaw.
	He's great in Jaws.
	He's great in this.
	And it's a great cast.
	It's a really, really fun movie.
	Okay.
	Things I Hate.
	They're now remaking the Republican National Platform to try and mirror Trumpism, which is what I have suggested is the problem this entire time, right?
	Was that we were all going to move our principles in order to make room for Donald Trump.
	So now they're saying a couple of things.
	One, they're saying that we're going to say that trade deals are great, but they have to be fair trade deals that are negotiated in the smartest way, right?
	So they're just going to start quoting Trump's idiotic speeches now and pretend that this is actual policy.
	That's one thing.
	Second, I love this.
	This is according to The Hill today.
	You ready?
	Okay.
	This is not a joke.
	This is not a parody.
	This is real.
	Quote.
	Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump recently spoke with Caitlyn Jenner, ahead of what is likely to be a contentious debate over transgender issues in the party's platform.
	The call between the former Olympic decathlete and the billionaire came days after Trump met with hundreds of religious conservatives, according to the New York Times.
	Delegates are expected to debate on Monday whether to adopt a provision defending laws that prevent transgender men and women from using the public restroom of their choice.
	So, we've got Donald Trump calling up Caitlyn Jenner to coordinate between the two of them how they will talk about transgender bathrooms in America.
	Yes, reality TV now runs our lives because we are a bunch of morons.
	So that is a thing that I hate.
	I mean, like, we've now moved through the looking glass.
	We've completely moved through the looking glass.
	It's all over, gang.
	And final thing that I hate, DeRay McKesson is this Black Lives Matter provocateur.
	He does nothing for a living.
	He legitimately just goes around race-baiting for a living.
	He started off doing this in Ferguson when he was basically a no-name.
	Now he makes lots of money doing it.
	They allowed him to lecture at Yale University where he said that riots were a good thing.
	He did a lecture called In Defense of Riots.
	So he went down to Baton Rouge, Louisiana to protest over the Alton Sterling thing and he was quickly arrested because that's what he does.
	He gets himself arrested and then claims he's a victim.
	So here's a little tape of that.
	I think he's talking to me y'all.
	He said if he sees me in the road, I'm going to jail.
	- No, sir, you going to jail. - I think he's talking to me, y'all.
	But he said if you see me in the road, I'm going to jail.
	- You're already in the road.
	- There's a shoulder, there's no sidewalk, sir.
	- My guy said the police continue to just provoke people.
	- There's no sidewalk, sir.
	- Did you see me over here? - He's been flagged.
	He said, the loud shoes.
	Have you seen me in the road?
	Mind you, there's no sidewalk here.
	My shoes are pink.
	Show the line.
	Show the line.
	Show the curb.
	Show where you're walking so they know you're not walking in the street.
	There is no sidewalk.
	Watch the police.
	They are literally just provoking people.
	The police are literally provoking people.
	The police are saying you need to move away from the line, right?
	And they're not arresting a lot of people.
	Right?
	They're not arresting anybody.
	All these people are just walking along the shoulder of the road.
	Then the cops come and arrest DeRay because DeRay is hanging out illegally on the side of the road.
	Okay, so, first of all, you are not allowed legally to walk on the side of a freeway.
	You're not, right?
	If I decided to get up this morning and just go jogging on the side of the freeway, I'd be arrested.
	So DeRay gets arrested, and then he's a victim.
	So he goes down there specifically to get arrested, and then he can claim the cops are racist.
	Okay, first of all, I bet half the cops are black.
	Second of all, DeRay does nothing for anyone.
	I mean, DeRay's entire shtick is just getting famous off protesting against police brutality that in the case of Ferguson didn't exist, and in the case of Louisiana is still under dispute.
	This is the country that we've now made, and DeRay McKesson's a hero in it.
	He's consulted by the head of Twitter on every new change.
	Every new change on Twitter runs through DeRay McKesson.
	Amazing.
	Amazing.
	But this is where we go.
	When feelings trump facts, folks.
	When feelings trump facts, we have nothing in common anymore.
	Because your feelings are unique to you.
	No one else holds them.
	But the facts are held in common by everyone.
	So if we're going to share anything, we have to share the facts, since we can't share feelings.
	And if we reject facts in favor of feelings, the country is basically over.
	On that happy note, we'll be back tomorrow with plenty more of the country devolving into chaos and murder.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.

▲