All Episodes
Previous Next
June 16, 2017 - The Ben Shapiro Show
19:14
Ep. 321 - Can't We All Just Get Along?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
On Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security announced its official revocation of President Obama's executive amnesty for illegal immigrant parents.
According to the Associated Press, quote, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly formally revoked a policy memo that created the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans program.
The revocation came on the fifth anniversary of another effort that has protected hundreds of thousands of young immigrants from deportation.
In reality, Obama's DAPA program, Deferred Action for Parent Arrival program, never took effect.
The federal judge had stated, pointing out that Obama had exceeded his authority.
It's unclear whether Trump is actually going to begin deporting more illegal immigrant parents, especially since Trump administration has continued to fight back against deportation of so-called DREAMers.
Actually, In the exact same memo announcing the revocation of DAPA, the Homeland Security Secretary said the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals would remain in place, breaking a key campaign promise.
As Daniel Horowitz of Conservative Review pointed out last week, quote, Trump's DHS has issued almost 125,000 DACA cards per Obama's unlawful Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals order to illegal aliens through the second quarter of this fiscal year, January through March.
This surpasses the 122,000 level of amnesty cards issued During the final quarter of Obama's presidency, October 1st through December 31st, 2016, which means the Trump administration is not even slowing down the pace.
Just last week, Kelly assured Congress we are not, not, not targeting DACA registrants right now, and pled with Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
So, will the Trump administration actually begin keeping its commitment to begin deporting those Obama attempted to protect under DAPA?
It's difficult to tell.
That uncertainty is still a step up from the Obama administration's obvious unwillingness to consider deportation for entire classes of illegal immigrants.
And Trump's vagary has had some predictable results.
The number of people attempting to cross the border illegally has dropped dramatically.
But there is no question that the Trump administration's open position on DACA is a new, shocking development for a president who pledged widespread deportations of illegal immigrants as a key campaign promise.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
I want to talk a lot about what's going on with President Trump's tweeting.
I want to talk about what's going on with Eric.
And my dad is going to stop by for the mailbag in just a little while.
But first, I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at Indochino.
So Indochino is the place for custom men's suits.
There is nothing that makes a guy look better than being in a custom tailored suit.
Indochino.com makes that happen.
You can first of all visit their showroom.
I've been to their showroom.
They've actually helped me figure out What to wear.
They've shown what kind of fabrics work.
They've shown what the fit should look like.
Indochino.com.
You pick your fabric.
You choose your customizations from lapels to pleats to jacket linings and more.
You submit your measurements online or you can go to their store and they'll actually fit it for you.
A tailor does the work.
Or you can actually just be measured by your friends or family and you can send those measurements into Indochino and get the best looking suit you will ever have.
I actually just wore this suit on Fox News the other day.
It's that nice.
And right now if you go to Indochino.com and you use Shapiro at checkout, that's I-N-D-O-C-H-I-N-O.com right now, and you enter Shapiro at checkout, you can get any premium Indochino suit for just $379.
That is 50% off the regular price for a made-to-measure premium suit.
It's made from scratch, made just for you.
This is not an off-the-rack that they're tailoring.
This is made just for you.
Again, Indochino.com, Promo code Shapiro for any premium suit for just $379 and free shipping.
Let me tell you, it's the best buy you'll ever make when it comes to suits.
I mean, an off-the-rack suit can cost exactly the same amount of money, but it doesn't fit to you.
Indochino.com makes that happen.
Use that promo code, Ben, so that they know that we sent you.
Again, it's INDOCHINO.COM.
My favorite suit to wear.
Indochino.com.
Okay, so.
I want to talk a little bit, before we get to President Trump's Twitter, I want to talk about a problem that I see arising on the right.
And it's a mistake that's being made in response to the left being awful on issues of free speech.
The left has been awful on issues for free speech for years.
I should know when I speak on college campuses, I get protested.
There are sometimes riots.
I've been banned from college campuses.
And the left uses a particular logic when it comes to this.
The particular logic that the left uses when it comes to banning me is that words are violence.
Words prompt violence, therefore we can't have Shapiro here.
If Shapiro says that a man is a man and a woman is a woman, then that could prompt somebody to do something nasty to a transgender person, and therefore we have to ban Shapiro from campus.
This is sort of the perspective at DePaul.
If Shapiro says that Black Lives Matter is a negative movement that hurts black people, and he says that cops aren't deliberately murdering black people en masse, that hurts black people, black people feel bad, and not only do they feel bad, maybe it will prompt some violence against black people in some unspecified way, therefore we have to keep Shapiro Off of campus.
Now, typically, the right has responded to this nonsense with mockery, right?
We call them snowflakes.
We say this is microaggression culture.
It's a bunch of nonsense.
But now, because the left for so long has been blaming acts of violence, individual acts of violence, on the so-called toxic climate created by the right, now the right finally has its chance to do the same thing to the left, and some people are unwilling to forego the revenge in favor of the actual principle, which is actually dangerous.
are more interested in revenge on the left than you are in upholding a principle to prevent the left from winning, then you are doing something counterproductive.
So, in the aftermath of this Bernie Sanders-supporting, Trump-hating terrorist trying to shoot a bunch of congresspeople and succeeding, Steve Scalise is still in apparently critical condition in the hospital, there are a lot of people on the right who have been making the mistake of essentially claiming that rhetoric causes violence, and not only does rhetoric cause violence, it's leftist rhetoric.
And not just leftist violent rhetoric, which, okay, But leftist normal rhetoric, like stuff that exists in the realm of the normal, this is dangerous.
So I think that, you know, the natural tendency after a horrible terrorist incident like this occurs is for everybody to come together.
The problem is when the coming together is about civility and niceness, and then anytime somebody says something that is inflammatory or passionate about politics, you say, oh, shut that guy down, he might cause a nutcase to go and shoot somebody.
You're starting to see this happen.
Scott Pelly over at CBS News.
He says violence almost always begins with words.
This is going to be the new routine.
Later at a lunch for reporters, President Trump was asked whether he worried that that language would incite violence.
His pause indicated it had never crossed his mind.
And then he said, no, that doesn't worry me.
As children were taught, words will never hurt me, but when you think about it, violence almost always begins with words.
In Twitter world, we've come to believe that our first thought is our best thought.
It's past time for all of us, presidents, politicians, reporters, citizens, all of us, to pause to think again.
Okay, so you can see why the left is doing this, okay?
So the left is saying this, the left is doing this because they specifically are interested in pressing forward the, the right is uncivil, the right is terrible, how dare the right use the kind of language it's been using.
Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi did a joint interview yesterday at the congressional baseball game in which they did a little bit of the same routine.
How do you balance letting Republicans in your caucus speak their minds while also setting a role, being a role model, and saying that's too far, you've gone too far, don't say that, which happens sometimes in both your caucuses.
Sure, but I think all of us have a responsibility to watch our rhetoric, but we're passionate.
We believe passionately about our causes, about our issues, and we can do that without being vitriolic, without fomenting the kind of anger that's out there in the country.
So that's what leaders do, and that's what members of Congress have been coming upon them to Okay, that's all fine.
This is all fine.
This is all unified.
But here's what's happened.
The left has now turned to, okay, Trump's rhetoric is really dangerous.
It's going to get people killed, right?
Trump, the rhetoric, it's going to get people killed.
Here's Senator Richard Blumenthal, who is a radical leftist from Connecticut, making exactly this case.
We need to seize this moment and tone down the rhetoric.
I know that's easier said than done and part of the problem is that the president is continuing the very visceral and vehement attacks instead of saying, as my colleague Senator Rubio said, that he welcomes a swift result and a fair result to this investigation.
And again, it's amazing.
A leftist shoots up a Republican congressional baseball practice, and the response is clearly that the Republican rhetoric is the problem.
The Republican rhetoric.
And I can see why people on the right get angry at this, right?
Jeff Flake did some of the same stuff yesterday.
This is the senator from Arizona.
He says that, you know, Trump should stop calling people losers.
That's the real problem here.
When you say you want the president to lead, is there something specific you think he could do that would maybe be a positive jolt to the system?
Well, things that he could stop doing.
Referring to others in the other party as losers or using other language that just isn't becoming.
It's done on our side as well and certainly the President's opponents.
Okay, so the language police are here.
So here's how the right should respond to the language police.
What the right should say is what I said yesterday.
Violent rhetoric is not okay.
Defending violence is not okay.
But passionate rhetoric?
You know, the normal passionate rhetoric of every day?
That stuff is not only okay, it's necessary in a republic, okay?
It's always existed in a republic.
That doesn't mean that it's all factual, it doesn't mean it's all good, but it is necessary, and to pretend that it's going to stop It's just a cudgel to wield against the other side.
So Laura Ingraham, I think, does this exactly wrong.
This is going to be a rare situation in which I think that Laura Ingraham is wrong and Nancy Pelosi is kind of right, which is just unbelievably shocking.
And it just demonstrates how people on either side of the bipartisanship trumps principle.
Here's Laura Ingraham talking about leftist rhetoric and what she thinks causes violence.
But it's a level of viciousness and vitriol that we see on social media, but usually that's an anonymous thing.
But now people are emboldened and they're actually saying it in person.
They're doing chalk drawings of people and their families on their driveway.
So they wake up in the morning and they see a chalk drawing.
But I think Charles is right.
This apocalyptic language.
We hear on other cable networks where these are supposedly very respected hosts who get up every morning and say, will our republic survive Donald Trump?
In other words, the resistance is a physical resistance.
If you believe your survival is at risk, you have a moral duty to physically resist that.
Okay, again, this is so hypocritical, and I'll explain why in a second.
Nancy Pelosi says the right needs to stop being sanctimonious about this stuff.
Yes, because I think the left should have stopped being sanctimonious about it years ago.
People should stop being sanctimonious about the idea that Sarah Palin putting a map on her website of congressional districts that she wants to target somehow leads to people dying.
The left should stop saying that talk radio leads to the Oklahoma City bombing, and the right should not imitate the left in an act of revenge.
Here's Nancy Pelosi saying that the right is being sanctimonious.
Yes, and the left should also stop being sanctimonious.
And I think that the comments made by my Republican colleagues are outrageous, beneath the dignity of the job that they hold, beneath the dignity of the respect that we would like Congress to command.
How dare they say such a thing?
How dare they?
Well, I don't even go into the whole thing.
I can't even begin.
Probably as we sit here, caricatures of me and Georgia once again.
We're in over a hundred million dollars of vitriolic things that they say that resulted in calls to my home constantly.
Threats in front of my grandchildren.
I mean, really.
Predicated on their comments and their paid ads.
So this sick individual does something despicable.
And it was horrible what he did.
Hateful.
But for them to all of a sudden be sanctimonious as if they'd never seen such a thing before.
And I don't even want to go into the President of the United States.
Okay, and the reason that I think that she's not wrong here is because you heard Laura Ingraham there say that this apocalyptic language we hear on other cable networks.
Okay, I was alive six months ago.
I remember when people on Fox News were saying on a routine basis that the world was going to end if Hillary Clinton was elected.
In fact, this was the best argument in favor of President Trump.
Okay, here is the fact.
The most read essay of the last election cycle in right-wing intellectual circles was the Flight 93 essay in the Claremont Review of Books.
We talked about it at the time.
It was quoted breathlessly by everybody from Rush Limbaugh to Laura Ingraham to Sean Hannity to my friend Dennis Prager.
I mean, it was quoted everywhere.
And the basic idea there was that if Hillary Clinton was elected, that the plane of state would crash and everyone would die.
It literally said in that essay, charge the cockpit or you die.
Okay, Ann Coulter said that Hillary's election would be the, quote, end of America.
Dennis said that America could, quote, never recover from her or any Democrat's victory.
Ingram herself, who's talking about apocalyptic language, she wrote a piece two weeks ago, two weeks before the election titled, quote, how the elites blew up the world.
Now, is my point that nobody should ever use language like this?
No, precisely the opposite.
My point is that this has always been the language of politics.
It may not be right.
I may disagree with this language.
I may have thought that all those people were wrong about the last election cycle.
And I may have thought their apocalyptic language was wrong.
In fact, I did.
I said that the Flight 93 essay was stupid and incoherent, but...
The fact is, nobody who read that essay actually thought that this was a Flight 93 election.
Nobody thought if Hillary was elected, it was time to go pick up a gun and start shooting Democrats.
Nobody thought that when Dennis said that America would never recover from Hillary's presidency, that that meant that it was time to go and violently uprise against the Democratic Party.
When Ingram said the elites blow up the world, nobody actually thought that Trump should go out there and commit bombings in response, right?
We always use this kind of rhetoric.
This rhetoric is not new, okay?
We've been using rhetoric like the war on drugs, the war on poverty.
FDR targeted the, quote, malefactors of great wealth.
This stuff goes back all the way in the American Republic, the language of people being enemies, but we all understand.
There's a baseline level understanding that we're not actually enemies.
There's a difference between the Democrats with whom we argue and ISIS that actually wants to chop off our head.
And I think that Republicans are making a huge mistake if they feed the snowflakes.
Don't feed the snowflakes.
Don't feed the snowflakes.
Do not buy into the idea that is now being promulgated by the right because we want to stick the left's face in it, that rhetoric leads to violence.
Normal political rhetoric that is edgy and passionate leads to violence.
It is very difficult to claim that college campuses should allow people like me or Heather MacDonald or Charles Murray or Ayaan Hirsi Ali, let alone Milo Yiannopoulos, Speak at the same time that you say the word resistance could cause violence.
When Laura Ingraham says, you know, the resistance, that means physical resistance.
That's the dumbest crap I've ever heard.
Okay?
It's really stupid.
No one in the resistance, or at least very few people in the quote-unquote resistance, think it's time to pick up a gun and start shooting people.
If they do, they are outliers.
There are truly violent people like Antifa.
I don't want to lump in everybody who's on the other side of the aisle with Antifa Because that's not fair, and it's not right, and it's begging, it is begging for the next time somebody who has a mention of Sean Hannity in their manifesto or Laura Ingraham in their manifesto, it is begging the left to do the exact same routine on us.
That makes the political situation uglier, not better.
It never gets more civil.
It just uses civility as a club to beat the other side, and then we say, okay, well, you're beating us up, so we're gonna be even less civil to you.
It just leads to a downward spiral in both civility and the level of political discourse that is really, really, really stupid.
Okay.
Before I go any further, I want to talk about...
President Trump, he had a tweet storm this morning about obstruction.
We're going to talk about whether obstruction is really on the table and the latest leaks.
We're going to talk about all that.
Plus, my father is going to stop by, my pops is going to stop by, and we're going to talk about our brand new book, Say It's So, Papa, Dad, Me, and the 2005 White Sox Championship season.
We're going to do a mailbag just with my dad.
We have lots of questions from listeners who want to ask my dad questions.
But before we get to any of that, I first want to say thank you to our friends over at the United States Concealed Carry Association.
So, This is a fantastic organization.
They provide industry-leading firearms education, training, and self-defense insurance.
If you are living in a state like California, or even not a state like California, and you have to shoot somebody in self-defense, good shot you're gonna get caught up in some sort of legal turmoil.
USCCA makes sure that you know what you need to know, and they help provide resources for your self-defense.
They provide self-defense insurance so that you are covered legally.
They're also about getting more guns into the hands of responsible, freedom-loving Americans.
There's a story today about gun owners who were able to protect themselves from convicted murderers who had escaped prison because they were gun owners.
Everybody who's a law-abiding citizen should have a gun and should know how to use it.
That's what USCCA is there for.
And right now they have this really awesome deal.
They are going to buy 10 of my listeners the gun of their dreams.
That's right.
You're about to get 10 chances to win $1,500 for any gun that you want.
10 chances to win $1,500 for any gun that you want.
Go to DefendMyFamilyNow.com to enter.
DefendMyFamilyNow.com.
It's a fantastic website.
Right now they actually have a separate deal that says you can be one of five people who will win even more money.
$1,776 right now when you go and you register over at Defend my freedom.
Defendmyfamilynow.com.
Defendmyfamilynow.com.
You can win $1,776 for the gun of your choice.
Gun and ammo of your choice.
Super awesome.
One of five people will win.
So five of my listeners can win $1,776 in honor of July 4th.
It's the Great American Giveaway, July 4th.
The deal is gonna end soon, so you wanna go and register right now.
Defendmyfamilynow.com.
Listen, you should be registered there anyway.
I mean, you should be registered there in any case.
Again, That's super cool.
You get five chances to win at $1,776 off of you.
$1,776.
Be patriotic.
Get a gun.
Write USCCA.
DefendMyFamilyNow.com.
Super, super cool program.
Okay.
So, I want to discuss briefly what President Trump has been doing because there's a bunch of breaking news.
The left, of course, is going nuts over new leaks.
But before we get to any of that, you're gonna have to go over and become a subscriber over at DailyWire.com for $8 a month.
You too can get a subscription to dailywire.com and you can be one of the cherished few who gets to participate in today's mailbag.
I believe we're doing a live mailbag today also, so if you have live questions and you register right now, you can be part of the mailbag.
My dad is stopping by for the mailbag, which is super cool.
You get the rest of the show live, you get the mailbag, you also get Andrew Klavan's show live, and we have lots more goodies coming up.
We are planning a big rollout of some new programs for our subscribers.
Plus, annual subscribers do right now get a free signed copy of Say It So Papa, Dad, Me and the 2005 White Sox Championship season.
We will sign it for you.
I will sign it for you.
And it is a great Father's Day gift.
Hundreds and hundreds of people have already done this, and they are enjoying the book immensely.
It's about fathers and sons in baseball.
So it should be really cool.
If you don't want to register right now, if you don't want to subscribe right now, then you can always go over to iTunes or SoundCloud and give us a listen.
We always appreciate the listenership.
And you can subscribe over there as well.
Make sure you leave a review.
We appreciate that too.
▲
Export Selection