Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 26, 2019 - The Ben Shapiro Show

51:48

Debate Night | Ep. 809

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The Democrats prepare for their first official debate.
	Democrats in the media discover there's an actual crisis at the border, and Google doesn't know what Nazis are.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
	Well, a lot going on in the news, and we will get to all of those things immediately.
	So let us jump in.
	We begin with the Democratic debate.
	The Democratic debate is tonight, the first Democratic debate.
	Are you excited?
	Does it feel like we've already had like three of these?
	And these will be endless.
	These Democratic debates, there are 25 Democratic candidates.
	Virtually everyone who is a registered Democrat in the United States will be part of this debate.
	Well, the first debate will feature some real big names.
	By big names I mean nobodies.
	The only big name in this debate is Elizabeth Warren.
	So she's got the night all to herself.
	We'll see how many people actually tune in just to watch Elizabeth Warren and her magical plan.
	Ooh, she has plans.
	This is what we keep hearing from the media.
	Now, they never actually evaluate whether the plans are feasible or workable.
	They never even assess whether her proposed wealth tax, which would take a percentage of wealth from people who have already paid taxes on their income, whether that proposed wealth tax is even constitutional.
	They haven't assessed whether any of those plans would work financially, whether they work in terms of the budget of the United States.
	Short answer, no, they don't.
	The fact is that the vast growth in the United States budget is driven by out-of-control spending, and that out-of-control spending is driven by entitlement programs, many of which she wants to add to, including Medicare for All.
	If you took out Medicare and Social Security from the United States budget, the United States budget would be in surplus.
	It is Social Security and Medicare that have bankrupted the country to the point where 30 years from now, 144% of our GDP will be spent on the national debt.
	So that's going to be very, very exciting.
	Well, anyway, Elizabeth Warren is leading the pack, and we're going to go through these candidates so that you know who exactly is going to be on stage in this most important of debates.
	So, you've got Elizabeth Warren, fake Native American and faux moderate, who once upon a time was in favor of things like school vouchers and wrote books like The Two Income Trap, in which she discussed the problem with having two parents outside the household working, and now is such a progressive leftist that she is threatening Bernie Sanders' flank.
	Bernie Sanders is running a little bit scared from Elizabeth Warren, and that is largely because the progressives in the media have decided that Elizabeth Warren is the hot new thing.
	So she's going to be on the stage.
	The other big name on the stage, if you can call him that, is Cory McBooker.
	So Cory Booker, the senator from New Jersey, who's been desperate for attention.
	A man so manipulative that you can actually see the gears moving behind his eyes when he speaks.
	You can actually see him flipping the anger switch up when it's time to be angry.
	A man who is basically the Mr. Potato Head of politics.
	He walks around and at a certain point he decides that it's time for the angry eyes!
	And he reaches into his back and pulls out the angry eyes and puts them on.
	Then suddenly he's very sincere.
	Cory Booker.
	So Cory Booker will be on stage fresh off having shot himself directly in the foot by attacking Joe Biden and it back and basically backfiring on him.
	We've also got Bill de Blasio, a very large groundhog killer, a crappy mayor of New York that nobody likes and nobody understands why he's even running.
	Julian Castro, who is hanging around basically in the hopes that somebody will give him a cabinet slot.
	John Delaney.
	Who?
	If you're asking who John Delaney is, I join you in this query.
	No one knows who John Delaney is or why he's there.
	He's basically just a guy who walked in off the street and they're like, would you like to be in a debate?
	And he's like, yeah, sounds good.
	Tulsi Gabbard, who is Bashar Assad's favorite congressperson.
	Jay Inslee of Washington State, a governor who has focused so much on climate change that he's done nothing about climate change in his actual state.
	Emissions are not actually down in the state of Washington.
	Amy Klobuchar, who is expected to be sort of a moderate candidate in this race, is somebody who is going to draw the middle in.
	And it turns out, yeah, not so much.
	She can't draw flies.
	And then you got Beto.
	Beto O'Rourke, who has flamed out worse than any candidate in recent memory, a man who started off with a money bomb and then proceeded to basically melt into shards.
	I've never seen a candidate melt down quite as completely as Beto O'Rourke.
	It's pretty insane.
	From a launch on the cover of Vanity Fair in the one shirt that he apparently owns to weirdo who eats dirt and was a furry.
	That transition's been rather rough for Beto.
	Have you ever seen such a fall from grace?
	I mean, it's like a Grace Kelly-esque fall from... Well, that's actually a different kind of fall.
	And then you have Tim Ryan.
	Again, a congressperson from Ohio who is supposed to be a moderate but has failed to break out from the pack.
	So, it will be a...
	A cornucopia of boredom and stupidity tonight.
	I hope that you're looking forward to it the same way that I am.
	We'll talk about what's going to happen in that debate in just one second.
	First, a rise in geopolitical tensions have led to a five-year high in gold prices.
	Iran has announced it will break the uranium stockpile limit they agreed to under the Iran nuclear deal.
	Is it a coincidence that gold prices have been steadily rising since the tanker bombings?
	No, it is not.
	It is not because, number one, chaos breeds uncertainty, and uncertainty means people look for a safe haven.
	As I've been telling you for the past four years, gold is a safe haven against uncertainty.
	Is it part of your plan?
	It should be.
	It's part of my plan.
	Hedge against inflation, hedge against uncertainty and instability with precious metals.
	My savings plan is diversified.
	Yours should be, too.
	The company I trust with precious metal purchases, Birch Gold Group.
	That's because I know them.
	I've talked with them.
	And you can, too.
	You look back historically, and when the bottom falls out of everything else, gold does tend to safeguard savings.
	Birch Gold Group has thousands of satisfied customers.
	They've got countless five-star reviews, A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
	So go contact Birchgold Group right now.
	Get a free information kit on physical precious metals.
	See if diversifying into precious metals makes sense for you.
	They've got that comprehensive 16-page kit, and it'll show you how gold and silver can protect your savings, how you can legally move that IRA or 401k out of stocks and bonds into a precious metals IRA if that's something you're into.
	To get that no-cost, no-obligation kit, all you have to do is text my name, Ben, to 474747 again.
	Text Ben, my name, to 474747Ben to 474747.
	Okay, so the Democrats are worried about a clown car on stage.
	And that's pretty much, I think, how they should open the debate.
	I think an actual clown car should drive up on stage, the door should open, and 20 candidates should all climb over each other to get out.
	Like a scene from Dumbo.
	Really fantastic.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	So Politico reports, this week's debates will be the first time millions of Americans meet the cast of Democrats trying to take out President Donald Trump.
	That's precisely what has the party brass terrified.
	Yes, I would be terrified too if you're leading candidates or an octogenarian socialist who is so lazy he was kicked out of a commune in the 1970s, A fake Native American who has spent her career basically lecturing people while picking up a half million dollar salary from Harvard Law School and then proclaiming that she is some sort of leader of the people.
	Joe Biden, a gaffe machine who has failed in every presidential run he has ever tried and whose only fame and notoriety is due to the fact that he lucked out by having Barack Obama select him as his vice president.
	And And Kamala Harris, who is a narc, right?
	Those are your leading candidates, Democrats.
	Congratulations.
	And they'll all be on stage trying to outdo each other.
	This is the big problem.
	Because no one wants to be outflanked.
	If you're outflanked on that stage, you've got a problem on your hands.
	So instead, what you're going to get is Elizabeth Warren saying things like, I want to relieve student debt for future generations.
	And Bernie Sanders saying, what about past generations?
	Why cannot we relieve student debt for Abraham Lincoln, who only had two years of schooling, after all?
	And then you'll have Joe Biden sitting off to the side going, I remember once when... It'll be great.
	Great entertainment.
	So the Democratic Party is a little bit worried about this.
	Interviews with nearly 20 Democratic elected officials, party chiefs, labor leaders, and operatives the past week revealed an air of foreboding, verging on alarm, that the debates will degenerate into a two-night bare-knuckle brawl, which, honestly, that's why Republicans should watch this thing, because you never know what's going to happen, guys.
	I mean, if this turns MMA, If this turns ground and pound, it's gonna be good, solid stuff.
	Well, maybe that's because they will be left with the proper impression.
	Because it is a bickering, small-minded opposition party.
	So, that's... accurate?
	candidates starting to take swipes at one another, the fear is that voters will be left with the impression of a bickering, small-minded opposition party.
	Well, maybe that's because they will be left with the proper impression because it is a bickering, small-minded opposition party.
	So that's accurate.
	Randy Weingarten, who's president of the American Federation of Teachers and a member of the DNC, and this should just remind you folks that the teachers unions are not friends to They are friends to the Democratic Party, who promised them insane amounts of treasure and loot.
	Randy Weingarten says, It's going to be a scrum.
	A lot of people trying to score points on each other and looking like scoring points was more important than communicating with the American people.
	That circular firing squad is not going to help save our democracy or help working families.
	There are a few reasons Democrats think their presidential hopefuls might escalate their attacks on Wednesday and Thursday.
	Well, number one, somebody has to break out of the pack and this would be the time to do it.
	Cory Booker has been attacking Joe Biden.
	Kamala Harris has been attacking Joe Biden.
	Booker's not in the Biden debate.
	Kamala Harris is.
	It would not be a surprise to see Harris go after Joe Biden.
	Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, has criticized Biden for voting for the Iraq War and free trade deals.
	Moderate candidates, meanwhile, have been unloading on progressive opponents.
	Governor John Hickenlooper, who is not a relevant human being but is in the Bernie Sanders debate, has gone after Bernie Sanders.
	The big question tonight is going to be whether anybody attacks Elizabeth Warren.
	Does anybody have the stones to go after Elizabeth Warren?
	Or are they all just going to pretend that Elizabeth Warren isn't the true threat lurking inside the party?
	It'll be fascinating to see if Amy Klobuchar, for example, goes after the foolishness of Elizabeth Warren's actual plans.
	That'll be kind of fascinating.
	It turns out that Joe Biden's lead, by the way, is starting to deteriorate in some of the major states, according to a new poll from Crooked Media and Change Research.
	Crooked Media, of course, the far left group that brings you Pod Save America.
	They've put together a poll.
	Their poll shows Biden leading in Iowa and South Carolina and Bernie Sanders leading in New Hampshire, which is kind of fascinating.
	According to their polling, Joe Biden is only up on the rest of the field by nine points.
	So these polls are all over the place at this point.
	You got the Morning Consult poll that has Joe Biden all the way up at 38%.
	And then you got this Crooked Media poll that has Joe Biden all the way down at 29%.
	That's a 10 point gap.
	Pretty astonishing.
	And then Bernie Sanders following at 20%, Elizabeth Warren at 19%, Pete Buttigieg at 14%, and then very sad, sad Kamala Harris all the way down at 5%, Cory Booker at 3%, and Beto trailing at 3%.
	According to that new poll, Joe Biden leads the Democratic primary horse race, but in the various states, it's pretty close.
	In Iowa, Biden is only up 27-20 over Elizabeth Warren.
	They've got Sanders at 18 and Buttigieg at 17, so that's a crowd right there.
	In South Carolina, that is the only place where Biden has a serious lead, according to the Crooked Media polling group.
	They say that he is up at 39 percent, presumably because there are a lot of black voters in the South Carolina Democratic primary, and that is where Biden's base of support is, followed by Warren at 15, Sanders at 13, and Buttigieg at 11.
	One of the other things this poll is showing is how closely grouped Warren, Sanders, and Buttigieg are.
	In New Hampshire, Sanders is actually ahead at 28 percent.
	Biden is at 24 percent.
	Warren is at 21 percent.
	It'd be fascinating to see sort of what the breakdown here is in terms of the voting population.
	Are they oversampling young white people?
	Because that would be sampling the Pod Save America audience, presumably.
	But Joe Biden is, the real question is not going to be for tonight.
	The real question is going to be for tomorrow night.
	The real question is going to be what happens when Joe Biden is on the stage and all the guns train on Joe Biden.
	Well, one tactic is being made clear by the New York Times today.
	I'll get to that in just one second.
	First, let's talk about something we can all agree is awesome.
	Saving money, like your money.
	We may not all agree that saving government money is awesome, but saving your money is really great.
	The reality is, if you're not shopping around, you're probably not saving money.
	Honey, Honey is the way to do this.
	It's a free tool that you download to your computer's browser while you shop online.
	Honey scans the internet for coupon codes and other discounts and then it automatically applies the coupon with the biggest savings to your cart at checkout.
	It is indeed like magic.
	So I use Honey.
	It's awesome.
	It just runs in the background and my computer doesn't bother me until it's time for me to buy something.
	And it works at all the big websites.
	I mean, you go to Amazon, and you're going to save on the products, even the products at Amazon.
	And I shop at Amazon all the time.
	I do most of my shopping online.
	That means that Honey has probably saved me at this point hundreds of dollars, and it can save you lots of money as well.
	There's really no reason not to use Honey.
	It's free to use.
	It's easy to install on your computer in just two clicks.
	Don't take it from me.
	Take it from our listeners.
	Get Honey for free at joinhoney.com slash ben.
	That is joinhoney.com slash Ben.
	A lot of our listeners have been using it and telling us just how great it is.
	You can be one of them.
	Joinhoney.com slash Ben.
	Honey, the smart shopping assistant that will save you time as well as money.
	Go check them out at joinhoney.com slash Ben.
	Okay, so as I say, Tonight, it will be interesting to see if anybody opens up on Elizabeth Warren.
	Tomorrow night, Joe Biden's on stage.
	And that's going to be Joe Biden thrown in with a pack of alligators.
	And you can see the New York Times setting up the groundwork for some of these attacks.
	There's an article in the New York Times today called Lock the SOBs Up, Joe Biden and the Era of Mass Incarceration.
	This is not a piece of analysis.
	This is a piece of supposed reportage.
	Amazing that nobody in the Democratic Party discovered that Joe Biden was a tough-on-crime Democrat in the 1990s until just the minute they seek to sink him in the nomination process.
	Weird how that works.
	Wasn't he VP for like eight full years?
	Here's what the New York Times says.
	He now plays down his role overhauling crime laws with segregationist senators in the 80s and 90s.
	That portrayal today is at odds with his actions and rhetoric back then.
	So the idea is that if he was tough on crime back in the 80s and 90s, it's because he was secretly in league with segregationists.
	Now, this is incredibly stupid.
	One of the reasons it's incredibly stupid is many of the people who are very much behind better policing in the black community were members of the black community who were pointing out that the crack epidemic Was wrecking an enormous number of lives in the black community.
	In fact, federal government and states getting tougher on law enforcement in 1994 reversed a 30 year downward spiral in violent crime in the United States.
	It's one of the most dramatic stories in American public policy history.
	The fact that Joe Biden is now being dragged through the mud over it.
	Is fairly insane.
	We get to live off the benefit of the fact that we got tough on crime in the 1990s.
	Now we get to say, oh, well, you know, crime, it's really down.
	That means we can loosen up our laws.
	We'll see how that works out.
	I am very skeptical that works out well.
	But to suggest that because Joe Biden was worried about crime during the highest crime time in modern American history, To suggest that that was a problem for Joe Biden because Joe Biden was therefore a racist is insane.
	But that's exactly what the New York Times is going for right here.
	So here's what the New York Times reports.
	In September 1994, as President Bill Clinton signed the new Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act in an elaborately choreographed ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House, Joseph R. Biden Jr. sat directly behind the president's lectern, flashing his trademark grin.
	Oh, the cruelty.
	For Mr. Clinton, the law was an immediate follow-through on his campaign promise to focus more federal attention on crime prevention.
	But for Mr. Biden, the moment was the culmination of his decades-long effort to closely marry the Democratic Party and law enforcement and to transform the country's criminal justice system in the process.
	He had won.
	The truth is, Biden boasted a year earlier in a speech on the Senate floor, every major crime bill since 1976 that's come out of this Congress, every minor crime bill, has had the name of one Democratic senator from the state of Delaware, Joe Biden.
	Now more than 25 years later, as Biden makes his third run for the White House, many calling for ambitious criminal justice reform, among the other Democrats, he must answer for his role in legislation that criminal justice experts and his critics say helped lay the groundwork for the mass incarceration that has devastated America's black communities.
	Now, here's the problem.
	Black voters don't seem to care about this stuff.
	By polling data, black voters are not running away from Joe Biden at this point.
	first debate on Thursday has only added to his challenge.
	So has the fact that black voters are a crucial democratic constituency.
	Now, here's the problem.
	Black voters don't seem to care about this stuff.
	By polling data, black voters are not running away from Joe Biden at this point.
	Now, maybe that changes.
	But at this point, this belief that because Joe Biden was tough on crime, when crime rates were at record highs in the United States, therefore he's a racist, is ridiculous and insane.
	You know how many black lives were saved by criminal justice?
	By increases in criminal justice resources at the federal and state level in the 1990s?
	It would be tens of thousands of human lives were saved by that.
	The murder rates in America's capital cities were skyrocketing throughout the 1980s, culminating in the early 90s.
	And then the government decided, hey, maybe we better get tough on crime instead of following these lefty protocols on exactly how crime ought to be fought.
	And the crime rates started to drop.
	In fact, if you want a more prosperous minority community in the United States, if you want prosperous black communities with a serious tax base, with growing economies, with people who are able to go to well-funded schools, you know what you need?
	Crime rates to drop.
	The only way to do that is to have more police in these areas.
	Literally, that's the only way to do this.
	The reality of high black crime rates in the United States goes all the way back to the early 20th century and before.
	And that was largely because the white community decided that they didn't care if black people killed each other, because racists decided they didn't care if black people killed each other, so they simply would not allocate law enforcement resources to the black community.
	This ended with increases in violence.
	That was a result of white racism.
	Then, in the 1960s, There was a decision made by folks on the American left that they would get loose on crime, supposedly out of sympathy for black communities, and crime rates skyrocketed, including in the black community.
	And particularly in the black community.
	And those differentials have never been corrected between black and white crime.
	That is not the fault of race.
	That is the fault of government policy that ignored, for well over a century, crime in the black community because people who are racist didn't care if black people hurt each other.
	And then it was followed by lefties who thought they were being sympathetic if they pulled those resources out of the black community.
	And now you're starting to see that again.
	One of the best things that happened to the black community in the 1990s and 2000s was the decrease in crime rates that led to the capacity for investment in a lot of these communities.
	This isn't a particularly supremely conservative position.
	There's a columnist for the Los Angeles Times.
	Jane Levy, she wrote a book on this about crime rates in, I believe it's called Crimeland, something like that, in Los Angeles, specifically in Los Angeles.
	And what she talks about is the fact that contrary to popular opinion, what is actually needed in high crime areas is not fewer arrests.
	It is more law enforcement presence, people living in the community, people who are visible on the streets, people working with those people.
	The fact that Joe Biden is getting dragged through the mud over all of this, is fairly insane and it's being led, let's be frank about this, is not being led by members of the black community.
	This is being led by the progressive woke credentialed class who have decided that police are bad and that the real problem is quote-unquote mass incarceration.
	When folks say mass incarceration, the question is which of the people who are in prison are in prison because they didn't commit crimes?
	In order to make the case that mass incarceration has been a serious problem in the United States, you need to make the case that the people who are in prison are actually innocent or are being over-punished.
	So which people are those?
	If you want to make the case that low-level drug arrests should be decreased, I'm basically okay with that case.
	But the vast majority of people who are in prison are in prison for violent crime.
	Releasing those people on the street is not going to make communities better.
	In fact, it's going to make crime rates skyrocket.
	The combination of welfare benefits that are created to help single mothers at the expense of married families, and a crime policy that has been loosened over the course of the past few years, is making things worse, not better.
	The single largest factor in rising crime rates, and crime rates generally, the single rising factor in poverty, and poverty generally, is single motherhood, is men not in the community.
	There are two ways that men are being removed from the community.
	One is voluntarily, the men are knocking up women and leaving.
	That is not just true of black communities.
	This is true of poor white communities in Appalachia.
	Hillbilly Elegy, J.D.
	Vance's excellent book about this, makes this case, that high crime rates in poor white communities are also driven by single motherhood.
	That's obviously true.
	It's driven by that, and yes, people committing crimes and then getting arrested.
	But if people commit crimes and are not arrested, how exactly is that going to make any of these communities safer?
	Is the idea here that if men are out there committing crimes, these are also solid family men, generally, who are sticking at home and playing with the kids at night?
	There's not a lot of evidence to support this particular contention.
	So Joe Biden is not the bad guy here, but the media are going to try and make him the bad guy just in time for this debate.
	It's amazing that I've become a Joe Biden defender.
	I can't stand Joe Biden.
	But the Democratic Party has moved so far to the left that Joe Biden, who is indeed a far left dude, is now considered a serious moderate who's going to be attacked on stage for the Horrible sin of working to militate against incredibly high crime rates in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
	Truly astonishing.
	Maybe it's time for criminal justice reform.
	That doesn't mean that in 1994, we didn't need to delegate a lot more resources to fighting crime, which we did.
	And Joe Biden was right about that.
	He was right, but he'll be torn up and down about it anyway.
	OK, in just a second, speaking of fighting crime and illegal immigration, we'll get to an amazing shift.
	In the minds of so many in the Democratic Party and the media about whether there is a crisis on our border.
	First, we need to talk about your rights.
	When the founders crafted the Constitution, the first thing they did That's the First Amendment.
	The second right they enumerated was the right of the population to protect that speech and their own persons with force.
	That would be the Second Amendment.
	So, I love the Second Amendment.
	It's deeply important to me.
	Not only because I get a lot of death threats and I need a gun to protect myself, but also because the Second Amendment is the bulwark against tyranny.
	It was meant to be so.
	All the founders knew it.
	Owning a rifle is an awesome responsibility.
	Building rifles is no different.
	Started in a garage by a marine vet more than two decades ago, Bravo Company Manufacturing, this is BCM, builds a professional-grade product built to combat standards.
	They're fantastic.
	Bravo Company Manufacturing is not a sporting arms company.
	They design, engineer, manufacture life-saving equipment.
	The people at BCM assume that when a rifle leaves their shop, it will be used in a life-or-death situation by a responsible citizen, law enforcement officer, or soldier overseas.
	To learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, head on over to BravoCompanyMFG.com, where you can discover more about their products, special offers, upcoming news.
	That's BravoCompanyMFG.com.
	If you need more convincing, find out even more about BCM and the amazing people who make their products at YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
	BravoCompanyMFG.com.
	Go get one of their rifles.
	They are awesome folks.
	BravoCompanyMFG.com.
	Meanwhile, controversy again breaking out over illegal immigration.
	Democrats are trying to pass funding that would presumably alleviate some of the circumstances at the border, which there is a humanitarian issue at the border.
	There is no question there's a humanitarian issue at the border.
	So what are Democrats trying to do?
	They're simultaneously trying to tie together Emergency border aid and trying to force the government to release more illegal immigrants into the interior.
	That's what they're doing instead of alleviating conditions at the border and making it easier for the government to keep track of people at the border and to process asylum claims more easily.
	Democrats are forcibly attempting not to do that.
	Instead, they now want to provide humanitarian aid without actually allowing for the more quick processing, quick and easy processing of the people who are crossing that border, which of course is not going to alleviate the problem.
	It's going to increase the problem.
	If you are suggesting to people that if they evade the authorities for long enough, they get a green card, or that if we don't have more people at the border to process asylum claims, that somehow this is not going to lead to more people trying to cross between ports of entry, You're just dead wrong.
	So here's what House Democrats are trying to do.
	The House passed a $4.5 billion emergency border aid bill on Tuesday.
	It contained provisions for the treatment of migrant children in U.S.
	custody that Democratic leaders added amid widespread anger in their ranks over President Trump's handling of the crisis.
	I mean, even notice how the Washington Post covers this.
	It's not about Trump's handling of the crisis.
	Democrats Just three months ago, we're pushing not to fund more beds at the border.
	In fact, they're still pushing.
	Some Democrats are still pushing not to fund more beds at the border.
	Take, for example, the conflict between Hillary Clinton and AOC.
	They both tweeted yesterday about the situation on the border.
	Hillary Clinton tweeted, I've been heartbroken and horrified to read the news of children at the border being detained in appalling conditions.
	No soap, no toothbrushes, no beds.
	By the way, this goes all the way back to the Obama administration and before.
	Not enough food, babies being forced to take care of babies, everyone sick.
	Okay, now we should all be concerned about this, obviously, which is why we should increase the amount of funding at the border for Border Patrol.
	So what does AOC do about this?
	The illustrious, venerable, intelligent, brilliant, Fresh face.
	So fresh.
	So face.
	AOC, what does she tweet?
	She tweets, Wayfair is the company that makes beds.
	So just to get this straight, there is a shortage of beds at the border.
	Wayfair makes those beds.
	They asked the company to stop.
	CEO said no.
	Tomorrow they're walking out.
	This is what solidarity looks like, a reminder that everyday people have real power as long as we're brave enough to use it.
	So just to get this straight, there is a shortage of beds at the border.
	Wayfair makes those beds.
	AOC is encouraging people not to make the beds for the kids at the border to presumably help the kids at the border.
	Democratic policy on illegal immigration is completely incoherent, and not only incoherent, it is not driven toward alleviating humane conditions at the border, making them more humane, It is directed at increasing the number of illegal immigrants crossing the border and creating public pressure to allow those people to move into the interior in order to quote-unquote alleviate the crisis.
	That is the goal here.
	So the House voted along party lines 230 to 195.
	in favor of this border bill.
	The backdrop for the vote is not only the humanitarian concerns about the surging number of migrants, but also President Trump's threats, delayed but not canceled Saturday, to begin a mass deportation of undocumented immigrant families.
	Notice how the Washington Post uses undocumented immigrants.
	This is typical media speak for illegal immigrants.
	These are not immigrants who are just lacking documentation.
	The vast majority of people crossing the border are people who are immigrating without any claim to enter the United States.
	Most of the people who apply for asylum in the United States are not granted asylum on the basis of an asylum claim.
	Democratic lawmakers have expressed concerns about passing a border aid bill that would not address both of these issues.
	Nita Lowey, who is the House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman, Democrat in New York, unveiled changes to the bill Tuesday morning that would require the Border Patrol to establish new health and safety standards for migrants in its custody, as well as protocols for dealing with migrant surges within 30 days.
	The changes would also limit children's stays at influx shelters used by the Department of Health and Human Services to no more than 90 days and require the department to report to Congress on their use.
	Now all of that sounds innocent and wonderful until you recognize that Democrats are simultaneously defunding and preventing additional funding for the courts that would process these people.
	So basically what Democrats are doing, they're saying to Border Patrol, you need to certify that you're keeping people in humane conditions.
	Also, here's none of the money that you need.
	And also, you need to release people if they're not processed within 90 days, and we won't give you the resources to process.
	What do you think is the predictable effect of these two policies combined?
	The predictable effect is to grant a legal waiver so that people can enter the country based on shortage of resources that Democrats themselves refuse to provide.
	That's what's going on here, because $4.5 billion ain't gonna do it.
	Additional changes Lowy unveiled Tuesday afternoon would bar HHS shelter contractors who do not provide adequate accommodations, food and personal items such as toothbrushes, as well as routine medical care, schooling, leisure activities and other basic services.
	Listen, I think we should provide all of these things.
	You know how we should provide them?
	By also increasing the amount of resources we dedicate to processing the claims so that we can make sure that people who are not supposed to be here do not remain here.
	You know how we can change this?
	By negotiating a deal with the Mexican government That they are a safe third-party country, just like Canada is a safe third-party country.
	If you're applying for asylum, you do so in the first country upon which you set foot that is outside your home country.
	You know how we can do this?
	By changing the law to allow people to apply for asylum from Mexican territory as opposed to being housed in U.S.
	facilities.
	By the way, four Democrats voted against this thing.
	They thought that it was even more important not to fund anything at the border than to fund anything at the border.
	Those Democrats were Ayanna Pressley, AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib.
	Of course.
	Of course.
	The cadre of radicals inside the Democratic caucus.
	Tuesday's House vote was not expected to garner significant Republican support.
	The White House announced it was opposed to the bill on Monday.
	House GOP leaders said they favored a competing bipartisan bill that passed the Senate Appropriations Committee on a 30-to-1 vote last week.
	So it's bipartisan, that Senate bill.
	No Republicans basically voted for this bill because it's a bad bill.
	Kevin McCarthy, the House Minority Leader, he said, um, guys, you could just pass the bipartisan Senate bill that we passed.
	There are some Republicans who are not in favor of the bipartisan bill even, but the fact is that that is a better bill than the House bill.
	The two chambers now have only two days to spare before lawmakers are set to leave Washington for a week-long holiday recess.
	HHS has already warned Congress it will exhaust its funding for housing migrant children at the end of the month, a scenario that would impede efforts to move them out of border control facilities.
	The Senate is poised to vote this week on its own $4.6 billion emergency spending bill that included $2.9 billion for the Department of Health and Human Services to address the large numbers of unaccompanied children arriving at the border.
	Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that it was time to get this thing done.
	Why is the House trying to hold this up?
	Specifically, by creating provisions designed to allow people to be released into the interior by law.
	The Senate bill includes $50 million more than the House bill for immigration judges to speed the adjudication of asylum claims and $61 million in back pay for ICE agents that Democrats in the House refuse to provide.
	Representative Chuck Fleischman of Tennessee, the ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Subcommittee, said Republicans are especially unhappy with the lack of funding for immigration judges and restrictions on ICE funding.
	He said this should have been an easy situation, but nothing is easy when it comes to the border.
	House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested that a vote against the House bill was a vote for Donald Trump and his inhumane, outside-the-circle-of-civilized attitude toward the children.
	She said that basically we are going to hold up the Senate bill.
	President Trump came out and he blasted all this.
	We'll get to the Democratic response to Trump, Trump's response to all this, and the media, who are just damned liars.
	We'll get to that in just one second, but first...
	With the ever-increasing numbers of car makes and models, it's now impossible to stock all the parts you need in a traditional chain storefront.
	Why endure the often pointless or seemingly intimidating questioning like, is your Odyssey an LX or an EX?
	And then you wait while the counterman orders the parts on his computer, and it turns out that he only has like one part at the store.
	You have computers, and those computers have internets.
	And those internets have access to RockAuto.com at home and in your pocket.
	RockAuto.com is a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.
	Go to RockAuto.com.
	Shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
	They have everything from engine control modules and brake parts to tail lamps, motor oil, even new carpet.
	Whether it's for your classic or daily driver, get everything you need in a few easy clicks delivered directly to your door.
	They've got amazing selection, reliably low prices, all the parts your car will ever need, rockauto.com.
	Go check them out right now, rockauto.com.
	See all the parts available for your car or truck right Shapiro in their How Did You Hear About Us box.
	They know that we sent you.
	That helps out the show, and it helps out our advertisers.
	Remember, go to rockauto.com and write Shapiro in their how-did-you-hear-about-us box so they know that we sent you.
	OK, we're going to get to the insane, hypocritical, democratic, and media response to the situation on the border in just a second.
	First, go subscribe over at dailywire.com, $9.99 a month or $99 a year.
	With the $99 a year, you get all sorts of great benefits.
	You get to be in the mailbag, which we do every Friday.
	You get an additional two hours of the show every day.
	I mean, we are working hard for you.
	You get this, the very greatest in beverage vessels, leftist tears, hot or cold tumbler.
	Feast your eyes upon it, and you help protect us From the vicissitudes of our Internet big tech overlords.
	There's a story yesterday we'll get to a little bit in a little bit on the show about Google employees labeling me and this show Nazi materials.
	This show.
	I mean, if I'm a Nazi, I'm so deep undercover that even I don't know I'm a Nazi.
	It's unbelievable.
	But according to our big tech overlords, you know, they could take us off the air at any minute on some of these tech outlets.
	That is why you should go subscribe to make sure that you can still get the material, to make sure that you can still hear the news that you want to hear with the conservative commentary that you want.
	Go check us out right now.
	Please subscribe.
	It really does help us.
	Go check us out at Dailyware.
	where we're the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in America.
	So President Trump came out yesterday and he said, listen, the Democrats don't support anything.
	They've been trying to hold us up on every front.
	And when you look at what the House is doing by not providing the resources necessary to process people, which effectively forces people to be released into the interior, he is not incorrect.
	We're trying to get the Democrats to agree to really give us some humanitarian aid, humanitarian money.
	But with that, if we can get this bill signed, we'll be able to do it.
	You know, the Democrats don't want to sign anything.
	And now I think they're going to probably sign this, from what I understand.
	I call it humanitarian aid.
	What we would like to do, and I'll do it right now officially, is ask the Democrats to give us Help on asylum, help on all of the loopholes, the horrible loopholes that get signed in over a period of years that don't allow us to do what we should be able to do.
	We need the votes of Democrats.
	OK, and he's not going to get the votes of Democrats.
	Democrats are busily blaming President Trump for the situation on the border, even as they withhold the funding that he needs on the border, even as they do not give him the resources that he requires in order to process asylum claims for people trying to get into the country.
	In a second, I'll show you what the predictable effect of this is.
	Here's Dick Durbin, the ridiculous senator from Illinois, blaming President Trump for the situation on the border despite the fact that inhumane conditions go all the way back to the 1980s and all the way forward through the Obama administration and nobody in the media or the Democratic Party gave any craps about it.
	Here is Dick Durbin.
	Suddenly it's Trump's fault.
	The talk stops here when it comes to the President.
	It's his decision.
	Look at his record, Willie.
	First he started us with a Muslim travel ban.
	Then he eliminated the DACA program, protecting 790,000 people.
	Then he said no protection for those under temporary protected status.
	Then they took 2,880 children, infants and toddlers, away from their parents and tossed them in a bureaucratic sea.
	And now he's calling for mass arrest.
	It's the President.
	Make no mistake, we've had four different secretaries over at Department of Homeland Security.
	And of course that's inexcusable, but ultimately it's the President's responsibility.
	Okay, again, every claim that he makes about what Trump has done, either the Obama administration did it, it's forced by court order, or the Trump administration has refused to release adults into the interior of the United States without keeping tabs on them, which is actually what Democrats want.
	So, here's what's happening.
	Right now, we have a shortage of resources on the border to process asylum claims.
	Very few people are being processed because our resources are spread so thin.
	Statistically speaking, we have seen a massive uptick in the number of illegal immigrants attempting to cross the border, particularly since November, December of last year.
	Now the media are finally realizing it, and naturally it's Trump's fault, despite the fact that back in November, December, January, February, he was saying we've got a crisis on the border.
	And the idea was that Democrats said, no, no, no, it's a manufactured crisis.
	It's not a real crisis.
	It's a manufactured crisis.
	Now, the truth is that the escalation of the crisis happened in January, February and March.
	Partially, I'm sure, as a result of the fact that Democrats refused to work with President Trump on any of this stuff.
	And let's go back to that period for just a second and point out exactly how members of the media treated the supposedly manufactured crisis.
	So here's Jim Acosta.
	And ladies, find you a man who loves you like Jim Acosta loves Jim Acosta.
	Here's Jim Acosta of CNN.
	You'll remember this.
	Reporting from the border, standing next to a fence, and explaining that there is no emergency on the border.
	And here are some of the steel slats that the president's been talking about right here.
	As you can see, yes, you can see through these slats to the other side of the U.S.-Mexico border.
	But as we're walking along here, we're not seeing any kind of imminent danger.
	There are no migrants trying to rush toward this fence here in the McAllen, Texas area.
	As a matter of fact, there are some other businesses behind me along this highway.
	There's a gas station, Burger King, and so on.
	But no sign of the national emergency that the president has been talking about.
	As a matter of fact, it's pretty tranquil down here.
	It's pretty tranquil.
	There's no national emergency.
	And then there are members of the media.
	Here's a montage of members of the media explaining this is absolutely a manufactured crisis from Chris Matthews to everyone else on MSNBC and CNN.
	This is just six months ago.
	And it was not a manufactured crisis at the time.
	It was not.
	And it certainly wasn't by February or March.
	Here are all the members of the media doing this routine.
	Well, there is no national emergency at the border.
	It's all made up.
	It's presidential fiction.
	Because there clearly is no emergency.
	There's no reason for this on border security ground.
	We don't have a crisis at the border.
	Nothing has changed on the southern border.
	If the war was such a crisis, why wasn't that a priority?
	So it's a fake crisis.
	The president is lying to the American people about a national emergency.
	There is no emergency at the border.
	It all depends on, you know, how you say there's a national emergency and a crisis at this moment when there wasn't one before.
	What the president is doing is manufacturing a crisis.
	There's a crisis going on there and it needs to be dealt with and Congress... But is it a crisis just because you call it that?
	Is it a crisis just because you call it that?
	There's Chris Cuomo of CNN.
	Is it a crisis just because you call it that?
	Well that was their message back in January and February.
	Now their message is that this crisis is unprecedented, which is what Trump was saying back in January and February.
	Hey, there was a serious situation at the border.
	It was exacerbated by the fact that the media refused to call it a serious situation at the border.
	But now they've realized, hey, wait a second, there's a serious situation at the border.
	So today, let's start with the New York Times.
	The New York Times and the Associated Press, everybody printed this photo of drowned migrants.
	It's a horrible photo, a horrible, horrible photo.
	It's a photo of a man named Oscar Alberto Martinez Ramirez.
	He died with his 23-month-old daughter Valeria as they tried to cross from Mexico into the United States.
	It is a horrifying photo of a dead child with her dead father.
	Apparently what happened here is that trying to cross between ports of entry, because people were not being processed fast enough at ports of entry due to, wait for it, shortage of resources, Because of all that, because of all that, this father tried to swim his daughter across the river.
	He then proceeded to leave his daughter across the river and go back across the river for his wife, at which point his 23-month-old daughter, being a 23-month-old and I have small children, tried to jump back in the river to follow her daddy.
	First of all, the fa- Like, as a parent, that's inexcusable.
	I'm sorry, that's inexcusable.
	To leave a 24-month-old next to a giant body of water?
	Not expect that the kid might try to jump in the water and follow you across the water?
	Instead of just waiting at the port of entry?
	In which case, both father and daughter would presumably be alive today?
	Just as a parent, that's inexcusable.
	It just, it is.
	It's irresponsible.
	But, what creates the situation?
	The feeling among people that they have to do this sort of thing?
	Well, inability to process people at the border would be one thing.
	Inhumane facilities at the border would be another thing, although that wouldn't really be the concern because presumably this father and daughter would have then approached the border patrol authorities and claimed asylum.
	Because once you're on American soil, you can do that, which is why people are trying to cross between ports of entry.
	You know what might have helped here?
	A wall.
	Because if there were a wall, you couldn't cross the border and then claim asylum.
	You would be forced into the ports of entry.
	You'd be funneled into the ports of entry.
	Democrats oppose that wall.
	So the media have been pushing out this photo.
	And I honestly am not clear on which dead bodies the media are willing to show.
	It seems like an unclear standard and a politically driven standard, by the way.
	I'm not saying that they shouldn't show pictures like this.
	I'm saying that they are radically inconsistent on when they will show pictures like this.
	So they'll show a picture like this or the drowned migrant famously drowned on the beaches of Turkey trying to reach European soil in the midst of the refugee crisis over there.
	They will not show pictures from, for example, the Bataclan or from the Orlando Pulse nightclub shooting or Israelis who are killed in terror attacks.
	So it's very weird which photos the media choose to feature and which they don't.
	I would guess that there's a pretty significant political motivation there.
	But the photo is obviously horrifying.
	And now the media have awakened.
	Oh, look, there's an actual crisis on the border.
	So Don Lemon.
	Last night, saying, will this picture move the needle?
	Well, I don't know.
	When the entire Republican Party and the President of the United States was declaring there was an emergency on the border, he needed more resources to deal with it.
	You and your friends were busy explaining that it was all manufactured, it was all fake, Trump was lying, he just needed a political win.
	And now all of a sudden it's, will these photos move the needle?
	With whom?
	Trump has wanted more resources on the border for virtually his entire presidency, and that really escalated leading up to the 2018 election.
	Here is Don Lemon.
	Are we shocked enough?
	I don't know.
	Where were you three months ago?
	How about that?
	The Salvadorian government released a statement from an earlier press conference where they said that the father and daughter drowned on Sunday the 23rd.
	And as they attempted to cross the river, their bodies were found on Monday.
	They add that they're in touch with the Mexican authorities to make arrangements to repatriate the victims.
	This photo is just tough to look at.
	I'm wondering though, is it going to move the needle here?
	Is it going to move the needle here?
	You know what would move the needle here is if you guys had agreed.
	We've got a crisis on our southern border.
	You know it'd be great there.
	Faster processing of asylum.
	Faster movement to deport people who shouldn't be here.
	A wall on the southern border.
	More resources for humane treatment of people who are crossing the border illegally.
	I mean, it's amazing.
	The shift is amazing.
	I mean, it really is.
	Chris Hayes over at MSNBC says, Trump dehumanizes everyone.
	This is all about Trump dehumanizing people.
	AOC voted against a bill that would even provide the most basic increase in funding for border facilities and was designed to allow more illegal immigrants to be released into the country.
	This is about Trump dehumanizing people?
	There is broad American agreement on what to do here.
	It is Democrats who have been refusing the funding that is necessary specifically for political gain.
	Here's Chris Hayes doing this routine.
	New York Times reporting a CBP official quote said the agency was able to send about a hundred children back to the station because overcrowding there had been alleviated.
	The official disputed the lawyer's accounts of conditions at the facility, insisting that migrant detainees housed by the agency were given access to periodic showers and were offered unlimited snacks throughout the day.
	Perhaps it's not surprising that this keeps happening when the people running our nation's immigration infrastructure constantly denigrate, insult, and dehumanize immigrants.
	Again, the conditions on the border have been consistent since Barack Obama was in office and before.
	No one on the left gave a damn about that.
	Brandon Darby over at Breitbart has been doing reporting on this stuff since I was working there.
	He's been doing reporting on this since like 2012, 2013.
	And nobody cared about it.
	No one cared about it.
	Because Barack Obama was president.
	The same New York Times that printed that photo, that printed that terrible photo today, that same New York Times has a, had a piece January 11th, 2019.
	Trump claims there's a crisis at the border.
	What's the reality?
	The reality is illegal border crossings have been declining for nearly two decades.
	In 2017, border crossing apprehensions were at their lowest point since 1971.
	There's one group of migrants that is on the rise, families.
	A record number of families have tried to cross the border in recent months, overwhelming officials at the border and creating a new kind of humanitarian crisis.
	Nonetheless, the idea was that Trump was saying something that was false.
	This is how the media covered this thing because they couldn't just give Trump the win.
	They couldn't just allow Trump to say something true and then we could all deal with it in responsible, reasonable, adult fashion.
	No, that was unnecessary.
	We couldn't do that.
	We simply couldn't do that.
	Okay, time for some things that I like and then some things that I hate.
	So, things that I like today.
	And so since the Democrats are going to be a farce on stage tonight, I figured it was time to feature a comedy of errors on the show.
	There's a play called Noises Off that's been playing pretty consistently in London for years and years and years.
	They made a movie out of it with a great cast.
	People like Carol Burnett and Michael Caine and John Ritter is in it.
	He's terrific in it.
	Noises Off is basically a farce about a farce.
	So it's a play that's taking place that's supposed to be a farce and it denigrates into even more of a farce as the actors blow all of their lines and are terrible at everything.
	The movie is really, really funny.
	It's kind of a gem from the 80s.
	So here's a little bit of the trailer.
	Critics everywhere are calling Noises Off one of the most hilarious films you'll ever see.
	It's screamingly funny, side-splitting, ripping good fun.
	Noises Off is a rib-tickling, hysterical, raucous, riotous romp that's funny, funny, funny.
	It's actually a very, very funny movie, so you can go check that out.
	Noises Off, which is a great cast, very funny movie, worth the watch.
	Okay, time for a bevy of things that I hate.
	So this veritable cornucopia of things that I hate today, that begins with Google.
	So Google apparently had an internal conversation, it's now been uncovered by James O'Keefe, in which one member of the Google team emailed other members of the YouTube team saying, "Today it is often one or two steps to Nazis.
	"If we understand that PragerU, Jordan Peterson, "Ben Shapiro et al. are Nazis, "using the dog whistles you mentioned in step one.
	"I can receive these recommendations "regardless of the contents of what I'm looking at, "and I have recorded thousands of internet users "sharing the same experience." I don't think correctly identifying far-right content is beyond our capabilities.
	But if it is, why not go with Meredith's suggestion of disabling the Suggestions feature?
	This could be a significant step in terms of user trust.
	So, in other words, in order to achieve user trust, we have to shut down opinions we don't like and call everybody a Nazi.
	Sir, this is from the Trust, and I believe this guy is a member of the Trust and Ethics Council?
	Is the IDA here?
	And nothing I trust more than people who label me a Nazi.
	Just for the record, not only am I not a Nazi, I am probably one of the most hated people by Nazis in the United States and white supremacists in the United States, which is why the FBI arrested somebody two months ago for threatening to kill me and my family, finding in his house a copy of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a framed photo of Adolf Hitler, and body armor.
	So that's good times over there.
	You know, as the person most targeted by the alt-right on the internet in 2016, as a person who has spoken out routinely and repeatedly on the evils of the alt-right and white supremacy, as a person who despises Nazis, I think Nazis are evil, obviously, I will tell you, I did not see this coming.
	I find it strange that PragerU, run by Dennis Prager, who I know personally, and happens to be a fairly observant Jew, and also does not like Nazis, That PragerU and Jordan Peterson, whom I also know personally, and who spends half of his lectures talking about the evils of Nazi totalitarianism and judging people on the basis of race.
	These are Nazis, according to this person over at Google.
	And the fact that these people are, the step from, we hate Nazis, let's fight Nazis, to everyone I hate is a Nazi, was about one second.
	That was about a one second step.
	And that should scare the living hell out of everybody.
	It's one of the reasons why big tech is under the gun right now.
	And you know what?
	Big tech should be under the gun.
	If they refuse to provide any sort of transparency, that's right, this comes from the Transparency and Ethics Council.
	There's no transparency because I have no idea they're calling me a Nazi and then downgrading my videos, presumably.
	I have no idea that they're doing that.
	But apparently they are, and when it comes to ethics, nothing seems more ethical to me than falsely labeling somebody a Nazi.
	It's become the Democrats' favorite pastime of late, and certainly members of the woke left, this is their favorite pastime of late.
	It's insane, it's insipid, it's disgusting.
	I mean, look, I'm a libertarian.
	So that means that I'm not in favor of regulating YouTube.
	I'm not in favor of regulating Google.
	I'm not in favor of regulating Facebook.
	I don't want those companies regulated.
	I think the heavy hand of government may be your friend today, but it will be your enemy tomorrow.
	With that said, if these companies do not provide any standard of transparency, how the hell are we supposed to trust them?
	And you know what?
	I can't hold back the dogs of war here.
	There are people who are far more militant than I who are on the Raging against this stuff.
	And raging against this stuff and ready to regulate this stuff because they feel like the promise was broken.
	That Google and YouTube and Facebook did not pitch themselves as lefty outlets that would only allow material they liked to be featured.
	These places were not pitched as Huffington Post.
	These places were pitched instead as platforms that were generally going to be generous in their allowance of content.
	And if they have shifted that into a left-wing, woke sensibility, there are going to be a lot of people who say, OK, you broke the bargain, so sure, it may violate my principles to regulate you, but what the hell, man?
	You broke the bargain, so my bargain with you is broken.
	Not going to play fair with people who don't play fair.
	I'm not one of the people who is suggesting that.
	I have, again, come out against Josh Hawley's bill, the senator from Missouri, in terms of regulating Facebook, regulating Google.
	I've come out against Elizabeth Warren breaking up big tech.
	But I'll tell you what, the bubbling, seething undercurrent of hatred for big tech is largely driven by the fact that they are completely non-transparent, and that when they are exposed, they're talking about crap like this, censoring materials they don't like.
	It's pretty astonishing stuff.
	Okay, you know what?
	We'll stop there.
	We'll be back here later today for two additional hours of content, so stick around for that, or we'll see you tomorrow for a full recap of the first Democratic debate.
	I'm Ben 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.
	Democrats go full open borders ahead of tonight's debate.
	Google admits that it is trying to silence all of those scary Nazis like Orthodox Jew Ben Shapiro.
	And the Washington Post smears me with a bunch of fake history.
	We'll get into it all.

▲