All Episodes
June 13, 2019 - The Ben Shapiro Show
53:18
Census And Sensibility | Ep. 800
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Democrats target the Trump administration over the census.
Mike Pence comes under fire for opposing gay flags flying over the American embassy in Botswana.
And Bernie tries to reinvigorate his flagging campaign.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
Man, a lot to get to today, plus breaking news out of Iran, where the Iranian regime continues to be extraordinarily militant.
This time, they have fired on two oil tankers in the Straits of Hormuz, so tensions are ratcheting up.
We'll get to all of that in just a second.
First, if you follow the news every day, and this makes you think, God, maybe I'm going to die one day because this news is just terrible.
Well, then probably while you're thinking about death, you may as well make the best of it.
Go over to Policy Genius and go check out life insurance.
Now, if you've been procrastinating on this thing, usually that's bad news, but your procrastination has now worked in your favor because while you were procrastinating on life insurance, Policy Genius was putting together a great way for you to get PolicyGenius.
Now is the time for procrastinating to stop.
PolicyGenius is the easy way to shop for insurance online.
In just two minutes, you can compare quotes from top insurers and find your best price.
Once you apply, the PolicyGenius team will handle all the paperwork and the red tape.
No sales pressure, no hidden fees, just financial protection and peace of mind.
PolicyGenius doesn't just make life insurance easy.
They can also help you find the right home insurance, auto insurance, disability insurance.
If you need life insurance, but you've been busy doing literally anything else, check out PolicyGenius.
It's the easy way to compare all the top insurers and find the best value for you.
PolicyGenius.com.
Nobody wants to shop for life insurance.
Nobody wants to think about death.
But now that you're thinking about death, because I just put it in your head, you should go shop for life insurance.
Go check them out at PolicyGenius.com.
They made it really easy for you.
That's PolicyGenius.com.
All right.
Well, the breaking news this morning is that the Iranian government has now attacked two oil tankers, according to the New York Times.
Two oil tankers came under attack on Thursday in the Gulf of Oman, forcing their crews to abandon ship and setting at least one vessel ablaze a month after four tankers were damaged in the same waterway, a vital thoroughfare for much of the world's oil products.
The early morning attacks escalated tensions in an already tense region where Iran had long been at odds with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and they are backing opposite sides in the civil war in Yemen.
The Houthis, backed by the Iranians, whose slogan is, death to the Jews, death to Israel, death to America.
Really nice folks.
Those are the folks who are fighting on behalf of Iran.
The Saudis, of course, have their own set of problems, and they are at war in Yemen.
Relations between the United States, allied with the UAE and Saudi Arabia and Iran, have also worsened.
Frictions have become so intense, other nations have pled with all sides to stay calm rather than provoke an all-out war, which is really kind of pathetic because the reality is the United States is not interested in war with Iran.
No one in the United States is up for a conflict with Iran.
But if they keep firing on our ships, I'm not sure exactly what we are supposed to do other than ratchet up economic tension.
At a certain point, if they fire on too many of our ships, we're not going to have a choice.
We're going to have to eviscerate the regime.
Up to that point, nobody is really interested in that.
The Trump administration clearly is not interested in that.
On Wednesday, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan, who is visiting Iran and trying to bridge the gap between Iran and the United States, warned of the risk of stumbling into military conflict.
Well, you know what heightens that risk?
Iran firing on American ships.
That's one of those things that might heighten the possibility of a conflict.
This is everybody sort of whistling past the graveyard with regard to Iran.
worried about the risk of a conflict happening by accident with an escalation that is unintended on either side.
This is everybody sort of whistling past the graveyard with regard to Iran.
The Iranian regime is deliberately attempting to provoke military action by the United States that is limited in scope, limited enough that it doesn't actually take down the regime, but far enough that it unifies the Iranian people behind a very unpopular regime, There have been rolling economic protests across Iran for years at a time.
And since 2009, there's been a broiling, seething undercurrent of anti-government activity in Iran.
The Obama administration committed a great act of evil by funding the Iranian government and undercutting that undercurrent of resistance to an evil regime.
They decided instead they were going to work with that evil regime, strengthen that evil regime, hand them pallets of cash.
Open up their economy.
Give them all sorts of access to world markets and money.
That was a horrible, horrible move.
The Trump administration has done the reverse.
And so now Iran is basically trying to do the same thing that North Korea has done for years.
Act so militant that everybody sort of backs down and says, you know, if we just give you some money, will you leave us alone?
It was not immediately clear how the most recent attacks were carried out or by whom, just as the circumstances of last month's attacks remain murky.
Well, the circumstances of last month don't actually remain all that murky.
Everybody sort of understands the Iranian government was behind it.
The two ships that were struck on Thursday appeared to be more seriously damaged than those hit in May.
On a visit to the UAE about two weeks ago, John Bolton, President Trump's national security advisor, said without disclosing any evidence that Iran was almost certainly responsible for the attacks in May, which Iranian officials denied.
Which, of course, they would do.
Bolton said, who else do you think is doing it?
Which is the correct question.
Other American officials said Iran's regional and Iran's regional adversaries have been more cautious about publicly assigning blame.
That's because they wish to avoid conflict, I think, more than Bolton may want to.
Emirati officials described the attacks as state-sponsored but did not specify as state.
Well, it wasn't Israel.
Mr. Trump has repudiated the 2015 deal, limiting Iran's nuclear program.
He recently moved to cut off Iran's remaining oil exports and sends additional military forces to the region.
Just yesterday, President Trump spoke about the German government's willingness to take Iranian oil and blasted former German officials, like the former Chancellor of Germany, Gerhard Schroeder, who has basically acted as an Iranian oil interest.
in Germany, trying to funnel Iranian oil into Germany.
Iran recently threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, which controls something, it's a choke point for something like 80 to 90% of all oil supply on planet Earth.
It's a really key choke point.
The Houthi faction in Yemen backed by Iran has launched attacks recently on targets in Saudi Arabia, including oil pipelines, fueling fears of a wider conflict.
Now, this should go to show you, by the way, all of this should go to show you that there has been this lie in American foreign policy for years, promulgated by folks who dislike Israel and the State Department, that at the very center of all Middle Eastern conflict lies the state of Israel and its existence.
That if you just solve the Israel-Palestinian issue, then all other conflict in the region would disappear.
Weird, because every major war in the region, effectively speaking, has not involved Israel.
At least since 1973.
Every major war in the region has involved states attacking each other.
The Iran-Iraq war, the Iraqi invasion of Saudi Arabia, the American invasion of Iraq, and now the war in Yemen, the war in Syria.
All of these involve internecine warfare inside the Muslim world.
They have nothing to do with Israel.
So this notion that we have to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to calm the region is just a bunch of crap, and it always was a bunch of crap, and that's being proved on a daily basis in the Middle East.
That is a side point, but it's worthy of note because no matter who the next Democrat in office is, they will immediately swivel back to the lie that at the center of all conflict lies the Jews!
Much of the world's oil and gas comes from the Persian Gulf area, bordered by energy powerhouses like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and Bahrain.
Some of it leaves the region through pipelines.
A significant portion is carried by ships that must pass through the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman.
Oil prices rose more than 3% on world markets in the hours after the attacks on Thursday.
Shinzo Abe, the head of Japan, he met Wednesday with President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, and Thursday with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, who's actually in charge.
He delivered a note from Mr. Trump to Khamenei, but the Ayatollah rebuffed the overture, said he could not expect honest negotiation from the American administration.
Because when I think honest negotiation, I think the Iranian government, which has lied at every step along the way about its desire to develop nuclear weapons.
Khamenei said, Basically, the Iranians are hoping and praying that Trump is ejected from office in 2020, and then they will be dealing with a much warmer President Buttigieg, or President Biden, or President Kamala Harris, or President Elizabeth Warren.
Iranian officials suggested the tanker attacks were meant to prevent friendly dialogue and provoke aggression.
So they're trying to claim that the United States basically bombed ships that were associated with the United States.
That's what they're trying to— Sure.
Sure.
Javad Zarif, the foreign minister, said, Yes, I'm sure that's what happened.
I'm sure that the West is trying to provoke a war with Iran.
This is the lie that Iran has been telling for years, which is that we want to go to war with them.
Little note to Iran.
If the United States desperately wanted to go to war with Iran, the government would no longer exist.
It would be a pile of rubble.
The fact is that Iran could do damage to the United States because there are terror cells associated with and funded by Iran all over planet Earth.
It is true that a war with Iran would be more protracted than a war with Iraq only because the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is extraordinarily large and paid off by the government.
However, Would the regime in Iran survive a direct conflict with the United States?
No.
The regime in Iran would not survive a direct conflict with the United States, which is why they are attempting a sort of mosquito bite directed at the United States, hoping that the United States will then knock a couple of Iranian ships out of the water, for example, and then the Iranians can stump around, the Iranian government can stump around talking about how they need to defend their country side with the Ayatollahs.
And they're looking for a rally around the flag effect that's the entire purpose of this particular move.
Because the fact is that the Iranian government is out of money.
The choking of the Iranian economy, which has happened under the Trump administration and for which they deserve full credit, has had significant effects on the Iranian government.
They are feeling it all across the country.
They're not able to fund their terrorist friends at Hamas in the Gaza Strip anymore.
Very, very sad.
All of their regional ambitions are being gradually thwarted by the fact that they are running out of cash.
And so they're attempting to lash out in the hopes that this will create an impetus for everybody to basically pay them off.
American analysts were poring over imagery as well as signal intercepts on Thursday to help determine how the attack happened and who was responsible, according to a senior American official.
Based on the extent of the damage to the tankers, early indications suggested that either mines or torpedoes were used, said the senior official who acknowledged the investigation was still in its early stages.
Last week, General Frank McKenzie, who's the head of U.S.
Central Command, told reporters traveling with him in the Middle East he believed the Iranians or their proxies could carry out an attack at any moment.
He said, I think the threat is imminent.
And you remember that there was a British general who had disagreed, and then the British foreign secretary said, oh yeah, he's wrong.
The Iranians are getting really, really militant.
One of the ships struck on Thursday is the Front Altair, owned by the Norwegian shipping company Frontline.
It was burned.
Its crew had evacuated the vessel.
CPC Corporation is a Taiwanese oil company that had chartered the ship to carry naphtha, which is a petroleum product, and confirmed that it had been attacked.
The Norwegian newspaper VG quoted a frontline spokesman as saying that its ship was on fire, that all 23 members had been rescued.
The other tanker was the Panamanian flag, Kokuka Courageous, it was carrying methanol.
And the Iranian state news media reported that it too was on fire.
It eventually ended up finding a port in, it was reportedly headed from the Saudi port of Al-Jubeil to Singapore, Both the ship's owner and its operator said all 21 crew members had abandoned ship, were later rescued by a nearby vessel.
So, if I mentioned earlier that these were American flag, they were not American flag, they were foreign flag, but these are all allies of the United States, obviously.
Iran's state news media confirmed the attacks on the two tankers and the rescue of 44 mariners.
The news channel IRINN said a rescue team from the southern Iranian province of Horozgan had picked up the crew of the ship carrying the Panamanian flag Japan's trade ministry said both ships were carrying Japan-related cargo.
So, we'll bring you the latest on that.
I will point out in one second how insane the media coverage of these sorts of incidents are, how preconceived narratives about the evils of the Trump administration really shape the coverage in an extraordinarily significant way.
First, I gotta talk to you about a topic that I love, sports.
I don't know if you've been watching the NBA Finals.
It is fantastic this year, although the injuries to Kevin Durant, I mean, it's devastating, obviously.
I love sports, whether we are talking about tennis or whether you're talking about basketball or my favorite sport, baseball.
Well, let me tell you about another great podcast that I told you about a few months ago.
It's called Sports Wars from Wondery.
It's all about the greatest sports rivalries of all time.
They're stories they actually might not know.
They've done episodes on Green Bay teammates Brett Favre versus Aaron Rodgers, who ended up taking his job.
Rafael Nadal versus Roger Federer battling it out for the title of greatest tennis player Of all time.
They recently had a match at the French Open.
Nadal won again.
He has a lifetime winning record against Roger Federer.
And if he wins another major, it's going to be fascinating to see where he lists on sort of the final ranking.
Now they're doing a series on former NBA stars Isaiah Thomas versus Michael Jordan, which is an amazing story.
Basically, Michael Jordan militated to keep Isaiah Thomas off the Dream Team, off the 1992 Dream Team, because he hated Isaiah Thomas so much.
There was serious bad blood between those two.
It's a surprising story and a really fascinating story.
So go subscribe.
Listen to Sports Wars on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you're listening right now.
Just go subscribe and download it.
Sports Wars.
Really fun to listen to.
I love the podcast.
It's great.
Sports Wars on Apple Podcasts.
Go check it out when you need a break from the news.
Listen to something entertaining and I think really interesting.
Check it out.
Sports Wars.
Okay, so Liz Sly is the Washington Post Beirut Bureau Chief.
And here is what she tweeted out in the aftermath of this.
Big escalation in the Persian Gulf.
Two oil tankers struck and on fire in the Strait of Hormuz, focus of U.S.-Iran tensions, comes after Trump failed to heed the last tanker warning and imposed more sanctions.
Okay, that last sentence is so astonishing.
It beggars description.
Comes after Trump failed to heed the last tanker warning and imposed more sanctions.
So in other words, if the Iranian government, a terrorist, a terrorist backing, evil, repressive, disgusting regime, bombs a couple of tankers and then threatens the largest military force, the most powerful military force in the history of mankind.
And that most powerful military force in the history of mankind, led by the President of the United States, the Commander-in-Chief, refuses to kowtow to a third-rate power that represses its own people and jails dissidents, then it's his fault, it's President Trump's fault, if the Iranians get more militant.
There's this soft bigotry of low expectations that the media have with regard to the ruling of Muslim states in particular that is really pathetic.
It's really pathetic.
Can you imagine if The UK, France, even Russia were to be bombing tankers that were allied with the United States in a direct slap at the United States.
Would there be these sorts of headlines?
Do you think there'd be these sorts of headlines about, you know, this is all because the United States has just been so provocative toward these countries, been so provocative toward Russia?
No, it'd be, why isn't Trump being more militant with Russia?
Why isn't Trump doing something about Russia?
It must be he's a Russian stooge, guys!
But Barack Obama, who actually acted as an Iranian stooge, who spent years lying blatantly to the faces of the American people, lying in their face, Ben Rhodes, his national security advisor, He openly acknowledged that his involvement in the administration involved crafting a narrative, i.e.
lying to the American people, that the Iranian regime was about to moderate, and if the United States made some sort of payoff deal, then Iran would become a moderate, stable force for good in the region.
It was all a lie.
They knew it was a lie at the time, and they pushed it.
They pushed that lie.
The Obama administration kowtowed to dictators on a regular basis.
It was Barack Obama pledging flexibility on an open mic to the Russian government in the middle of the 2012 election.
Was he ever hit with headlines like this from the Washington Post bureau chief in Beirut?
Of course not.
It's that President Trump refuses to kowtow to the Iranian government.
That's a big problem.
And as I say, there is this tendency on the part of the media to treat terrorist activity by Muslim governments as though it is not terrorist activity at all.
So when the Palestinian Authority engages in the paying of terrorists, when Hamas engages in rocket fire on a democratic ally of the United States, When the Iranian government engages in the spread of terror across planet Earth, then it's all about, well, I guess the West must have provoked them.
The West must have done something bad.
This springs from a peculiar and ugly perspective on American foreign policy and really the world that suggests that there is a power hierarchy that dictates morality.
In other words, that if you are more powerful, you must have victimized somebody at the bottom of the scale.
And so the people at the bottom of the scale should feel fully liberated to be as evil as they want to be.
Iran is put upon by the West.
And therefore, if they bomb random ships, well, you know, that's just what they do, guys, and you gotta give them some room to express themselves.
You expect the President of the United States to bow before the whims of dictators who literally lead chants, death to Israel, death to America?
That's what you want?
Washington bureau chief from Beirut?
How pathetic.
Okay, now speaking of pathetic, yesterday the Democrats decided to hold the Commerce Secretary and the AG, the Attorney General, in contempt, at least in one House committee.
A House panel voted to hold Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt of Congress over the administration's efforts to shield documents related to its decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.
Now you may be asking yourself, What's so wrong with asking people if they're citizens in the census?
I thought the census was all about finding out who's in the country.
You're right.
That is what the census is designed to do.
But Democrats are really angry about this.
And you should ask yourself, why are Democrats so upset about all of this?
Why are Democrats so upset about the asking about illegal immigration in the country, asking people their citizenship status?
So they've filed a federal case, I kid you not, with the Supreme Court trying to suggest That if illegal immigrants don't want to answer those questions, and if associated Hispanic folks in districts with lots of illegal immigrants decide not to answer census workers' questions, then the census cannot properly be done, and thus we ought not to ask the question.
Which is ridiculous.
I mean, I'm sorry, that is a ridiculous contention.
That is akin to saying that if you ask, if census workers ask about your career, your job, which they do, if they ask about your career and you are offended by those questions and are less likely to answer the Census Bureau question, well, that means that the census should be barred from asking the question in the first place.
The question is, what's the real rationale here?
The Democrats have exposed why exactly they love illegal immigration so much.
And I really am puzzled Now, you're asking yourself, you know, those illegal immigrants, they're not going to be able to vote, so why would Democrats want them in the country?
for people seeking asylum.
And the reason they don't wanna do that is because they want those people not held at the border, but released into the interior of the United States.
All of this could be solved with a simple act of Congress.
Democrats do not wanna pass that act of Congress because they have an actual interest in ensuring that illegal immigrants enter the country.
Now, you're asking yourself, those illegal immigrants, they're not gonna be able to vote, so why would Democrats want them in the country?
Why is that something that is important to Democrats?
And this Census Bureau controversy really answers the question.
So the Census Bureau controversy is based on Democrats being very, very upset that there is a memo that was in a dead guy's computer, okay?
And what this memo basically suggested is that the Census Bureau should ask these questions because it would lead to redistricting.
That there should be a push in the United States to allocate districts based not on the sheer population in a district, but based on the voting population in a district.
In other words, if you have 800,000 illegal immigrants in a particular district and 200,000 voting citizens, then that should not be treated the same as a district with one million voting American citizens, which makes sense.
We live in a country one man, one vote, right?
If I am not subject to America's laws, then why exactly should I be represented in Congress, especially when I can't vote for the people in Congress?
It's bizarre.
It's a very strange, weird notion that we should allocate districts based on people who cannot vote, are not citizens of the United States and are actively breaking American law.
But the reality is that if we redistricted based on citizenship and not based on sheer population size, Democrats would lose something like nine houses and nine seats in the House of Representatives, according to data analysis.
The reality is that Republicans would pick up a bunch of seats because, again, there are a lot of illegal immigrants in the country and they are all living in areas that have a lot of Democrats.
Not all of them, a huge number are living in areas that, I mean, California is the number one source.
Of people who are illegal immigrants living in the United States.
So if you wanted to, let's say you're a Democrat, and let's say that you wanted to ensure that you had a lot of Democratic seats in the House, but you didn't want to really add more voters, or you didn't see the need to add more voters.
So what would you do?
You might create maybe a sanctuary city.
And maybe what you would do is you would welcome in millions of illegal immigrants to your city, knowing that with every illegal immigrant, you are gaining a share of a new congressional seat.
And now, based on the population of the census, you would be allocated more congressional seats.
And now imagine someone was going to go around asking whether those people were illegal immigrants for purposes of determining how many congressional seats were allocated.
Well, that might offend you.
You might find that to be problematic.
Because now, those congressional seats will bleed away from the areas that you have created that are heavy on illegal immigrants and low on voters.
This is all very telling.
The fact that Democrats are opposed to a basic question like, are you in the country legally?
Is pretty astonishing.
It's pretty amazing, honestly, and it is extraordinarily telling.
It's extraordinarily telling that Democrats are making this case.
American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Dale Ho wrote in a request to the Supreme Court, Well, you know what undermines my confidence in our representative democracy?
for partisan and racially discriminatory purposes would undermine public confidence in our representative democracy.
Well, you know what undermines my confidence in our representative democracy?
When there are a bunch of people who are being represented who aren't voters or subject to American law.
It turns out that that really undermines my faith in representative democracy.
If I and a bunch of my fellow citizens can vote, and we are being represented with exactly the same number of representatives as a bunch of people who come in the country, cannot pay taxes, and cannot vote, I feel like that's a little weird and a little bit of a problem.
In fact, it feels like I'm being governed by a group of folks who are actually a political minority in many areas.
The Justice Department and the Oversight Committee are essentially on the same trajectory as the Department and the House Judiciary Committee were on last month.
The Judiciary Committee voted to hold Attorney General Barr in contempt for failing to turn over materials related to Robert Mueller's probe.
In that case, the Judiciary Committee and the Justice Department worked out a compromise.
Basically, the Democrats are very, very upset that they believe that there will be political ramifications to the change in the census question.
And they're particularly upset about it because, again, if there are changes in the census question, it could have some serious impact on how many Democrats end up in Congress.
They are giving credence to every complaint about Democrats not caring about illegal immigration and actively seeking illegal immigration right now.
They think that they're making a case against evil Republican racism.
What they're actually making a case against is themselves.
President Trump is not wrong when he says that Democrats, with their subpoenas, they're out of control, that they are basically just lashing out at everyone on Earth in an attempt to avoid all of the ramifications of their own bad policy.
Okay, in just a second, we're gonna get to President Trump, and we're gonna get to Bernie Sanders, who's dropping like a stone in the polls.
All it took, apparently, was another quote-unquote Democratic Socialist to rise for Bernie Sanders to fall.
We'll get to all that in just a second.
First, let me tell you something.
Man, listen, I have a great life, but my life is filled with stress, and that means sometimes I struggle to sleep.
I'm not alone.
One in three American adults doesn't get enough sleep.
If you're not sleeping enough, it can affect your cognitive function during the day.
Learning, problem solving, decision making, lack of sleep actually leads to loss of IQ points, believe it or not.
That's why we are partnering with Calm, the number one app for sleep.
Sleep deficiency does serious damage, not just to your brain, but to your body as well.
I mean, I personally have the body of a Greek god, but if I don't sleep for like three nights, I look like a Michelin man.
The sleepless are more prone to accidents, weight gain, depression, With Calm, you'll discover a whole library of programs designed to help you get the sleep your brain and body needs, like Soundscapes, over 100 sleep stories narrated by soothing voices like Jerome Flynn from Game of Thrones and Stephen Fry.
Right now, Ben Shapiro listeners get 25% off a Calm Premium subscription at calm.com slash ben that's c-a-l-m.com slash ben they also have sleep listening programs for like little kids so your kids won't go to sleep knock them out with calm.com seriously 40 million people have downloaded calm find out why at calm.com slash ben that's c-a-l-m.com slash ben go check them out right now okay so meanwhile president trump is is in trouble again today
He is in trouble again because somebody on his comms team decided, you know what would be smart?
Let's put him in front of George Stephanopoulos at ABC News.
How could this one go wrong?
Okay, comms team, what are you doing?
Why would you do this?
Who do you think you are winning over when you put Trump in a room with George Stephanopoulos?
George Stephanopoulos is a Clintonista hack.
Not only is he a Clintonista hack, he Okay, so now you're putting him in a room with President Trump.
I can't imagine how this would go wrong.
That in and of itself is a problem.
Then you have the problem of President Trump, perhaps the most stubborn man ever to live.
Doubling down on his worst impulses.
So, I am not a fan, to put it mildly, of the notion that when President Trump was approached by a foreign government, namely the Russian government, and given dirt on Hillary Clinton that he didn't call up the FBI.
Now, I will point out here two things.
One, that is not illegal.
And two, Hillary Clinton did do the same thing with the Ukrainian government.
So it is true that the Ukrainian government was trying to pass dirt on President Trump On to Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton's team took it, didn't say anything about it.
Now, the Ukrainian government is not militantly opposed to the United States government in the same way that Vladimir Putin is, so there is a distinction there, but Hillary should have reported that too.
It is also true that the Steele dossier was largely based, the Steele dossier, which was the basis for a lot of the Trump-Russia collusion charges, and was basically a fantasy made up By a bunch of Russian operatives.
Basically, Christopher Steele, this former British spy, went over to Russia, talked to a bunch of Russian government officials, and then funneled that information to the Hillary Clinton campaign.
So while you can say the Hillary Clinton campaign got that information not directly from the Russian government, they got it from Christopher Steele, in effect, they were taking Russian government-created Intel that was false about Trump and then disseminating that inside the halls of power in Washington, D.C.
and trotting it out to the media as well.
So with all of those caveats, the fact that the Trump administration was openly approached by members of the Russian government and allies with the Russian government to take dirt on Hillary Clinton and didn't report it to the FBI was a low point in American politics.
It was ugly and it was wrong.
There's a difference between illegal and wrong.
It is not illegal for a foreign government to say, here's some oppo on your opponent and you take the oppo and you run with it.
That's not illegal.
It would be illegal if there was a quid pro quo.
If you said, okay, I'm going to take the oppo and later I'm going to give you this thing under the table, right?
That's bribery.
But Eugene Volokh has written, professor of law at UCLA, he wrote a long post at the Washington Post, probably four years ago now, talking specifically about whether it would be illegal if a member of the government of Turkey approached Hillary Clinton with info about Trump for her to use that information.
The answer he came up with, and I think that his legal analysis is correct, is no.
Now, with that said, would it behoove the President of the United States to simply say, if I am approached by a foreign government with intel about my opponents, I will talk to the FBI about it?
Yes, it would, particularly because the President of the United States, you know, he was not, according to the Mueller report, involved in the Trump Tower meeting.
He was not apprised of the Trump Tower meeting.
He was not in the loop on that thing.
So it'd be very easy for him to say, listen, knowing what now, what I, I didn't know then, I was just a guy, right?
I was running for president.
I didn't know anything.
I didn't know this stuff.
But now I know, of course I would go to the FBI if somebody approached me on that sort of stuff.
You know, you live, you learn.
And now I wouldn't do that.
Instead, President Trump, who has never met a thing he will not double down upon, he's asked about this and here was his response.
Your campaign this time around, if foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information on an opponent, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?
I think maybe you do both.
I think you might want to listen.
There's nothing wrong with listening.
If somebody called from a country, Norway, we have information on your opponent.
Oh, I think I'd want to hear it.
Do you want that kind of interference in our elections?
It's not an interference.
They have information.
I think I'd take it.
If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI.
Okay, and then he continued by saying, well, maybe he wouldn't go to the FBI because no one really wants to go to the FBI.
Now, again, what he says on a legal level is basically correct, but on a moral level, it is not obviously correct.
And not only is it not obviously correct on a political level, it is very wrong, right?
On a political level, you're running for president.
You've been enmeshed in this whole, you're colluding with Russia thing for years at this point.
Wouldn't you just say no?
Wouldn't you just say no?
Like, I wouldn't take the information, and also I would pass that along to the FBI.
Wouldn't you just say that?
It's a weird thing to say.
Now, William Barr, the Attorney General, was asked about exactly this subject about a month and a half ago by Chris Coons, the senator from Connecticut?
Delaware, from Delaware.
And Chris Coons asked Barr about whether you should report it to the FBI if somebody approaches you with information, and here was William Barr, the Attorney General's answer.
What if a foreign adversary, let's now say North Korea, offers a presidential candidate dirt on a competitor in 2020?
Do you agree with me the campaign should immediately contact the FBI?
If a foreign intelligence service, a representative of a foreign government says, we have dirt on your opponent, should they say, I love it, let's meet?
Or should they contact the FBI?
If a foreign intelligence service does, yes.
OK, so Barr makes a distinction there on a legal basis between a foreign intelligence service and a foreign government.
Coons basically broadens it out to a foreign government.
And people are saying that's Barr giving wiggle room to Trump.
And there's two questions here, the legal and the moral.
On the legal side, Trump ain't wrong.
On the moral side, it is a very dicey proposition at best to be taking information from America's enemies just because they happen to be giving you information about your political opponent.
I find it disgusting.
I find it wrong.
And if Hillary Clinton did it, People on the right would be yelling and screaming about it.
If Elizabeth Warren does that, if she gets information from the Chinese government directed against President Trump and just goes ahead and uses it, people are going to be pissed and people are going to have a right to be pissed.
So that is wrong of President Trump.
We'll get to his response to all of this in just one second.
First, let's talk about racking up credit card debt.
So I know people Well, basically ruined their lives with credit card debt.
I know folks who have racked up thousands of dollars in charges.
They were told, buy it now, pay for it later with interest.
And then that interest rate just gets wildly out of control and I pay like 20 percent interest every month.
And suddenly your life is ruined.
Don't do it.
Instead, with Lending Club.
You can consolidate that debt or pay off credit cards with one fixed monthly payment.
Since 2007, Lending Club has helped millions of people regain control of their finances with affordable, fixed-rate personal loans.
No trips to a bank, no high-interest credit cards.
Just go to LendingClub.com, tell them about yourself, how much you want to borrow, pick the terms that are right for you.
If you're approved, your loan is automatically deposited into your bank account in as little as a few days.
Lending Club is the number one peer-to-peer lending platform with over $35 billion in loans issued.
Go to LendingClub.com slash Ben.
Check your rate in minutes, borrow up to 40 grand.
That's LendingClub.com slash Ben.
LendingClub.com slash Ben.
All loans made by WebBank, Member, FDIC, Equal Housing Lender.
You really can ruin your life if you just rack up that debt and you don't do anything about it.
Instead, go consolidate those loans.
Check your rate in minutes.
Borrow up to $40,000.
That's LendingClub.com.
Get your life back under control with LendingClub.
OK, in just one second, we're going to get to President Trump's response to himself.
We will also get to Bernie Sanders dropping like a stone in the polls.
We'll get to Mike Pence being ripped up and down for the basic stance that only the American flag should fly outside the American embassy, which I don't know why that's controversial.
We'll get to all that in just one second.
First, you have to go and subscribe over at dailywire.com.
When you do, you not only get the rest of today's show live on video, you also get two additional hours.
I mean, we are working hard to bring you that two additional hours in the afternoon.
You also get to ask us questions in the mailbag, which we'll be doing tomorrow.
You also sometimes get to interact with me during the breaks on the radio show that we do later today.
You get to be part of the mailbag when we do the Daily Wire backstage.
We have all sorts of goodies.
The Sunday Special, which comes out on Saturday for you if you are, in fact, a Daily Water subscriber.
So all sorts of wonderful things coming for you.
And if you get the annual subscription, you get this.
The very greatest in all beverage vessels, the leftist-tierest hot or cold tumbler.
Cast your eyes upon it and despair that you have it not.
But you could have it.
It's like the Holy Grail of political tumblers.
All you have to do is spend 99 bucks a year, which is cheaper than the monthly subscription.
Father's Day is coming up.
It makes a great Father's Day gift.
Go check it out right now.
And again, I'm making this appeal for weeks.
I'm going to continue making this appeal.
If you love the show, if you love conservative material, you need to help out the people who produce that material in a direct fashion.
Yes, absolutely.
Patronize our advertisers.
It really does help us.
But also subscribe directly at dailywire.com because the fact is the left is militantly attempting to take everything conservative off the air.
Deplatforming people from big tech, trying to attack our advertisers.
You shield us.
from the nastiness of the ill-motivated left when you subscribe at places like Daily Wire.
So please go subscribe at Daily Wire, $9.99 a month or $99 a year.
We really appreciate it.
it.
We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
Okay, so in response to the hubbub created by his comments, President Trump has now gone on a Twitter spate this morning.
Ivanka, please take away his phone.
He tweeted out, Although the radical left doesn't use the name Russia anymore since the issuance of the Mueller report, House committee now plays a seldom used contempt card on our great AG and Secretary of Commerce, this time on the census.
Dems play a much tougher game than the Republicans did when they had the House majority.
Republicans will remember.
This has already been argued before the U.S.
Supreme Court, but the House doesn't want to wait.
This is a common thread between all of the committees.
Do whatever you can to embarrass the Trump administration, attack the Trump administration, Attorney David Bruno.
So true.
In the meantime, they're getting no work done on drug pricing, infrastructure, and many other things.
All of that is fine.
Then he gets to this.
I meet and talk to foreign governments every day.
I just met with the Queen of England, UK, the Prince of Wales.
He spelled it originally W-H-A-L-E-S.
So it's good to know that the president is familiar with Aquaman.
If we are seriously worried about global warming and the recession of the tides, knowing Aquaman could come in super useful.
Later, of course, the president did correct the spelling of the Prince of Wales, but not before it became a meme.
The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the PM of Ireland, the President of France, the President of Poland.
We talked about everything.
Should I immediately call the FBI about these calls and meetings?
How ridiculous!
I would never be trusted again.
With that being said, my full answer is rarely played by the fake news media.
They purposely leave out the part that matters.
Yeah, well, I don't think these are quite the same thing.
I mean, you having a conversation with the Prince of Wales?
About quote-unquote everything?
Not the same thing as the Russian government approaching you with intel about your political opponents.
And when people say, you know, who would actually turn over intel about their political opponents?
Well, back in 2000, the Al Gore team actually got a hold of George W. Bush's debate prep book and they turned it over to the FBI.
So, you know, it actually does happen.
It actually does happen.
I will say that President Trump, I think that Keeping him away from the reporters at this point would probably be a good idea.
Although, I will admit, this is very funny.
Yesterday, he was in the Rose Garden, I think, and he was talking to reporters.
And he was trying to call on somebody and it went like this.
Let's see, who do I like?
Nobody, that's the end.
Go ahead.
Okay, that is indeed very funny.
Meanwhile, on the Democratic side of the aisle, Bernie Sanders is dropping like a stone.
And he is going down like the Soviet economy circa 1987.
It's pretty incredible.
Bernie Sanders is now dropping behind Elizabeth Warren in virtually all state polls.
He's behind Elizabeth Warren in a Nevada state poll.
He's now running behind Elizabeth Warren in a California, UC Berkeley, LA Times poll.
It shows Joe Biden at 22%, with Elizabeth Warren at 18%, Bernie Sanders at 17, and Kamala Harris at 13.
Kamala Harris, lest you forget, is the actual senator from the state of California, her running fourth.
That is really bad news for Kamala Harris.
But Sanders continues to drop in the RealClearPolitics polling average, and that is very, very bad news for him.
And so Bernie has to sort of reinvigorate his campaign.
The problem is everybody's already heard Bernie's pitch.
They're looking for something new, something different.
Somebody's got a plan.
They're looking for Fake Native American, Elizabeth Warren, or something.
So Bernie gives a big speech yesterday, in which he talks about democratic socialism, and his pitch is going to be that he is the truest defender of democratic socialism.
Now, recall, for most of his career, Bernie was an actual supporter of communists.
In not just Norway and Denmark, which are not, in fact, socialist countries, they are capitalist countries with a heavy welfare state, not the same thing.
Democratic socialism is simply a way of shoehorning the term socialism into a system that is really driven, in terms of prosperity, by free markets.
But Bernie Sanders, flanked by one million American flags, was speaking... I mean, I guess it beats flying the Soviet flag.
He was more comfortable there in 88, but now he's running for president.
He did a whole speech in which he talked about democratic socialism.
He said democratic socialism was the path of justice and love.
Because when I think justice and love, I think an octogenarian loon bag who spends all of his days determining how many types of deodorant you should be able to buy.
Here's Bernie Sanders making his case.
It is my very strong belief that the United States must reject that path of hatred and divisiveness and instead find the moral conviction to choose a different path A higher path, a path of compassion, justice, and love.
And that is the path that I call democratic socialism.
Yay, justice and love and pudding.
Many, many pizza and three beach houses.
That is the path.
And I'm a millionaire because I wrote the book, so leave me alone.
Democratic socialism, where I control everything and call it justice and love.
It ain't justice and it ain't love when you're controlling other people's lives.
If you love something, set it free, Bernie Sanders, like the economy or other humans.
Bernie also suggested that his goal here is to carry the business of the New Deal to completion.
This should give the lie to you.
Henry Olsen is a columnist over at the Washington Post.
He's sort of a Trump-supporting columnist over at the Washington Post.
We talked, I think, a couple of podcasts ago about a piece that he wrote in which he explicitly suggested that the job of conservatives was to prune the garden planted by FDR, which is, to me, an insane contention.
FDR's garden was a bunch of crap.
Okay, FDR's garden led to a second Great Depression from 1936 all the way up to the outbreak of World War II.
FDR's garden has led to the bankruptcy of the American government.
It has led to a 20 trillion dollar deficit mainly created by programs that he initiated like Social Security.
And Bernie Sanders is making the same case as Henry Olsen.
That's not great for Henry Olsen.
Here's Bernie Sanders saying that he wants to carry the business of the New Deal to completion.
For folks who have never studied the New Deal, it is rare to find a more fascistic take on American economics than the New Deal.
The New Deal literally had something called the National Recovery Administration, where the government would hand out blue eagles, blue patriotic eagles, to firms that pledged to support FDR's particular brand of economics.
Ugly stuff.
Here's Bernie Sanders talking about how the New Deal must be fulfilled so we can have, I assume, another Great Depression.
That'd be great.
Over 80 years ago, Franklin Delano Roosevelt helped create a government that made transformative progress in protecting the needs of working families.
Today, in the second decade of the 21st century, we must take up the unfinished business of the New Deal and carry it to completion.
OK, so if you want to carry the business of the New Deal to completion, then good news.
He's not going to make America great again.
He's going to make the Great Depression great again.
So that's exciting stuff.
So that is Bernie's pitch.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden, who's trying to separate himself off from Bernie Sanders, right?
Supposedly, Bernie Sanders is on the left wing of the party and Joe Biden is in the mainstream of the party.
These two wings are merging.
And this is the problem for Joe Biden.
So Joe Biden wants to run as old Joe.
Old, reliable Joe.
And Joe ain't going to scare you.
He's not going to scare you.
He's just in the grand American tradition.
Well, Biden was asked yesterday about whether he was on the same page as Bernie Sanders.
And he was like, well, yeah, of course I am.
Sure.
Why not?
Look, I just think we got a lot of really good candidates out there, and they're making the case, and I don't put a whole lot in terms of labels.
I just think that if you think about it, the vast majority of the members that are running, the folks that are running, they're all kind of on the same page.
I'm not going to comment on Bernie's characterization of who or what he is.
He's sincere about what he thinks, and I think he should go out and say it.
Okay, so I'm not gonna go after Bernie.
He's sincere.
We're all on the same page, guys.
Okay, if Joe Biden's on the same page as Bernie Sanders, why should he be president?
Really, what's his pitch exactly?
You wonder why Elizabeth Warren is rising?
It's because Joe Biden can't explain why he wants to be president, and Bernie Sanders seems even kookier than Elizabeth Warren.
Joe Biden's pitch, by the way, is not a particularly attractive pitch.
He says that his first move as president of the United States will be to raise your taxes.
This is from the so-called moderate.
Tax-cutting tax.
For multimillionaires and billionaires.
Guess what?
When I'm president, it's gone.
It's gone, guys.
When I'm president, your tax cuts, they're gone.
Now, he tells a lie right there.
An open and obvious lie.
The lie being that it's mostly for millionaires and billionaires.
Okay, I can express to you, as a person who makes a lot of money in the state of California, I got destroyed on taxes last year.
The Trump tax cut actually destroyed everyone who is a high earner in liberal-leaning states with high tax rates.
The fact is, 80% of Americans saw a tax cut, and the vast majority of those people are not in the top 1% or in the top 10%.
But Joe Biden is going to raise your taxes.
It's a bold move, Cotton.
We'll see how it goes for him.
Also, Joe Biden's pitch is that for eight years, there was no hint of a scandal or lie in the Obama administration.
We'll see how this one goes over, too.
It's fascinating how Biden has really avoided talking about the Obama administration when he does.
It's in these very broad terms about how great things were under Barack Obama.
Weren't they just awesome?
Sure, we won't talk about the incredibly slow economic recovery or the fact that the Obama administration set the Middle East on fire.
Sure, we're not going to talk about the fact that it was an incredibly polarizing administration on both politics and culture.
We won't talk about any of those things.
No, it was it was just it was wonderful.
It was basically utopia.
Don't you remember?
Like five years ago, it was utopia.
Riots in Ferguson.
It was utopia, guys.
Stop that.
Utopia, according to Joe Biden.
I was most proud of.
For eight years, there wasn't one single Really?
Not a hint?
Any hint?
I wrote a whole book about the various scandals of the Obama administration.
You can go check it out.
It's called The People vs. Barack Obama.
It's a whole book.
The good news for Joe Biden and many other Democrats is that as long as you have acolytes like Joy Behar, you'll be fine.
So Joy Behar, over on The View, made what I think is one of the dumbest comments I have ever heard.
So Joe Biden has been going around proclaiming that if he is elected president, he will do a couple of things.
He will raise your taxes and also he'll cure cancer.
Not sure how he's going to do that.
Second thing.
So Joe Biden's plan goes something like this.
That's the plan.
But Joy Behar is already making excuses for why Joe Biden may not actually be able to cure cancer.
Those excuses do not include that it's very hard to cure cancer, since cancer is, in fact, a bucket of different things.
It doesn't include the fact that we've been trying to cure cancer for decades, and we have made some progress, but not tremendous progress.
The real problem, according to Joy Behar, is that if Joe Biden becomes president and wants to cure cancer, it may be too late because it flips through deck.
Global warming.
Really, this is a thing a human said.
I would say that curing cancer is going to be much more difficult when there's so much climate change and pollutants in the environment, because a lot of cancer is environmentally caused.
And this president rolls back anything that will clean the air.
So they're working against each other if they don't also clean up the emissions.
Okay, so what now?
Does she understand how cures work?
Like, if you cure tuberculosis, then you've cured the disease.
If you are curing cancer, then presumably you are curing the disease that is cancer.
And even if it's caused, you now have a cure.
But that's... Also, global warming doesn't have to... Global warming doesn't cause cancer.
If you're talking about emissions that cause cancer, then you would be talking about, you know, pollutants in the air.
Like, somebody is spewing ash into the air and this causes lung cancer or something.
Man, when you have people making excuses like that, put her on the stump, man.
She's fantastic.
And meanwhile, the Democrats are growing more and more nasty and radical by the day on social issues.
I remember a time when the case for the gay rights movement was basically, leave us alone so that we could do what we want.
And everybody was kind of like, Okay.
Sure.
Makes sense.
And then it was, okay, well, we want the same government benefits as married couples.
And people were like, well, not so sure about that one since married couples, heterosexual married couples actually, you know, are in the business of producing children.
And then heterosexual marriage is really about the production and rearing of children.
So there are different societal benefits to that than just two people who love each other living together.
But I guess, okay.
And then they were like, well, we don't want gay marriage, but now we want gay marriage.
So if you can just call it marriage, then we'll be cool.
We'll never bother you again.
And everybody was like, Well, you know, not so hot on this one, but maybe if the government stays out of the business of marriage, and maybe if you sort of leave us alone, we'll learn to live with it.
All right, I guess.
And then, now the new push is, we need to fly the gay pride flag above the U.S.
embassy.
Where did, what?
Now?
So your pitch is, That something that your original case was, leave us alone so we can engage in the private consensual behavior we like.
That went to, we need you to celebrate that private consensual behavior on a flag on the top of the United States Embassy in Lake Botswana.
What in the actual F?
What in the world?
So, Mike Pence was asked about this, the Vice President, because he put out an edict, basically, or he was asked to defend an edict put out by the Trump administration, that at the U.S.
Embassy, we should fly the, wait for it, the U.S.
flag.
I know, crazy idea, right?
Like, because it's the United States, so the flag we should fly, it shouldn't be like the gay pride flag, or like a Christian flag, or a Planned Parenthood flag.
It should probably just be like the United States flag.
So Pence was asked about this, and here's what he said.
The administration directs U.S.
embassies not to fly the pride flag.
I'm aware that the State Department indicated that on the flagpole of our American embassies that one flag should fly and that's the American flag and I support that.
To the LGBTQ community who feels as though that runs counter to the president celebrating Pride Month in his tweet.
When it comes to the American flagpole at American embassies and capitals around the world, having the one American flag fly, I think, is the right decision.
Why is this remotely controversial?
I'm so confused.
But Sarah Silverman found it controversial.
So I can't do a Sarah Silverman voice because no one actually has a voice that high.
whole shtick is to do this cutesy voice and then curse.
So she said, dear VP, you're a hate mongering, fear-based weasel.
And your biggest irony is that if there was hell, you'd a hundred percent be going there.
I'm not sure like Sarah McLaughlin, if she knows what irony means, because I hope you go to prison for crimes against humanity regarding the LGBT community.
Remember this started with private consensual behavior should be left alone by the government.
And now it's, you should go to prison.
If you don't want to fly a gay pride flag at the USSR.
Embassy.
That's where we have come to.
Guys, I'm pretty sure that the fascists are not the conservatives here.
She has women's rights and the babies you rip from the arms of parents seeking our help.
What a delight Sarah Silverman is.
So we've now reached the point where I think frankly that we should remove the American flag patches from American soldiers shoulders.
And now when they go into battle against like the Taliban, they should wear, it's gay pride month, they should wear a gay pride flag.
They should know what they're fighting for.
And then when it's breast cancer awareness month, they should wear a breast cancer awareness flag so that when a Taliban soldier is getting his brains shot out, he should know that we here in the United States, we hate breast cancer and we will fight breast cancer with every last vestige of our strength and ability.
Yes, the country may be too stupid for repair.
All right, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
So, things that I like.
Douglas Carswell was one of the leaders of the Brexit movement.
He has a brand new book that is coming out, I believe you can already buy it, called Progress vs. Parasites.
We'll have him on the show next month probably to talk about it, at least the radio show.
The book is really good.
It's called Progress vs. Parasites, a brief history of the conflict that shaped our world.
It covers an enormous amount of ground.
It really does talk about why it is that certain areas of the world thrive and other areas of the world do not.
His basic thesis is that when you have a Mandarin class, when you have a group of people who sit atop a government, who are taking All of the gains of a particular country and centralizing it in that body for either redistribution or for political purposes, it ends up sapping the will and sapping the entrepreneurship inside that society.
And he traces that pattern throughout history, not just sticking to the West, but moving around the world.
The book is a really good, kind of fun historical read.
Go check it out.
Douglas Carswell's Progress vs. Parasites.
You can go get that at Amazon right now.
Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.
All right.
So the thing that I hate today, so Bill Maher, he has crafted this weird sort of conspiracy theory.
So I was on Maher's show last year and Maher asked me about the Russia collusion stuff.
And I said, listen, if you prove that Trump colluded with Russia, meaning if you prove that Trump was in a conspiracy with Russia to thwart our elections, then impeachment should be on the table.
I said that to Maher.
I said, I don't see any evidence of that now.
And I don't think any evidence of that is going to actually come forward.
I was right.
Now, Bill Maher has moved on to another conspiracy theory.
He said he couldn't believe it.
He said, you don't believe that Trump colluded with Russia?
And I was like, no, because I don't see the evidence of it.
If you show me the evidence, then maybe?
And Bill Maher was like, I can't believe that you don't believe that.
You're an otherwise smart person.
So Bill Maher was on CNN with, I believe, Chris Cuomo here.
And he says, his new theory is that if President Trump is defeated in 2020, He won't go, like Jennifer Hudson from Dreamgirls.
He will just stick around.
He's telling you he's not going.
So here's Bill Maher explaining his new conspiracy theory, which is that Trump is going to, I guess, wedge himself into the Oval Office with superglue, and then dare people to carry him out.
If he loses, Trump, he won't go.
I've been saying that since before he got elected, that if he loses the second time, if he loses the coming election, And Michael Cohen said that, Nancy Pelosi echoed, said that.
A lot of people say, well, yes, it can happen here, meaning fascism, meaning something other than what we—is democracy.
Now, I think we're already there.
You know, I have a dictator checklist that I read on my show sometimes, things that no American president has ever done, but this president does.
This is banana republic.
So you think he wouldn't leave?
That is one of them.
I absolutely think he will not leave.
Oh, so what will he do?
Do you think the U.S.
military is just going to station itself around the White House to prevent him from leaving?
Is that what Bill Maher thinks?
This is such conspiratorial tripping.
It's so funny.
All the same people who are claiming that Donald Trump will not leave if he loses an election are still claiming that Stacey Abrams is the legitimate governor of Georgia.
All of them.
So, all right.
I mean, if this is where, if you're so far gone that your new shtick is that Donald Trump will not be ejected from the Oval Office, that what, he'll set up like squatters rights in the Oval Office?
If he's not elected in 2020?
Oh my goodness.
Creating Phantom Trump in your mind is what's going to lead to his election victory if he wins, truly.
The idea that Trump is Hitler, he's the worst person who ever lived, he's a dictator.
Most Americans look at that, who have a brain, and they say, well, I'm not really seeing that so much.
You can oversell here.
And I think that the Democrats and many in the media are overselling.
All right.
We'll be back here later today with two additional hours of programming.
So we will see you then.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
Shapiro, this is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Robert Sterling.
Directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive Producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior Producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our Supervising Producer is Mathis Glover.
And our Technical Producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Adam Sievitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and Makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
Production Assistant, Nick Sheehan.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
President Trump makes a big foreign policy faux pas as shells hit oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman and hundreds of thousands of people take to the streets to protest in Hong Kong.
Then, Jordan B. Peterson has a new social media platform for free speech and deep fake videos threaten to upend the 2020 election and reality.
Export Selection