All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 19, 2020 - The Ben Shapiro Show
01:00:16
Why To Vote For Trump | Ep. 1118
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Joe Biden stonewalls all questions about Hunter Biden's controversial emails.
Trump supporters are physically assaulted in San Francisco and Washington, D.C., and we examine why conservatives will vote for Trump.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
Today's show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.
Protect your data from prying eyes at expressvpn.com.
We are in the final days leading up to one of the most contentious presidential elections in our nation's history.
What if Biden wins?
I mean, the market could certainly drop.
What if the outcome is uncertain for weeks?
What if we only have eight Supreme Court justices?
What if the Democrats try to pack 83 more on there?
You know, lots of stuff could happen in the future.
This is why you should diversify your investment portfolio.
What are you doing pre-election to shore up your investments and safeguard your future against the unknown?
Well, do what I do.
Diversify into gold with Birchgold.
Just like I keep telling you.
Wouldn't it be nice to have that layer of security whichever way the wind blows?
Text Ben to 474747.
One of the great people at Birchgold will walk you through your conversion of your eligible IRA or 401k into a precious metals IRA where the physical metal, not ETFs, will be stored securely.
Birchgold.
They're my dudes.
They're people that I work with regularly.
I know them.
I trust them.
They have an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Countless five-star reviews.
Talk to them.
They're extremely knowledgeable.
They can help you preserve your savings.
Give them a call, ask all of your questions, get all the information, and then take at least a little bit of your money and diversify into precious metals.
It is good to be diversified across resources.
Text Ben to 474747.
Open a precious metals IRA today.
Again, text Ben to 474747 to get started.
474747 to get started.
Text Ben to 474747.
All righty, so over the weekend, Fox News broke a story regarding the Hunter Biden emails and Joe Biden and everything else.
So as we all know, the New York Post ran a story last week involving Hunter Biden's emails.
They said that they obtained these emails and a bunch of text messages from a computer that he left at a Delaware repair shop and then never came back and got.
Well, this prompted the media to basically claim that the story was false, beginning to end.
They suggested that this was ill-gotten gains, that it was Russian hacking or something of the sort.
There's no evidence at this point, by the way, that that is the case.
They just sort of speculated it.
On the basis of that speculation, the social media sites like Twitter and Facebook decided to suppress the story.
Twitter later sort of backed down, but not really.
The New York Post Their account on Twitter is still suspended.
Over at Facebook, they have decided to reduce the reach of stories that deal with the New York Post revelations.
Well, over the weekend, Fox News now reports that one of the people on an explosive email threat allegedly involving Hunter Biden has corroborated the veracity of the messages, which appear to outline a payout for former Vice President Joe Biden as part of a deal with a Chinese energy firm.
So this obviously makes the allegations a lot more serious.
The allegations apparently are that it wasn't just Hunter Biden going around and picking up bags of cash using daddy's name, which, of course, we've known about for quite a while.
I mean, that's been true fairly obviously on the surface.
Hunter Biden has no qualifications for anything of note.
Again, his history is extraordinarily checkered.
The idea that he was picking up 50 grand a month just to sit on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian natural oil and gas organization, is absurd.
He was picking up a bunch of money in China as well.
There are stories now he's picking up money in Kazakhstan.
It is not Really a shock that to learn that that was happening.
It would be a shock, however, to learn that some of that money was being passed through Joe, right?
That would actually implicate the vice president in serious corruption.
It's the difference between.
Looking the other way on a bad thing going on and actively taking part in a bad thing going on.
According to Fox News, one email dated May 13, 2017, obtained by Fox News, includes a discussion of remuneration packages for six people in a business deal with a Chinese energy firm.
The email appeared to identify Hunter Biden as, quote, chair slash vice chair, depending on agreement with CEFC, in an apparent reference to the now bankrupt CEFC China Energy Corporation.
The email includes a note that, quote, Fox News spoke to one of the people copied on the email who confirmed the authenticity of the email.
There's been a lot of talk, by the way, about the emails being forged or fake.
Not one denial of the authenticity of the emails or texts has been put forward by either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden's people.
Sources, here's where it starts to get very very dicey.
Sources told Fox News the big guy is a reference to the former vice president.
The New York Post initially published the emails and other controversial messages that Fox News has also obtained.
So that would really change things a fair bit if it turns out that Hunter Biden was being paid money and then half of it was being held for Joe Biden.
Now there was another supporting text message in which Hunter Biden was texting with his own daughter and he suggested that in the future, unlike your granddad, I won't be holding half your salary, which again sort of suggests that maybe something nefarious is going on.
And maybe there's a good explanation for all of this.
Maybe it turns out that Hunter was off operating on his own.
Joe didn't know anything about it.
Maybe everybody's just misinterpreting this and the big guy is somebody else.
But wouldn't you expect the media to ask questions about this?
Wouldn't it make sense for the media to ask questions about this, especially given the fact that just like everybody else in the upper echelon of politics, Joe Biden has engaged in some sweetheart dealings before.
As of 2008, this is a report from the New York Times in October of 2008, quote, Although he is among the least wealthy members of the Millionaires Club that is the United States Senate, Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, a college professor, earn about $250,000 a year.
Mr. Biden maintains a lifestyle that is more comfortable than the impression he may have given on the campaign trail.
This is as of 12 years ago.
A review of his finances found that when it comes to some of his largest expenses, like the purchase and upkeep of his home and his use of Amtrak to get around, he has benefited from resources and relationships not available to average Americans.
As a secure incumbent who has readily faced serious competitions during 35 years in the Senate, Mr. Biden has been able to dip into his campaign treasury to spend thousands of dollars on home landscaping and some of his Amtrak travel between Wilmington, Delaware, where he lives, and Washington.
And the acquisition of his waterfront property a decade ago involved wealthy businessmen and campaign supporters, some of them bankers with an interest in legislation before the Senate, who bought his old house for top dollar, sold him four acres at cost, and lent him 500 grand to build his new home.
There's nothing to suggest Biden bent any rules in the sale, purchase, and financing of his homes.
Rather, he appears to have benefited at times from the simple fact of who he is, a United States Senator, not just Amtrak Joe.
He was a VIP, so he was treated accordingly by the bank, said Ronald Tennant, a former loan officer who handled the mortgages Biden used to build his house.
The bank didn't give him a below-market interest rate, a perk that has caused embarrassment for some other members of Congress.
But, said Ronald Tennant, we paid particularly close attention to make sure everything came out right.
So again, there's just a certain amount of cronyism that goes on in politics.
It is also inarguable that Joe Biden has looked the other way as many of his relatives, including his brother and his son, went around trafficking on his name.
The real damaging allegation would be if Joe Biden personally benefited from any of that, if it wasn't just him being sympathetic to family members and looking the other way while they Participated in the appearance of corruption, but if he actually participated in corruption, remember this entire story began with Joe Biden denying originally that he met with any Ukrainian business person and then his campaign saying, well, maybe there was sort of like a passing event where he met one of Hunter Biden's allies and Hunter Biden goes around the world basically telling foreigners that he has access to his dad and therefore they should hand him sacks of cash, right?
That's the appearance of corruption.
That's bad.
It is really bad, obviously, and maybe criminal if Joe Biden was actually receiving money from any of those transactions.
And right now, the only thing we have that suggests that is an unnamed source of Fox News suggesting that that's what those emails suggest.
OK, so with that said, wouldn't you expect that Joe Biden would have to answer some questions about it?
Well, the answer, of course, is no.
The answer, of course, is no.
He's not going to have to answer any questions about it because, of course, he's a Democrat.
That's the way that this works.
So here, for example, is Joe Biden being asked by a CBS News reporter about all of this.
He smacks the reporter.
Nobody seems to see this as a threat to the press.
Nobody seems to see this as Joe Biden avoiding the question.
Instead, the entire media, the blue checks on Twitter, are very angry at Fox News and the New York Post for reporting on the story at all.
So we've got three years, three long years, of Democrats and the media claiming at the top of their lungs that Trump-Russia collusion was a foregone conclusion.
That the Steele dossier, though it had yet to be verified, was filled with valuable information.
And yet the angle the media have been taking here is that Joe Biden not only doesn't have to answer questions, but that the New York Post has to answer very serious questions for having run the stories in the first place.
Here was Joe Biden avoiding the question over the weekend.
And the idea here is that the reporter is being nasty for asking the question.
Another reporter asked Biden about this over the weekend as well, and Biden simply walked away from it.
And everybody else starts laughing.
You can hear the other reporters laughing in the background as Joe Biden waves his hand at the allegation and then just walks away.
Now, is that how the media treat similar allegations about the Trump family and their supposed corruption and moneymaking off of the Trump name?
Of course not.
Of course not.
Okay, so the New York Times has a long piece today, not about Joe Biden and his history or the history of the Biden family.
Instead, they have a wonderful piece today about how the New York Post is chaotic in the newsroom.
According to the New York Times, the New York Post front page article about Hunter Biden on Wednesday was written mostly by a staff reporter who refused to put his name on it.
Two Post employees said, Bruce Golding, a reporter at the Murdoch-owned tabloid since 2007, did not allow his byline to be used because he had concerns over the article's credibility.
The two Post employees said, speaking on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation.
Coming late in a heated presidential campaign, the article suggested that Joe Biden had used his position to enrich his son, Hunter, when he was vice president.
The post based the story on photos and documents the paper said it had taken from the hard drive of a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden.
Many post-staff members questioned whether the paper had done enough to verify the authenticity of the hard drive's contents, said five people with knowledge of the tabloids and her workings.
Staff members also had concerns about the reliability of its sources and its timing, the people said.
The article named two sources, Stephen K. Bannon, who is now facing federal fraud charges, and Rudy Giuliani, the president's personal lawyer, who is said to have given the paper a copy of the hard drive on October 11th.
Giuliani said he chose the New York Post because, quote, either nobody else would take it, or if they took it, they would spend all the time they could trying to contradict it before they put it out.
Top editors met on October 11th to discuss how to use the material provided by Giuliani.
The group included the tabloid veteran Colin Allen, known as Colin, Stephen Lynch, the post editor-in-chief, and Michelle Gotthelf, the digital editor-in-chief, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting.
Mr. Allen, who is the Post's Editor-in-Chief from 2001 to 2016, urged his colleagues to move quickly, the person said.
As the deadline approached, editors pressed staff members to add their bylines to the story, and at least one aside from Mr. Golding refused, according to two Post journalists.
A Post spokeswoman had no comment on how the article was written or edited.
Now, it is certainly possible that somebody looked at the article after having written the text and said, you know what, I'm not comfortable putting my name on this.
It is also quite possible that the person just didn't want to be the person on TV answering questions about all of this.
It turns out there's a pretty fraught political environment.
Morris did not have a bylined article in The Post before Wednesday, a search of the website showed.
Emma Jo Morris, a deputy politics editor who joined the paper after four years at Fox News, and Gabrielle Fon Rouge, a post reporter since 2014.
Morris did not have a byline article in the post before Wednesday, a search of the website showed.
She arrived at the tabloid in April after working as an associate producer on Sean Hannity's Fox News show.
Von Roosh had little to do with the reporting or writing of the article.
She learned that her byline was on the story only after it was published, according to three people with knowledge of how it was prepared.
Okay, so the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, they've reported that they could not independently verify the data in the Post article, which included hedging language, referring at one point to an email allegedly sent to Hunter Biden.
Okay, so this was all from the New York Times.
Okay, so here is the question.
All of that may very well be true.
Is this the standard the New York Times holds?
Because they've posted approximately 1,000 unverified scoops.
Dozens of them.
And we did a whole news cycle, it came up in a presidential debate, when the Atlantic posted scoops about President Trump saying bad things about wounded and killed troops.
And it turned out that everybody who was present on the record denied that any of this happened.
Didn't matter, it was still brought up.
I mean, we have unsourced allegations from the Steele dossier pushed into full public view by BuzzFeed in early 2017.
And they're literally, there's nothing to verify any of it.
Nothing.
They ran with it.
Like the New York Times ran with all of it.
People ran with all of it because once it had been put out there, the story became not how it was obtained, but that it was put out there in the first place.
It was the right that started focusing on how it was obtained.
It was the right that said, okay, where did the Steele dossier come from?
Why are we all talking about it?
Who gathered it in the first place?
And that turned into so-called Russiagate.
That turned into the whole sort of Spygate scandal.
Now, what does that say?
Well, it says two things.
One, it is certainly fair for the New York Times to ask where all of this stuff came from.
But two, it does demonstrate their political leanings, right?
It was the right that uncovered SpyGate in the aftermath of Russiagate.
Well, it was the left that is now pushing into where did the laptop come from?
And people are treating this story as quote-unquote debunked, even though, again, neither Joe nor Hunter have actually denied that the emails and texts are real.
And in fact, the New York Post, in order to establish the bona fides of the texts, they've actually put out a bunch of texts that make Joe Biden look pretty sympathetic, right?
There are a bunch of texts that came out over the weekend in which Joe Biden was texting his son Hunter while Hunter was in rehab.
And they are very sympathetic.
They make Joe look really warm, like a good dad.
Okay, so either they're all real or they ain't real, but we really don't have any information that they ain't real at this point.
There has yet to be a full-on denial that these things are real or any explanation of what it means to hold 10 in trust for the big guy.
Or what it meant when Hunter told his daughter that his dad held half of his salary or whatever.
The New York Post points this out in an editorial today.
They have a piece about this, say much of the push to ignore the post drop of Hunter Biden's emails centers on the charge that it's all unverified.
The claim is more excuse than truth.
First, a host of media outlets have now interviewed the company repair guy, the computer repair guy, who provided the data at the heart of these exposés.
He said exactly what we've reported from the start about how the laptop came into his possession.
Second, neither Hunter nor Joe has ever questioned that the fact that the drive is real.
They merely dismissed the entire line of questioning while charging the post has an agenda in presenting it to the world.
Third, we've published emails and pictures, most of which have nothing to do with Ukraine or China that contain an extraordinary level of detail.
Is all of that fabricated?
The Biden campaign's response notably is not that an email from a Burisma official thanking Hunter for an introduction to his father isn't real.
Instead, said meeting doesn't show up on Joe's official schedules.
Pressed by Politico, the campaign acknowledged they couldn't say for certain if Joe Biden had met him casually.
It's particularly rich that the New York Times has fixated on the unverified excuse since it spent much of the Trump era offering supposed dirt from anonymous sources, which, by definition, makes the info unverifiable.
This, of course, is exactly right and exactly true.
So the fact that the media wish to ignore this story is evidence more about what the media's prior biases are than about the story itself.
Senator Ron Johnson, for his part, member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he says that we are seeing more and more validation that the Hunter Biden emails are true.
Here's the senator from Wisconsin.
What we're finding is we're finding more and more validation that these emails are true.
One of the recipients on that email chain has told Fox News that, yeah, that's a true email.
Now, these other emails that Breitbart's breaking from, Bevan Cooney is the co-conspirator, the man who's in jail right now.
It's a totally separate email server.
Okay, so, um, you know, obviously this deserves a little bit more scrutiny.
Remember, it was just a few months back that Adam Schiff said that Hunter Biden, under no circumstances, should be called as a witness in the entire Ukrainian investigation, even though Republicans were clamoring for it.
Republicans can, for instance, call on Hunter Biden.
This isn't like some fantasy football trade, as I said yesterday.
This isn't, we'll offer you this if you'll give us that.
We'll offer you a witness that is irrelevant and immaterial, who has no relevant testimony, but a witness that will allow us to smear a presidential candidate.
Alrighty, so this has been highly political from the start.
There's a reason the Democrats don't want to talk about it.
That makes perfect sense.
Now, again, does this mean that the story itself is utterly well substantiated in every possible way?
I have no evidence that's the case.
I don't know.
You don't know.
What I do know is that nobody seems to be willing to hold Biden's feet to the fire.
He's been doing these long interviews and nobody is asking him these questions.
He's being asked about it on the tarmac where he promptly rips into the reporter for asking what is a very simple and predictable question.
And meanwhile, this election just gets more and more contentious in every possible way.
Violence broke out over the weekend against Trump supporters in both Washington, D.C.
and San Francisco.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, our founding fathers knew the American people are the ultimate guardians of their own liberty.
This is why they created the Second Amendment to secure every American's fundamental human right to protect themselves, their family, and their community.
We've watched in the past few months as violence has broken out in major cities around the country.
Gun sales are through the roof.
There is a reason for that.
And if you're going to own a gun to protect yourself, protect your rights, if you're a responsible gun owner, you should have a gun that works for you.
I mean, a gun that really works.
I'm talking about Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Bravo Company was started in the garage of a Marine veteran of the U.S.
Marine Corps in Heartland, Wisconsin.
The people at Bravo Company MFG support the right of responsible private citizens to have the access and ability to employ the same tools as civilian law enforcement as a means of defending ourselves, our loved ones, our communities, and our freedoms should a threatening situation ever arise.
Bravo Company Manufacturing is not a sporting arms company.
They design, engineer, and manufacture life-saving equipment.
BCM assumes 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 a soldier overseas.
Quality is, indeed, of utmost value to them.
Every component of a BCM rifle is hand-assembled and tested by Americans in Heartland, Wisconsin to a life-saving standard.
They're making guns not for target shooting, not for hunting.
They're making it in case you, God forbid, have to use it.
To learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, Head on over to BravoCompanyMFG.com.
You can discover more about their products, special offers, upcoming news.
That is BravoCompanyMFG.com.
If you need more convincing, find out even more about BCM and the awesome people who make their products at YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
Again, that's YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
Okay, well, this election continues to grow more and more contentious.
Especially, I think that it's worth noting that there seems to be a widespread perception among folks on the left that Donald Trump is, as the satanic, incredibly evil figure, that if Trump goes away, everything in the United States gets better.
That if Trump goes away, then we have this great coming together, COVID ends, the skies shine forth, the beautiful new sun.
Not true.
There are grave underlying issues.
These issues predated Trump.
Frankly, the country, in terms of social comedy, in terms of the social fabric, the country was much better off at the very beginning of 2009, right after Obama was elected, but before Obama actually became who he became over the course of his terms.
The problems that have been ripping America apart during the Trump era did not start during the Trump era.
They started during the Obama era.
The Trump era was largely a response to them.
And they're not going to go away if Trump goes away.
This is why you're seeing the kind of violence that you are seeing against Trump supporters.
Again, if this were violence against Biden supporters, by Trump supporters, you know it would be front page news.
It is not, therefore it is not.
This happened, this was an altercation that happened in San Francisco.
There's a black man in San Francisco who's protecting people who are marching for Trump from presumably members of Antifa and other violent protesters.
And this guy got his front teeth knocked out.
Here's a little bit of video of the incident.
I mean, the guy's literally just standing there, and they're trying to walk away.
And these jackasses in black masks come up to them and just start punching them directly in the face.
I mean, that's absurd.
It's absurd.
How is this acceptable in civil society?
The answer is it's not.
But when you say it's okay to punch a Nazi and then you define everybody you don't like as a Nazi, it becomes very easy for this to happen.
Meanwhile...
Reportedly, in Washington, D.C., this is according to the Post Millennial, a female Trump supporter was allegedly attacked and hospitalized by Women's March and Black Lives Matter activists after she participated in a pro-Trump rally.
Isabella Maria DeLuca, whose bio identifies her as a Turning Point USA ambassador, posted images of her injuries while recovering at a local hospital.
Apparently, she is Outreach Director for the Republicans for National Renewal, which is a pro-Trump organization.
A Breitbart News reporter attending the event captured footage of DeLuca waving a Trump flag and shouting four more years earlier in the day.
DeLuca says that she was assaulted by an older female.
She said the first woman was a white, older woman.
She had glasses on, a glittery, bedazzled Black Lives Matter shirt.
She looked like she could have been my grandma, honestly.
According to DeLuca, a younger assailant then grabbed DeLuca's pro-Trump flag when she tried to grab it back.
The woman allegedly punched and choked her.
DeLuca said she felt reluctant to defend herself due to the advanced age of her attacker, but was determined to retrieve the flag when it was snatched.
Deluca told the publication a younger female Black Lives Matter supporter assisted the older woman who had initially assaulted her by hitting, pushing, and punching Deluca.
Apparently, she was treated with a cervical collar due to her head and neck injuries and said she was suffering from blurry vision and dizziness due to the impact.
And we've seen this sort of stuff fairly routinely across the country.
People who are wearing MAGA hats and this is treated as though they are wearing a swastika on their hats and therefore people are being punched.
And honestly, the mainstream left may not be in favor of the violence, but they're certainly in favor of this basic idea, which is that if you vote for Trump, if you consider voting for Trump, you are evil.
It's one of the reasons why I think the left is so fearful about the polling right now.
Because when you castigate anybody who possibly would vote for Trump as an emissary of Satan, It turns out they stopped telling pollsters that they're going to vote for Trump.
And so there is this great fear out there that there's this enormous, silent Trump vote.
Now, that may or may not be true.
It would have to be incredibly enormous to overcome the sort of barriers to election that Trump is showing in the polls right now.
The polls are narrowing just slightly.
There's an IBD-TIPP poll today out showing that Trump is down six nationally.
If Trump gets down to about down four nationally, then this starts to look like a very, very competitive race again.
And indeed, the gap has started to narrow a little bit.
That's not a shock.
It usually does in the very lead up to the election.
But the kind of language that is used by typical mainstream members of the left is indicative of their thought process when it comes to how Trump supporters are to be viewed.
And it is specifically because of that that I think Trump has such a high level of support among Republicans, among other reasons, which is if you suggest that everybody who supports conservative viewpoints is the equivalent of President Trump.
They treated Romney and they treated Trump kind of the same way.
And so a lot of Republicans really resonate to the Trump line, it's not about me, it's about you.
They don't hate me.
They don't hate you because they hate me.
They hate me because they hate you.
I am just a stand-in for their hatred of you.
I am just the face that they put on their hatred of you, many Americans who disagree with the wild left agenda.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let us talk about the fact that if you've got male pattern baldness running in your family, you want to avoid that fate.
But there's really only one way to avoid that fate, and that is you need to get started with keeps.
I have male pattern baldness.
It does run on both sides of my family, actually, and that is why I've been using keeps for quite a while.
Two out of three dudes will experience some form of male pattern baldness by the time they're 35.
The best way to prevent hair loss is to do something about it while you still have hair left.
You just have to go to the doctor's office for your hair loss prescription.
Now, thanks to Keeps, you can visit a doctor online, get hair loss medication delivered right to your home.
They make it easy.
They deliver your medication every three months, so you can say goodbye to pharmacy checkout lines and those awkward doctor visits.
Keeps offers generic versions of the only two FDA-approved hair loss products out there.
You may have tried them before, probably never for this price.
Prevention is key.
Keeps treatments typically take between four to six months to see results, and it's important to act fast because you gotta stop that hair from going away.
The faster you start, the more hair you will save.
So as I say, the hatred for Trump supporters does translate into a love of Trump on the part of many people on the right.
100,000 men trust Keeps for their hair loss prevention medication.
If you're ready to take action and prevent hair loss, go to keeps.com slash Ben to receive your first month of treatment for free.
That is K-E-E-P-S.com slash Ben, keeps.com slash Ben.
So as I say, the hatred for Trump supporters does translate into a love of Trump on the part of many people on the right.
The radicalism of the left drives a lot of people to the right and also drives them to be silent about the fact that they are on the right because they're afraid of the consequences socially for saying they're on the right.
And there are people on the left who embrace this.
Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration, a wild leftist, he tweeted out over the weekend, quote, When this nightmare is over, we need a truth and reconciliation commission.
It would erase Trump's lies, comfort those who have been harmed by his hatefulness, and name every official, politician, executive and media mogul whose greed and cowardice enabled this catastrophe.
So in other words, every single person in a position of power who backed Trump or said a kind word about Trump would apparently be listed by Robert Reich by a government commission.
And then those people would be targeted for destruction.
That's his idea of a truth and reconciliation commission.
When he says Truth and Reconciliation Commission, he says what he's talking about is the post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa.
Yeah, the difference is that that was post-apartheid.
This is not actually an apartheid state.
It's not anything remotely close to an apartheid state, the United States of America.
Nelson Mandela became the leader of South Africa at the end of apartheid.
Barack Obama was elected president of the United States because there is no apartheid.
There was apartheid in the United States in the 1950s.
There is no apartheid in the United States circa 2020.
The idea of a truth and reconciliation commission in which we all come together to examine the great evil of Trump is such a bizarre and insane notion.
But I think that there are a lot of people on the left who agree with this.
There are a lot of people on the left who agree that half of America is irredeemably evil and racist, and that we need some sort of reconciliation commission to wipe this off our hearts.
It's like the post-Nazi era.
We need a denazification program for anybody who is conservative.
We need a denazification program for anybody who served in the Trump administration.
And that's because America is so endemically evil on every level.
And this would explain the general perception on race that is promoted by the left.
If you believe that your enemies are truly evil, if you believe that your enemies stand in favor of racial apartheid, and that everybody who disagrees with you is some sort of sick xenophobic racist, well, that allows you to do whatever you want.
You can punch people in the streets.
You can push Louis Farrakhan.
Over the weekend, there was yet another SOP piece to Louis Farrakhan by a person named Natalie Hopkinson, an author and associate professor at Howard University's Department of Communication, Culture, and Media Studies.
Talking about the wonders of Louis Farrakhan, overt anti-Semite.
You want to talk about somebody who hates gay people?
Louis Farrakhan hates gay people.
According to the New York Times at Peace, just over 25 years ago, Louis Farrakhan, the head of the Nation of Islam, realized he needed help in his quixotic quest to summon a million black men to the National Mall.
A key supporter of the event was Marion Barry, who had just returned to the Washington's mayor's office after a stint in federal prison.
Farrakhan wanted Miss Barry, the first lady, Cora Masters Barry, This piece goes on and on about the wonders of the Million Man March and the genius of Louis Farrakhan and what a nice guy Louis Farrakhan was.
It goes on, and all of this is justified because, of course, America is endemically evil.
Not only that, it turns out that if you oppose Louis Farrakhan, we can also condemn you as evil.
The author of this piece, a person in, again, Natalie Hopkinson, She denounced offended Jews as, quote, people who have become white for their privilege.
Which is pretty amazing.
She said people who have become white should not be lecturing black people about oppression.
That's the way America is now viewed.
People who have become white.
Now, I wasn't aware that you could, quote unquote, become white.
Apparently you can.
Apparently the way that you, quote unquote, become white is if you are no longer perceived by the white superstructure as a person of minority heritage.
But what that really says is that the way we are now going to judge people as to whether they're a minority or not is based on level of lack of success, which is an awfully racist way to look at people who are black or Hispanic.
I mean, because again, race is not malleable.
If you're saying now that race is malleable based on level of success in American society, what you're really doing is saying that black people and Hispanic people are somehow incapable of success, which of course is a great racist lie.
But that notion is being promoted and actively promoted.
By the way, actively promoted in many cases by the state.
The San Diego Unified School District is overhauling the way it grades its students.
Students will no longer be graded based on a yearly average in the San Diego Unified School District or on how late they turn in assignments.
The San Diego Unified School District is overhauling the way it grades its students.
Board members say the changes are part of a larger effort to combat racism.
According to the San Diego Unified School District Vice President Richard Barrera, this is part of our honest reckoning as a school district.
If we're going to be an anti-racist school district, we have to confront practices like this that have gone on for years and years.
Oh, you mean practices like grades?
You mean practices like you need to turn in your work on time?
This is the length to which we have gone to declare that Americans are racist and America is racist.
So connect all of these ideas, right?
We now live in an America where anti-racism is the order of the day.
Ibram X. Kendi-style, Robin DiAngelo-style anti-racism is the new prevailing ideology.
That ideology says that America is deeply evil, that if you don't agree that America is deeply evil, it's because you are a racist.
And also, if you are a racist, we should have a truth and reconciliation commission, according to Robert Reich.
Or we should just punch you in the face if you're walking on the streets.
And the way that we can tell is because you're wearing a Trump hat.
What do you think that's gonna do?
You think that might drive a silent Trump vote?
You think it may create an impetus for people to vote against this garbage?
People should vote against this garbage.
It's garbage.
I mean, again, just because black and Hispanic students apparently are underperforming in the San Diego Unified School District does not mean that grades are the problem, that grades themselves are the problem.
This is no less racist and horrific than that ridiculous post put up by the National Museum of African American Culture that suggested that timeliness, hard work, and deferred gratification were white qualities.
A notion with which actual racists like David Duke agree.
According to NBC San Diego, according to data presented by the district, under the old grading system, teachers fail minority students more than white students.
A lot more.
During the first semester of last year, 30% of all D or F grades were given to English learners.
One in four, 25% of failing marks, went to students with disabilities.
By ethnicity, 23% went to Native Americans, another 23% went to Hispanics, and 20% of D or F grades went to black students.
But just 7% of failing marks went to white students.
So, they've decided to get rid of grades.
Academic grades will now focus on mastery of the material, not a yearly average, which board members say penalizes students who get a slow start or who struggle at points throughout the year. So in other words, if you stink at math at the beginning of the year and then you're okay at math at the end of the year, then the fact that you were terrible at math the entire year has no impact on your overall grade, which is a big deal.
You don't turn it in on time?
That's not considered part of your academic grade.
at the beginning of a school year.
Another big change, teachers can no longer consider non-material factors when grading.
Things like turning in work on time and classroom behavior will now instead count to our students' citizenship grade, not their academic grade.
That's considered non-material now.
You don't turn it in on time, that's not considered part of your academic grade.
Also, there is a suggestion that they will review potential student disparities stemming from their zero tolerance disciplinary policy They're going to get rid of their penalties for cheating because it turns out that it might disproportionately harm black people to punish people for cheating.
Which, again, is a really racist notion.
What, only black people are cheating, or Hispanic people are cheating, or Native American people are cheating in the San Diego Unified School District?
But this sort of stuff is now running rampant throughout not only the intelligentsia, but through our state-sanctioned systems.
According to Christopher Rufo, writing for the New York Post today.
At the King County Library System, a private consulting firm called Racial Equity Consultants recently held racially segregated listening sessions to quote, root out institutional privileges and systemic inequities.
Apparently, there's a lot of institutional racism in the library.
If you reject that, you're accused of internalized racism.
At the Federal Veterans Administration Puget Sound facility, the local leadership has launched a series of racially segregated caucuses for individuals who identify as white and those who identify as African American or black or as people of color.
Apparently, these are racially segregated sessions.
The VA refused to provide comment.
Finally, at the King County Prosecutor's Office in Seattle, the Chief Prosecutor Dan Satterberg and senior staff have recently required employees to sign an equity and social justice pledge and continued training for white employees who must quote-unquote do the work and learn the true history of racism in our country.
Okay, it turns out that this sort of stuff is going to drive a Trump vote.
It will.
And it should drive a Trump vote.
Because if you're going to react to the complete takeover of the intellectual underpinnings of the country by this anti-racist garbage, and the Democrats have decided to go along with it, and not only go along with it, push it, foster it with your taxpayer dollars, not sure how many choices you have.
And then there's the question of what comes next if Joe Biden is elected.
We've been covering this on the show.
I know the media don't want to talk about what happens after Joe Biden is elected.
There's this bizarre notion that after Joe Biden is elected, all wrongs are healed.
Magically, everything bad in the country comes to an end and just good springs up everywhere in much the same way that Barack Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize for being breathing.
And also being president of the United States.
Once Joe Biden is elected, the work is done.
There's nothing more to do.
But it turns out there's an actual agenda that is attached to Joe Biden.
And it is a very, very bad agenda.
We'll get to that in one second.
First.
Let us talk about the fact that right now a lot of people are staying home.
A lot of gyms across the country still have extreme restrictions on what you can and cannot do at the gym.
More and more people are now working out at home, which makes sense.
This is why you need Echelon.
Echelon, they've got a huge lineup of connected fitness bikes, fitness mirrors, rowing machines that give you a fun, challenging workout from the comfort and safety of your home.
In as little as 20 minutes, you can get into the best shape of your life and be active with the entire family.
The world-class instructors will motivate you with daily live non-demand classes that are always available when you need them.
And unlike their competitors, Echelon is affordable for everybody.
Their EX1 Connected Fitness Bike is less than half the price of a Peloton.
If you looked at those Peloton ads and you thought to yourself, kind of fun, but looks like super duper expensive, why would I do that?
Well, good news for you.
Echelon can make it happen for you.
My wife has been doing the Echelon classes.
They are excellent.
She assures me.
With Echelon financing, you can try them out risk-free for 30 days, zero down, as low as $46 per month.
Don't pay a ton or a peloton.
Instead, go check out Echelon right now.
I've been using Echelon myself.
That's how I got in this incredible shape.
Go check out Echelon right now.
The programs are fun, the equipment is fantastic, and it's not going to cost you an arm and a leg like a Peloton.
Go to EchelonFit.com slash Ben.
That is E-C-H-E-L-O-N-Fit.com slash Ben again.
EchelonFit.com slash Ben.
Go check them out right now, already in just a second.
We'll get to more from the Biden agenda.
First, 2020, you may have noticed, it's been an insane year.
Statues toppled, coupled with radical rioting, looting in America's cities.
It can feel at times like America is coming apart.
Right now, it's a perfect time to read my book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps.
I talk about the fact that there are two perspectives on America, one that says we ought to stick together, and the other that says we really ought to be ripped limb from limb because America deserves it.
My book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps, I think is the single best window into what is going on in the country.
I'm not going to say it was prophetic when I wrote it back in December, but it's kind of prophetic.
It sort of predicted everything that was going to happen in the country.
And all of those problems are going to outlast whatever this election is.
Go pick up a copy.
It is a great primer.
It is a great educate.
People ask me all the time, what's a great history book I can read to learn more about American history and American philosophy?
That's really what my book is about.
Go check it out right now.
How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps makes a fantastic gift.
Particularly for high school and college students, How to Destroy America in 3 Easy Steps.
Check it out right now.
Also, in case you missed it, we had another fantastic episode of the Sunday Special yesterday with Megyn Kelly.
We discussed the media bias against President Trump, we discussed Roger Ailes and the movie Bombshell, why she left Fox, and the real question, what's her take on her interaction with Trump during 2016?
So, head on over and watch at dailywire.com or listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get Also, as with everything else in 2020, there's been a lot of drama with the presidential debates, but we are ready for the next and final debate this Thursday.
Join us at 8.45 p.m.
Eastern, 5.45 p.m.
Pacific for an all-new episode of DailyWare Backstage.
Watch debate with us, get our immediate live reaction to this major political event.
Even better, join DailyWare right now as an insider or All Access member.
Get 20% off with Code Debate so you can watch all the debate coverage live with us on our Apple TV or our Roku app.
It's magical.
What do members get?
Well, glad you asked.
They get our articles ad-free, access to all of our live broadcast and show library, the full three hours of the Ben Shapiro Show exclusive.
Readers pass content available only to Daily Wire members.
If you're considering that All Access membership, you get to join us on All Access Live every night for online and live stream discussions.
You also get not one, but two of these magical leftist ears somewhere.
Hmm.
With your membership as well as early, sometimes exclusive access to new Daily Wire products.
So go watch the debate with us, the final debate with us on dailywire.com, YouTube and Facebook.
Get 20% off your Daily Wire membership with code DEBATE when you sign up today.
You are watching and listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
All right. So one of the questions we ought to be asking ourselves is not just what is the left going to do wrong in terms of ideology, but what are they going to do wrong practically?
Members of the left, members of the Democratic Party continue to talk about destroying America's institutions.
Pete Buttigieg over the weekend, who is now being widely touted as a top advisor to Joe Biden, he was on Fox News and he suggested that we absolutely should pack the court.
He calls it depoliticization of the court because we now live in 1984 where all terms have been redefined.
My views haven't changed.
I think bipartisan reform with the purpose of reducing the politicization of the court is a really promising idea.
Let's also be clear that a president can't just snap their fingers and do it.
And most of all, we don't want to allow this president to change the subject, which is what they're always doing.
We've got, I mean, there are all kinds of interesting questions about the future of the American judiciary.
Well, okay, so that's gonna be fun.
It's gonna be fun to watch the Democrats try to pack the judiciary, even as they get rid of the filibuster, even as they add states to the Senate.
If you're worried about the institutional infrastructure in the United States, Trump ain't the danger to it.
Trump might like to, in the cockles of his heart, he might like to overrun all institutional boundaries.
He has yet to do so.
Seriously, he really has not.
I mean, the fact is, the legislature still has enormous power.
Trump has used executive orders, but less so than Barack Obama did.
Trump has not, in fact, quashed the press.
It is the Democrats who are openly threatening to destroy institutions of the American government.
They're threatening to destroy the Electoral College.
They're threatening to destroy the Senate.
They're threatening to destroy the Supreme Court.
They're threatening to make the executive branch into the only branch that matters.
That's been part of the longtime goal, going back to Woodrow Wilson.
Mike Pence correctly points out that we do at some point deserve a straight answer on court packing.
But the good news is that the media will ask.
And then when Joe Biden says, I'll tell you, I'll tell you later.
You know, come on, man.
Come on.
I'll tell I'll tell you later.
Come on, man.
Then they're just they go back to sleep.
Here's Mike Pence pointing this out.
Now, Joe Biden says he's going to tell the American people what he'll do after Judge Barrett is confirmed in a week or so, even though millions of Americans are voting right now.
Well, come on, man.
The American people deserve a straight answer, Joe.
When you're running for the highest office in the land, the American people deserve to know if you're going to respect the highest court in the land.
OK, the answer is he's not going to get that answer because the media are utterly uninterested in anything revolving around Joe Biden.
They're also uninterested in his economic plans.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board has a piece today talking about the cost of Bidenomics.
Same.
Joe Biden has shrewdly kept the campaign focus on COVID-19 and President Trump, which has helped him avoid having to talk much about his own policies.
That's especially true of his economic proposals.
A new study out Sunday from the Hoover Institution shows that it will have a damaging impact on growth, job creation, and household income.
Biden often cites Moody's, the credit rating service, for saying his economic plan will yield faster growth and more jobs.
Wall Street, he likes to say when he mentions Moody's, as if that's a conservative stamp of approval, even as he claims Trump is a captive of Wall Street.
But everyone knows most economists at today's big financial institutions have a Keynesian bias that posits consumer demand and government spending as the main drivers of growth.
This is certainly true of Moody's.
The fact is that a huge number of quote-unquote economists on Wall Street are very much in favor of the government taxing more and spending out the wazoo because they believe that spending is going to jog the economy to new and great heights despite the fact that that's not actually what has happened here.
Barack Obama spent money like a crazy person and the economy was incredibly slow.
Trump cut regulations and spent money like a crazy person and the economy grew incredibly fast.
It wasn't about the spending of the money.
It was about the cutting of the regulations.
It was about the lowering of the taxes.
It was about the feeling that Trump was not going to change the rules on businesses around the country based on whatever the political whim of the moment was.
The Wall Street Journal says, We're not predicting a depression if Biden wins the election.
On dire economic predictions, Trump is the mirror image of Paul Krugman on the left because Trump keeps saying there will be a depression if Biden wins.
The data show the U.S.
economy is recovering from the pandemic shutdowns faster than most economists predicted.
Democrats may attempt to portray the economy as a disaster that requires trillions in new spending, but Biden would inherit an economy with strong growth momentum.
The housing market is booming.
Small business sentiment is bullish.
Manufacturing is on the rebound.
Once a COVID-19 vaccine is approved and better therapies become more widely available, the economy should take off, as even Democratic governors ease their lockdowns.
The issue, however, is whether Biden's policies will nurture this strong recovery or slow it down.
This is where the Hoover study comes in.
It examines the Democrats' proposals on health insurance taxes, energy, and regulation.
The authors are economists Timothy Fitzgerald, Kevin Hassett, Cody Kellen, and Casey Mulligan.
Both Hassett and Mulligan were members of the Council of Economic Advisors in the Trump White House, but then the boosters of Bidenomics are veterans of the Clinton-Obama administrations.
Overall, the authors estimate that the Biden agenda, if fully implemented, would reduce full-time equivalent employment per person by about 3%, the capital stock per person by some 15%, and real GDP per capita by more than 8%.
Compared to the Congressional Budget Office estimates for these variables in 2030, this means there will be 4.9 million fewer working Americans, $2.6 trillion less in GDP, and $6,500 less in median household income by 2030.
Okay, well that's a lot of money out of your pocket.
The analytical details are especially helpful on energy costs and the so-called labor wedge against hiring that have received little attention.
Biden's plans to promote electric vehicles and phase out fossil fuels go beyond anything Obama proposed.
To take just one example, the electrification of most passenger cars would increase the per capita demand for electric power by 25%, even as more than 70% of baseline electric power from fossil fuels would go offline.
So you'd require enormous subsidies.
In other words, they're getting rid of electric power plants at the same time they need more electricity.
Or consider the expansion of the ACA and Medicare for people above 60 versus 65 now.
The subsidies affect the incentive to work.
Authors estimate the ACA changes would increase the average marginal tax rate on labor by 2.4 percentage points.
That's nearly half as much as the 6 percentage points from the original ACA.
Biden is also proposing substantial increases in business tax rates that will raise the cost of capital.
All of this will eventually end up being imposed down to the worker.
Biden would raise capital costs by phasing down bonus depreciation.
In the 2017 tax reform, he would raise labor costs by imposing a 12.4% Social Security payroll tax to income above $400,000.
That threshold is not indexed for inflation, so it would apply to ever more Americans as the years go by.
And none of this is good for the economy.
So, again, there's a lot about a Biden administration that would be bad, ranging from attacks on institutions to economic plans to his willingness to kowtow to China and Iran.
There's a lot that's bad there.
Now, the big problem for Trump is that Trump has not been able to make Biden the focus of this campaign, and he refuses to make Biden the focus of this campaign.
He loves the rallies.
He loves being a stand-up comedian.
But the fact is that every time he does a rally and is a stand-up comedian, and he says things that draw headlines, he may enjoy that.
It may jazz up the base.
But it explicitly allows Joe Biden to escape any sort of questioning because the media just zoom in on Trump.
They just redirect the camera away from Biden and back to Trump.
So instead of him going out there and doing just an hour long rally, just asking over and over and over, what's going on with Hunter and Joe?
Instead, it's just random, weird distractions and overwrought claims about locking people up.
So Trump did a rally over the weekend where he literally, like Trump, he's a troll.
And it's one of the things people love about him is that he's willing to troll a media that has been trolling the right for too long.
But it's hard for trolls to win elections.
It is.
Trolls have a tough time motivating people in the middle.
Anybody beyond the base, it's tough to get motivated.
So here is Trump.
I mean, this is very funny stuff.
I'm not gonna pretend it's not funny.
I'm also not gonna do what so many people do, which is what?
When Trump says something that he said before, then people say, he's reached a new low.
It's a new low!
Nope, same low as ever.
Same exact low.
There is no new low for Trump.
It is not as though he just keeps digging that pit.
That pit has a bottom.
The bottom is where we are.
We've been there for four years.
Trump has been absolutely consistent.
He has not changed one iota.
Here is Trump being Trump.
Why don't you drive them crazy?
Just say 12 more years, right?
12 more years.
OK, so again, very funny line.
I get it.
And people love it on his side.
And then it just gives the Democrats an excuse to say that Trump is never going to leave office and he's violating institutional norms.
Everyone knows he's joking.
Doesn't matter.
It allows for another media cycle about this stuff.
Then Trump was doing this rally and he and the crowd started chanting, lock her up about about Gretchen Whitmer, who is the governor of Michigan.
Now, of course, Whitmer's lockdown policies have been awful.
I mean, truly, truly bad.
Her COVID policies were really, really bad.
But there's also a story out there right now that she was being targeted by a terror group for actual kidnapping and maybe murder.
And so when the crowd starts chanting, lock her up without Gretchen Whitmer, and then Trump says, lock them all up.
Like, is that a headline that you need right now?
Really?
Like truly?
Again, this is political malpractice.
The Democrats would terminate our recovery with a draconian, unscientific lockdown like your governor is doing right now for everybody except for her husband.
No, it's so badly hurting you stay.
Okay, and Trump kind of lets that go.
And then he suggested that Joe and Hunter Biden and the Clintons should be should be locked up.
This is all just is different.
He had a bunch of rallies over the weekend.
None of this is useful.
None of it's a new bottom.
I'm not going to pretend I'm newly offended by any of this.
I find all of it equally stupid and equally offensive.
I just don't, I don't think it's worthwhile.
I don't think it is a smart tactic.
I don't think that it has anything to do with the world of reality.
Gretchen Whitmer is not going to jail.
Joe Biden and Hunter Biden, no criminal activity has been proved.
They're not going to jail.
Hillary Clinton, she did something criminal.
It was let off the hook by James Comey.
She ain't going to jail.
Is this sort of stuff useful?
I mean, just for a second, forget about how much you dislike the people he's talking about.
Is it useful for him to be doing this in the last couple of weeks of a presidential campaign?
That Biden family and others, but that Biden family is corrupt.
It's a corrupt family.
And with me and my kids, let me tell you, my kids, I'll tell you something though, I just lock them up.
You shouldn't lock them up.
Lock up the Bidens.
Lock up Hillary.
Lock them up.
Okay, so that's playing the hits.
There's only one problem.
He's got a debate on Thursday, and you know this is now going to come up.
You know that Kristen Welker, who is the moderator in this particular case, she's definitely going to ask Biden what is his favorite flavor of ice cream, and then she's going to ask Trump on what basis he is suggesting that his political opponents ought to be locked up.
Again, Trump says things that sound like they violate institutional norms, and they violate rhetorical norms.
I think that is certainly true.
I think he violates rhetorical norms on a daily basis.
He's been doing this since 2015.
As far as institutional norms, Democrats are certainly more of a threat to institutional norms.
So the case for Trump really is the case against Biden and the case for what the Trump administration has done, not the case for Trump personally.
And so when people say, how could conservatives vote for Trump?
I mean, look at the man, look at his character, look at all this.
The answer is the alternative sucks.
The alternative is terrible.
The alternative is an ideology of wokeism that is completely damaging to the American ideal.
The alternative is horrible policy on the part of Joe Biden.
The alternative stinks.
And also, the Trump administration has done a lot of good things, which is why when I watched the Mike Pence-Kamala Harris debate, and you just watched Pence defend most of the Trump agenda, you thought to yourself, if this were the Trump agenda without a lot of the crazy, this is a winning agenda right here.
Okay, so with that said, over the weekend, I've said before, Many times, I've said before that I plan on voting for Trump in this election cycle.
And I do.
I plan on voting for Trump in this election cycle.
But I didn't vote for Trump in 2016.
Right?
I mean, I was very obvious about the fact I didn't vote for Trump.
I didn't say that it was a sin, like some people did, to vote for Trump.
I didn't suggest that it was bad to vote for Trump.
I said, I fully understand why you would vote for Trump to stop Hillary Clinton.
I can't do it in 2016.
And I made my reasons very apparent at the time.
Well, now, obviously, I'm planning to vote for Trump in 2020.
So over the weekend, I cut a video that I think tries to explain why that is, what has changed.
So here is a video why I'm voting for Donald Trump.
I think it lays out the case for why conservatives ought to vote for Trump.
Here's what it sounds like.
I did not vote for Donald Trump in 2016.
I am voting for Donald Trump in 2020.
There are three reasons I'm going to vote for Donald Trump in 2020 when I didn't four years ago.
First, I was simply wrong about Donald Trump on policy.
Second, I wasn't really wrong about Donald Trump on character, but whatever damage he was going to do has already been done, and it's not going to help if I don't vote for him this time.
And third, Most importantly, the Democrats have lost their f***ing minds.
So, first of all, Donald Trump has governed pretty conservatively.
I thought he would not be conservative in his governance.
I was just wrong on that.
Donald Trump radically cut regulation.
You actually saw reductions in the number of man-hours dedicated to dealing with regulation for the first time in a long time under Donald Trump.
He appointed originalist judges to the best of his ability.
We're talking dozens of them.
Textualist, originalist judges who actually care about the role of the judiciary.
He cut taxes.
Jogging the economy.
Raising it to heights not seen in half a century.
The lost unemployment rate in half a century.
People having their wages rise at the bottom of the spectrum.
He appointed pro-life people to the executive branch and pursued pro-life policy via executive order.
He dumped out of the idiotic Paris Accords, which were useless and counterproductive.
He dumped the even more idiotic and evil Iran deal, which gave money to the Iranian mullahs to use for terrorism, as John Kerry freely admitted.
Donald Trump crushed ISIS.
He killed al-Baghdadi.
He killed Qasem Soleimani.
Donald Trump is the first president of my lifetime not to start any new wars, which is a kind of big thing.
He moved the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
He brokered the first meaningful peace deals there in three decades in the Middle East.
He cracked down on China in unprecedented ways.
He's resisted using the federal government to control everybody's life during COVID.
That's a big thing.
This is the biggest government power grab of my lifetime, and Trump refused to do it.
Donald Trump restored due process on college campuses because he actually cares about due process, or at least his Secretary of Education does.
Contrary to popular opinion, Donald Trump has not actually threatened the institutions.
The fact is that Donald Trump may have been hemmed in by his own people.
Whatever the rationale, he has not threatened the press, he has not threatened the legislature, he has not used the executive branch in nearly as powerful ways as Barack Obama did.
Trump hasn't been as conservative as I would like on everything.
He's spent way too much money, like oodles too much money.
I actually care about that stuff.
His perspective on trade is a zero-sum game.
I think it's wrong-headed.
He still signed into law at the USMCA, which is a pretty good trade deal.
But these are problems I've had with a variety of Republicans, including George W. Bush.
Trump has governed overall in a far more conservative fashion than W on policy.
He is the most conservative president of my lifetime on policy.
Of course, Ronald Reagan left office when I was four years old.
Second, times change.
When I said I wouldn't vote for Trump in 2016, I was worried about three things.
One, policy.
Again, I was wrong.
Second, I was worried about the soul-sucking of the Republican Party to approve bad behavior.
The people nodding and grinning at bad stuff Trump did.
A lot of that has happened.
And third, I was worried about toxicity down ballot, right?
Losing House seats, losing Senate seats.
Blowing out the Republican Party with minorities and women and young people.
A lot of that has manifested.
But here's the thing.
It's already manifested.
And me not voting for Trump in 2020 doesn't stop that from manifesting.
Like, I've been very, very clear on my feelings about Donald Trump's character.
I have serious reservations, to say the least.
Trump has some good qualities.
Rays a hammer in search of a nail.
Sometimes he hits a nail.
It's super satisfying.
And sometimes he hits a baby, and it is far less satisfying.
Trump hitting the media, it's often justified.
I mean, the media have exposed themselves as just a pure dumpster fire of leftist garbage.
They've treated him as an enemy from the very first day.
They've promulgated false narratives.
They've lied about things that he has said.
They have taken the worst interpretation of everything he could possibly have said.
That doesn't mean that Trump hasn't been vindictive or petty or immoral.
He does all those things.
Trump being unable to focus and willing to jump on any rake is not just immoral, it is very often stupid and counterproductive.
I mean, you know my opinion on this.
Everybody knows, deep down in the cockles of your heart, no matter how much you love Trump, everybody knows the Trump administration, with Trump on teleprompter more often and less on Twitter, would be in a position to win the 2020 election more easily.
Everybody also knows that Trump's tweets damage him with people who don't already love him.
All of that is true, right?
But all of it is not changing.
There's a group of people out there who every time Trump tweets something newly stupid, they get newly enraged.
I think most Americans, basically, this is all baked into the cake at this point.
I think it's important, deeply important, for conservatives to criticize Trump when he requires it.
When Trump does something bad, we should say it out loud.
We shouldn't hide that.
That's why I've been calling balls and strikes on Trump as a president since the day he was elected.
But 2020 is not 2016.
Everything that is bad about Trump is already part of the system.
It's already part of the new normal, for better or for worse.
And me avoiding voting for him in 2020 doesn't change that.
Third, and most importantly, the Democrats have lost their f***ing minds.
They've lost their minds.
So have members of the mainstream media, So have members of our bureaucracy, so have members of academia.
These people must not be allowed the mechanisms of power.
Our most crucial institutions, from corporate America to the universities, they've been corrupted, top to bottom, and giving them power over your lives, more power over your lives, Huge mistake.
The Democrats are no longer the party even of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
They're the party of Bernie Sanders and they're just wearing around the mask of Joe Biden.
They're the party of Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar.
Joe Biden is a Potemkin village of a candidate.
He is not a bulwark against radicalism.
He is a facade for it.
Everybody knows it.
That's why Bernie is touting him as the most progressive presidential candidate since FDR.
There's a reason that Noam Chomsky is on board with Joe Biden, right?
I mean, if you just watch this stuff, it should scare the hell out of you.
Today's Democratic Party is not even the Democratic Party of Barack Obama circa 2008.
Barack Obama circa 2008 supported traditional marriage.
Barack Obama circa 2008 was not openly in favor of packing the courts or getting rid of the filibuster.
Barack Obama in 2008 Used to speak about personal responsibility sometimes.
Like, all of this is just gone.
The Democratic Party is now the party of radicalism.
The simple mandate for the Democrats is this.
They now believe in cramming down their perspective on everyone they can via any force that they can control.
They believe that you should be forced by law to violate your religious beliefs if it conflicts with their social views.
They believe that the science says we have to destroy the free market in the name of the environment.
They say that unborn babies aren't babies, that men can be women.
And if you disagree with any of that, You are a bigot, and you're a homophobe, and you're a terrible person.
They believe that your right to keep and bear arms should be heavily infringed, if not outright abolished.
They believe that due process comes second to intersectional identity, that we shouldn't judge you as an individual, we should judge you based on your racial group.
They believe that America is systemically racist, rooted in sin and evil, founded in 1619, not in 1776.
They believe that every single disparity in America can be chalked up to racism and bigotry and America-sucking.
They believe in racial, sexual, sexual orientation quotas, overt discrimination, They believe in a hierarchy of victimhood.
If you're low on that hierarchy of victimhood, you should shut up.
If you're high on the hierarchy of victimhood, you can say whatever the hell you want, you will never be held accountable.
They believe that economic freedom should be curbed in the name of income equality.
They care far less about growth and prosperity than they do about some bizarre notion that equality is its own good.
They're complicit in a culture war on anybody who disagrees.
They seek to ruin anybody who stands in their way, and they will activate the media, they'll activate social media, they'll activate their friends in academia to get all of that done.
Meanwhile, they'll make room for Antifa and Black Lives Matter.
They will cheer the rioting and the looting, or at least they'll go along with it and refuse to condemn it.
But if you go to church during a pandemic, you are a danger to society.
If you go to grandma's funeral, you're super dangerous.
But if you are out there rioting and looting and burning things, that's just a philosophy, guys.
It's not a movement.
It's not an organization, as Joe Biden said.
They literally will not even condemn Antifa, okay?
Antifa is a terrorist organization.
They will not condemn it.
They will not condemn Black Lives Matter protests that escalate into rioting and looting.
They think that there's no relationship whatsoever between an ideology that suggests that America is at root evil and that every institution in American life is infected with that evil and the rioting and the looting.
On foreign policy, the Democrats want to kowtow to Iran.
They want to reenter the garbage Paris Accords.
They want to make nice with China.
They've threatened to destroy the Electoral College, pack the Supreme Court, abolish the filibuster, add states by simple majority to vote Democrat.
They say they'll use impeachment as a purely political tool.
In fact, they've even said they want a congressional committee to use the 25th Amendment to get rid of a sitting president.
They seek to centralize all power in the executive branch, and they hope to overrun the powers of the states.
They're aided in all of this by corporations, the mainstream media, and pretty much anybody else they can get their hands on.
They've created a social structure dedicated to ostracizing anybody who dissents on leftist dogma.
If you vote for Trump, you are evil.
Your friends should stop talking to you.
You should stop talking to your own parents.
Maybe you should be fired.
Certainly, people should stop treating you like a human being.
So, here's the deal.
I'm voting for Trump.
You don't have to love Trump's character.
You don't have to like his Twitter account to vote for him.
You don't have to approve of the crazy or bad things that he says or the way he often acts.
But if you care about the Constitution and economic freedom and the security of the United States, you really don't have a whole hell of a lot of choice.
You should vote for Trump.
You should certainly vote against Joe Biden and a Democratic Party that is running completely off the rails and now threatens the integrity of the Republic if they are given the levers of power.
Alrighty, so there you have it, the case for voting for Trump.
Well, tomorrow we'll get into much, much more preparation for the debate.
Joe Biden apparently going into hiding all the way until Thursday because he knows the media will never ask him a tough question.
This race right now is fraught.
It looks like the polls may be starting to narrow.
We can hope at least a little bit.
I will again encourage the President of the United States to stop scraping the bottom of the barrel because not only is it morally wrong, it is politically unfeasible and foolish.
The fact is that this is an incredibly important election because the direction of the country is now being decided.
It's not being decided on what the direction of the country was four years ago.
Nobody has a time machine.
It's not about 2008.
It's about right now.
Where are the Democrats going to take us if they win not only the presidency, but the Senate?
The answer is no place good.
We'll be back here tomorrow with much, much more, or later today with a couple additional hours of content.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
Our Technical Director is Austin Stevens.
Executive Producer, Jeremy Boring.
Our Supervising Producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Assistant Director, Paweł Wajdowski.
Our Associate Producer is Nick Sheehan.
The show is edited by Adam Sajewicz.
Audio Mix by Mike Karomina.
Hair and Makeup is by Nika Geneva.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
Hey everybody, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
You know, some people are depressed because the American Republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon has turned to blood.
But on The Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started.
▲
Export Selection