Editor's Note: Accuracy is not guaranteed; you can help us get better by highlighting mistakes and suggesting edits! Please fill out this survey if you wish to learn more about us and our mission or send me an email.
After an extraordinarily contentious first debate between Trump and Biden, Democrats float, canceling further debates and the media press forward with the accusation that Trump is soft on white supremacy. I'm Ben Shapiro. This is the Ben Shapiro Show at. The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by Express VPN, Surf the Web with peace of mind. Sign up now and Express VPN dot com segment in one second. We'll get to everything newsy. But first, let me remind you, it's a little bit uncertain out there.
Have you noticed there's a big election coming up and covid still out there? And who knows whether there can be more lockdown's? Who knows whether the stock market is going to go up or down? Will Biden pack the Supreme Court? If he's made president, will Trump win and then everybody will go crazy and burn? The city's uncertainty means that you might want to diversify your finances just a little bit. And one of the ways that you do this is to make sure that you're a little bit, at least a little bit into precious metals.
This is why I trust the folks over at gold, just like I keep telling you to do. Wouldn't it be nice to have a layer of security, whichever way the wind blows? Text Ben to forty seven. Forty seven. Forty seven. One of the great people at Brcko will then walk you through your conversion of your eligible IRA or 401K into a precious metals IRA where the physical metal, the not ETFs, will be stored securely. Brcko, they're my folks.
They have an AA 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 again. You should diversify at least a little bit into precious metals. If you had listened when I told you to do this the first time, you'd be much better off financially than you are right now.
So listen, this time and then three years from now, you'll look back and think, hmm, that was a smart decision. Tech's been to forty seven, forty seven. Forty seven open a precious metals area today. Again, tech's been to forty seven. Forty seven. Forty seven. All righty. So we are still in the midst of the fallout from that extraordinarily contentious, rough, brutal to watch debate between Trump and Biden were basically Trump yelled over Biden for about an hour and a half and then Biden said really snarky and terrible things punctuated by outright lies.
And then Chris Wallace tried to intervene and himself became the subject of the debate. It was really awful, like all the way around. And it was not productive from any possible angle. One of the things that happened is the media went nuts. I mean, how could this have happened? How could we have reached this point in American life, disgrace to the American system? It's such a disgrace. And I mean, I thought that the debate was not good.
I mean, I talked about it at length yesterday. I talked about it the night of the debate on Deleware backstage. I thought this was a very, very big debate because the purpose of the debate is to inform you about the people who are participating, basically just reinforce what you already know, maybe provide you a little new information, maybe put the positions of the participants in a different light. And the debate really didn't get into policy very much.
Or if it did, it was completely obscured by the bizarre antics that were evident from every available side. But when the media complains about this being the low point of our democracy, I mean, people like Jon Meacham, the historian, saying this is the low point of the presidency in the United States and people on CNN and complaining that this was it was unprecedentedly bad. All I could think was, you are Dr. Frankenstein and this is your monster.
I've been saying for a long time. And one of the great misconceptions about Trump is that Trump is the murderer of American politics. There's this weird thing that has happened in American politics ever since Trump became president, where everybody assumes that every bad thing began with Trump. And the reality, of course, is that Donald Trump is not the murderer. He is the corner. This is the this is the metaphor that I have been using for at least several years here.
Donald Trump stumbled upon the body of American politics. It was it was warm. I mean, it was warm. It had been recently murdered. But the fact is that he was not the guy who originally stuck the knife. And now was he a doctor? Did he fix the body politic? No, of course he did not. He proceeded to stand over the body and watch it bleed out. But was Donald Trump the guy who originally brought us to this point?
No. In fact, he was not. And I have proof positive of this. So last night on CNN, Ted Cruz, Senator Ted Cruz, who all of facts disclosed, I'm very friendly with Senator Cruz. Of course, Senator Cruz was on with Chris Cuomo, block of wood on CNN. Now, Chris Cuomo is not a reporter. Chris Cuomo is a political activist masquerading as a reporter, most evident when he was doing these bizarre interviews with his brother, Andrew Cuomo, who is busily presiding over the worst regime in the United States with regard to handling of covid, shipping elderly people back into nursing homes with covid, ensuring that the state then covered up those numbers by pretending that if you died outside of a nursing home, even if you acquired covid in a nursing home that was not listed as a nursing home death, refusing to answer FOIA request, openly denying this week that he'd ever done that, which is pretty incredible, and then saying that every night when he puts his head down on his pillow, he knows that he has saved lives.
And Andrew Cuomo, his behavior during this entire debacle has been devastatingly bad. And Chris Cuomo has been covering for him the entire way. So this was a meeting between two partisan actors. One is openly partisan. Senator Cruz is perhaps the most partisan Republican in Congress. And this is perfectly obvious. This has been true for years. It's not like he's hiding the ball here. Senator Cruz is not a quote unquote objective reporter. Chris Cuomo, however, is a quote unquote, objective reporter.
And Chris Cuomo spent about 20 minutes berating Cruz last night on CNN about 20 minutes. Now, the reason this is relevant is because the media created this environment and then they are very upset to learn that this is now the environment in which we live. So a lot of this in the aftermath of debate with regard to 2012, I people tweeting out about remember that quaint old time when people attacked Mitt Romney for his binders full of women and people treating.
They're like, oh, acquaints our time. Know the story there is that you guys did go after Mitt Romney for the binders full of women comment, which was the most innocuous comment in the history of presidential debate. He literally said, I tried to recruit women into my administration when I was governor of Massachusetts and I had a binder filled with the resumes of women so that I could pick women who are qualified for positions. And they treated that as though it was a sexist thing to have a binder filled with the resumes of females.
OK, it was your fault that you got Trump. It was your fault. We got the debate last night. You brought us to this point and the complete lack of self acknowledgement, the complete lack of mirror ownership, apparently at CNN leads the same people who engage in this sort of nonsensical talking over each other, screaming and people treating people like garbage on national TV day in and day out, then turn around and they're like, oh, how could Trump do this sort of thing?
He's one of you. The answer. He's one of you. Donald Trump is a media creation. Donald Trump is a member of the media. And people like to say that Trump hates me. Trump does not hate the media. There is nobody in American politics who loves the media more than Donald Trump. He obsesses with the media. He talks with the media. I mean, if he hated the media so much, why would you let Bob Woodward in the front door and do 18 hours of interviews with him?
Donald Trump loves the media. He's obsessed with the media and the media are obsessed with Donald Trump. So much so that there is a story in The New York Times today. I mean, this just demonstrates the bizarre, the insane loop that has been created between Trump the media. There's a story in The New York Times today talking about Trump is the single greatest source of misinformation in politics today anywhere on the globe. How do they measure that? They looked at the number of headlines, including Trump and misinformation.
So in other words, because Trump says something in the media are obsessed with him and 1000 headlines about the thing he said, that means that he is the source of of misinformation, the chief source of misinformation, or alternatively, you guys are the loud speaker.
You guys are the ones who decide where to shine the spotlight. You're the ones who have decided to turn every issue in American politics into a crisis issue in American politics. So back to this Chris Cuomo and Ted Cruz interview. I want you to see if you can distinguish the behavior of Chris Cuomo here from the behavior of Donald Trump in that debate the other night. You're going to find it is very hard to do. It's very hard to do.
The level of the debate in which we engage in politics in this country is the stupidest possible level, which, by the way, is why people now go to podcasts. It's why the ratings on CNN overall have declined. They've increased relative to their ratings over the past few years. But just overall, in terms of general audience share, there's a reason that fewer people are now watching things like Chris Cuomo and more people are watching long form podcasts, especially long form podcasts like, for example, Joe Rogan, where he will do three hour interviews with people with whom he disagrees and explicate their viewpoints.
They watch podcasts like this one. They watch podcasts like my Sunday special, where I will have on Matthew Yglesias from Vox. And we'll just discuss ideas for a full hour, because guess what? This stuff is getting old. It really is getting old and the media created it. Members of the media act like this and the left cheers. They love it when Chris Cuomo acts like a jackass to Ted Cruz, when he talks over him, when he insults him, when he brings up Ted Cruz's wife and suggest that Ted Cruz is a coward for not attacking Donald Trump more.
Meanwhile, defending his own brother, the members of the media, they dig this. This is the thing, man. The left is into it. They love it every second. And they're like, well, Donald Trump does that. It's so bad. It's so bad. Because you built this machine, guys. You built the machine. I do, Chris.
We can have a very reasonable policy discussion about the policy mistakes in New York and New Jersey of sending covid positive patients into nursing homes. I think that was the reason for the country mistake. Right. That wasn't just happened to population. One of the reasons why you're the death rate in New York is four times the death rate in Texas, the place where the governor said that you didn't need to test and you didn't need masks. Right. That guy is that we're talking about.
Is it political?
Was it a mistake when your brother implemented a policy that nursing homes had to accept covid positive patients and endanger the lives of my brother was the first to say there was a learning curve and that mistakes were made and they changed things as soon as they could.
OK, everybody turns up the heat here. Again, it gets even worse than this. Chris Cuomo starts openly defending his brother's behavior and then brings up Ted Cruz as though it's Ted Cruz's job to condemn Donald Trump in the same way that it's Chris Cuomo job to be an objective journalist. The journalists and the politicians you see are exactly the same. The journalists and the politicians are to be treated exactly the same. The only difference is you're supposed to pretend that journalists are journalists.
Here's Chris Cuomo continuing this.
My brother will stand for Islamic Republic. Don't you talk to the president the way you talk to my brother Ted, you're afraid of him if he goes smack it down at home, like.
Like you guys really talking about the president, my brother, not the president. I'm talking about the president, the one who called you a liar.
You're perfectly fine to scream and yell. Because, you know, whatever you do, you're doing it because you don't want to discuss the substance, like had you invited me on the show to actually talk about the Supreme Court and talk about the book, One Vote Away, and instead you just want to repeat insults over and over and over again, but you're not actually talking. You just bring up my brother for half the interview because you're such a fair guy, OK?
This is incredible. Bringing up his brother is the governor of New York. His brother is the governor of New York. And you're talking about covid policy. It seems a little relevant to bring up the fact that your brother, the governor of New York, who was treated with kid gloves by you on national TV for weeks at a time, that that was a failure of coverage on your part. That is not the same thing as Ted Cruz doing the partisan thing in defending Trump.
He's a Republican senator from Texas. What the hell do you think he's going to do? He doesn't have the same job as Chris Cuomo. The generalized point here is this. While you hear everybody in the media complaining about Donald Trump, you guys created this toxic brew and then you're like, oh, this is toxic brew. This is really bad. I can't believe it's so bad as all this. I can't believe that it's really, really bad.
Jeff Zucker was calling the Trump campaign in the middle of the Trump campaign to give advice to Michael going.
You can't you can't do this, you can't do this, it's not that you can certainly criticize Trump for his behavior. You can certainly criticize anybody you want. But you might want to check whether the house that you're living in is literally made of glass before you start chucking those sorts of stone. OK, so how were the actual ratings from the debate? Not particularly good. Actually nosedived from 2016, which suggests, as I thought before, that there are very few people who have not made up their mind in this election cycle, which, given the polling data right now, is very bad for Trump and very bad for Republicans across the country.
Cook political recently rerated Iowa from leans Republican to to deadlock, basically to turn to to throw up. It's it's a it's a it's an even state now that they now move to Ohio in the same way it was a lean Republican state and now they've turned it into a toss up. It's a toss up state so that the polls are trending away from Trump. And a lot of these places people have made up their minds, it seems. And unless something dramatic changes, it's going to be a rough night for Trump.
If you if you look at the polls now, again, maybe the polls are all skewed. Maybe it turns out that Trump still has a 30 percent shot at winning the presidency. That doesn't mean he has a zero percent a shot. I mean, you know, one in four times you run the simulation, Trump wins the presidency. But right now he's got a deficit to make up. That debate definitely did not do it for him. The ratings on the debate were abysmal.
The chaotic first presidential debate, according to The New York Post between Joe Biden and President Trump, officially tanked polling in dismal TV ratings compared to the blockbuster showdown between Trump and Hillary Clinton four years ago. Networks ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox averaged twenty seven point three million viewers during the 90 minute plus slugfest, according to deadline. That is a 36 percent plunge from the face to face brawl between then candidate Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in 2016. Again, that was a very much because nobody really was tuning in to see Biden get clocked persay.
Nobody hates Biden the same way that so many people despised Hillary Clinton. And so there wasn't that sort of tension and buildup to this particular debate. Nonetheless, the Commission on Presidential Debate now says that they are going to redo the format of these debates. They have decided that the debates themselves are not orderly enough because Trump talked over Biden for a lot of the debate. And so now they are probably going to give the ability for the moderator to mute the mikes, which, of course, has created its own set of controversies.
Now, do I think that that's a good idea? Honestly, I think that it's not a bad idea. I do mean the fact is that during the Lincoln Douglas debates, which were pretty famous debates, people talk for like half an hour and they either got to talk for half an hour, then they would have 10 minute rebuttals and then they would do it one more time. And that would be the whole debate that that seems like a better way of doing it than than what we saw the other night.
So I don't object to the idea of changing the rules. I just object to the idea that changing the rules after they've already been set is a good idea. But at the same time, I think it's kind of fair. I mean, I do. Trump is the one who broke the rules from the beginning. So making clear that he can't just set the rules and then ignore the rules, I don't think that that's necessarily a bad thing. But I think that they should get rid of a lot of the rules as they stand right now.
I don't think you can say a lot this illuminating inside of two minutes instead of trying to get through thirty five topics. How about we have like two topics and everybody has to speak at length and then we get to watch these guys jabber for half an hour. And by the way, maybe be the best for Trump, right? We know that Trump can go off the cuff for half an hour. Can Joe Biden go off the cuff for half an hour?
Right now? I have serious doubts that I should benefit Trump if they went toward that format. We'll get to more of this in just one second. More of the debate fallout, because Democrats, of course, have decided that the pure story from the debate is Donald Trump's white supremacy, again, based on an exchange in which he literally said that he was willing to condemn white supremacy twice. It's amazing. I pointed this out yesterday and people on the left went nuts.
Idiot Seth Rogen on Twitter came after me suggesting that I was selling out towards your premise. If Seth Rogen had received one one hundredth of the hate from white supremacist that I have received from white supremacists, who would shut the hell up? Because the fact is there is no one in America who's been harder on white supremacists than I have, nor is there anybody literally by statistics. In 2016, I was the number one target of the alt right and white supremacist, according to the Anti Defamation League.
The suggestion that if I correctly characterized Trump's comments the other night, that that is some sort of sellout to white supremacists. That is because you guys are so full of crap. Their eyes are turning brown into more of that in just one moment. First, let us talk about the fact that you need to constantly make your employees better. You do know, let's say, that there's this wonderful new employee let's call our savvy, for example, and let's say that savvy is just she's terrific at her job, like, great in every way.
But when she first entered your office, she informed you that, well, she had gotten your book, your brand new book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps. She had not completed it. Let's say she had said that when your first instinct to be, well, you know, savvy, she have done your homework and then immediately head over to her. Well, I won't say that we did actually RELISTOR job on or let's just say that she is now on an interim an interim trial period, because that's how this works around here.
We have high standards. You should have high standards, too, and that's why you should use zip. Recruiter Zipora rescinds your job to one of the Web's leading job sites, but they don't stop there with their powerful matching technology. Zip recruiters against thousands of resumes to find people with the right experience and then actively invites the. To apply to your job as a recruiter makes hiring efficient and effective, with features like screening questions to filter candidates and in all in one dashboard where you can review and rate your candidate's zip code.
In fact, it's so effective that four out of five employers who post on ZIP recruiter get a quality candidate within the very first day right now to try zip recruiter for free. My listeners can go to Zipp recruiter dot dotcom daily wire that is zip recruiter dotcoms like y zip recruiter dotcom slash daily wires. It is indeed the smartest way to hire. OK, so fallout from the debate. So Chris Wallace said that he never dreamed that the debate would go off the rails that way.
He told this to The New York Times. He said, I've read some of the reviews. I know people think, well, gee, I didn't jump in soon enough. I guess I didn't realize there's no way you could hindsight being 20, 20, this was going to be the president's strategy, not just for the beginning of the debate, but for the entire debate. He said, I'm a pro. I've never been through anything like this.
And it's true that Trump's tactics definitely threw Walsh off his game. And that is certainly true. Again, I don't think that Trump's behavior in that debate helped him very much. But does that mean that Wallace did a great job anywhere throughout? No. No, it doesn't. Trump, for his part, said he was disappointed in Chris Wallace and that he was also disappointed in FOX News. I got to say, this sort of stuff gets old.
You are the president of the United States. How you behave in debate is on you. It was Trump yesterday in Duluth. Did you see last night, May one, I said Sleepy Joe. Name one law enforcement group that supports you. And then Chris Wallace says, don't do that. Can you believe this guy? I was debating two people last night. Can you go to church? No. Can you go to restaurants? No. Can you do anything?
No. But you could, right? That's OK. Arson's ok, but challenging sleepy Joe is totally off limits. So disappointed in Fox.
OK, so I think that some of his critiques of Wallace are fair. I also think that some of Wallace's critiques of Trump after bottom line is that that debate really didn't accomplish much other than it gave Democrats a talking point for the next couple of weeks, a talking point that, by the way, happens to be not true. So for their part, Democrats, of course, got very offended. Joe Biden said the debate was a national embarrassment and it was it was a national embarrassment, says Joe Biden, who literally in 2012 said that Mitt Romney is going to put black people back in chains.
Joe Biden says this was a national embarrassment. For 90 minutes.
He tried everything to distract everything possible. And it just it just didn't work. The president of the United States conducted himself the way he did, I think was just a national embarrassment.
OK, and then Chuck Schumer put out the suggestion and you're starting to see this increase in sort of volume. Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, he said, I don't think that Trump should want to debate Biden against then putting out the message now that maybe the rest of the debate should be canceled. Remember, Biden's entire strategy here is to run out the clock. That's why what prompted the other night was really not good for him, because he should have let Biden talk.
The whole point here is that Biden cannot talk. And when he does, he makes big booboos. That was a strategic blunder by Trump. But Democrats basically want to take the ball and go home now. Here's Chuck Schumer. Unless he's trying to lose.
I don't think Donald Trump should want to debate Joe Biden again. Second, I would say maybe we should give the moderator a mute button, given how President Trump just interrupts it will. And the bottom line is Donald Trump doesn't follow the rules. The commission's got to get a lot tougher when debate participants don't follow the rules.
All right. So they're already talking about the possibility of shutting down future debates. Joe Biden can go back into the basement and run out the clock, which again underscores the entire strategy here is to make it about Trump. And you saw this in the debate. This is where Wallace really feel he should have held Biden's feet to the fire on. The very simple question is whether he's going to pack the Supreme Court, which, by the way, is the single most transformative question up in this election.
If you were taking one of the three branches of government and rendering it absolutely obsolete in terms of its legitimacy to the American public by packing it with a bunch of partisans, then that seems like that might be worthy of discussion. And Joe Biden should not have been able to get away with go out and vote. That's not how any of that works. OK, well, all of this takes a backseat to the generalized the generalized narrative that the media have attempted to draw from the debate.
And that is once again, as always. But Donald Trump is a white supremacist. Now, just to recap, hey, Donald Trump is not a white supremacist. Donald Trump's history with condemning white supremacy is pretty long, meaning that it was, let's put it this way. It was intermittent for a long time. There are a couple of instances in which he did not and in which I duly ripped the living crap out of him. You'll recall back in 2015 when he did an interview with Jake Tapper and Jake Tapper asked him to denounce David Duke and he said, I don't know who David Duke is.
And then he refused to denounce him. And you'll remember, I just ripped into him. I savaged him over this issue right before the Louisiana primary was really, really ugly. And then you'll remember in Charlottesville, where he actually did condemn white supremacists, but he said there were good people who are marching with the white supremacists, which happened not to be true. And that was shortly after he had said that some very bad things happened in Charlottesville and he sort of ignored the ideological component.
Then he came back and he revised and then he recognized the ideological component. Ever since then, I mean, he's given multiple speeches in which he's talked about the evils of white supremacy. He's repeatedly condemned white supremacy. Trump has not been shy over the last several years in condemning white supremacy. In fact, you remember in twenty seventeen, even during the Charlottesville mess where he was completely inept, he said that white supremacist should be totally condemned. This was in 2017.
You had people and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, OK? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
OK, so the problem with that comment was the people other than the neo-Nazis and the white supremacist didn't exist. But he says, I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white supremacist. And in fact, you can compile a list of all the times he's condemned neo-Nazis and white supremacists. He's done it many, many, many times. But because the media ran out of the Russian narrative, they decided immediately to shift over to the racist narrative. It's not as though this was not planned.
It was absolutely planned. Dean Baker of The New York Times literally said in print right after the Russia narrative collapsed, right after the Miller report, they said, we are shifting over our reporters to the racism beat. They put out a. Full article talking about this, how they were restaffing up to cover racism in the lead up to the 2020 election elections is a preset narrative, and Wallace walked right into the preset narrative. And Trump, because he is inept with human language, made a booboo.
But it was not a booboo in which he was saying white supremacy is OK. You cannot read the comments that he said and come away with white supremacy is OK unless you wish to have that conclusion going in. We'll get to that in just one second, because that is the conclusion the media are drawing. Of course, we'll get to that. First, let us talk about the fact you are paying way too much for your cell phone bills. I'm going to be very direct with you right now.
If your cell your plan is with Verizon and AT&T, T-Mobile, you're simply paying way too much for the exact same coverage you would be getting right now with pure talk. Look at that cell phone bill where it shows data usage. The average person who switches to talk is using less than four gigs of data a month. But the big carriers are charging you for unlimited data. It's like paying for an entire row on an airplane, but you only need one seat.
Why would you do that? That's how pure talk saves the average person over 400 dollars a year on their wireless service. Unlimited talk, text to data, all for just 20 bucks a month. Why would you be spending a fortune on unlimited data that you are not using? You're not using unlimited data, folks switching over to pure talk. It's the easiest decision you will make today. So grab that mobile phone. They'll pound it 250. Say, Ben Shapiro, when you do, you say 50 percent off your first month down payment, two five zero say keyword Ben Shapiro, peer talk.
It's simply smarter wireless. Go check him out right now. Dow Pountney fifty say Ben Shapiro. And when you do, you say 50 percent off your first month of coverage. Again, they'll pound it to five zero, say keyword Ben Shapiro to get involved with my friends over at Pure Talk and lower that cell phone bill by like half. It's going to be good for you. Go check it out. Pouncy fifty. Say, Ben Shapiro. OK, so again, the narrative that is now coming out from the left and it's going to try and run this all the way to the election is that Trump is soft again on white supremacy now.
So I think there's going to get votes. No, I think we've done this routine several times before. It seems like it comes up every several months. So Joy Behar is the most blunt instrument in the Democratic arsenal. So here she was yesterday on The View suggesting that Trump himself was a white supremacist. Yes, I'm sure that's right. I'm sure that Donald Trump, the guy who signed into law criminal justice reform, who moved the embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, whose daughter is Jewish and his grandchildren are Jewish and who has evinced tremendous love for both Jews and black Americans.
And there's a guy going back decades was hanging out like Don King. Here's Joy Baker talking about how how Donald Trump is not just soft on white supremacy. Again, he's made comments in the past where I think he was. Did he do that the other night? No, he did not. She doesn't just say he was soft on white supremacy. She goes whole hog because that's Joy, Bay'ah. She's never met anything like a moderate statement. She says instead, Donald Trump is himself a white supremacist.
Can I just say one thing? So, of course, he doesn't denounce white supremacy, Sunny, because he is a white supremacist. Americans have to decide whether they want a white supremacist in the White House. We've never had it before. Maybe we didn't know we had it, but we certainly know we have it now.
OK, no, no, no, no. OK, so here's here's the white supremacist yesterday. So the white supremacist in chief yesterday, here he was. He was asked specifically about denouncing white supremacy. Here was his answer.
They should stop the the police like they've done in New York, like they've done in New York. I just told you, you can always denounce any form, any form, any form of any of that you have to denounce. But I also Joe Biden has to say something about Antifa. It's not a philosophy. These are people that hit people over the head with a baseball bat. He's got to come out and he's got to be strong and he's got to condemn antifa.
And it's very important that he does it.
OK, so first of all, he's right. He's absolutely right here that the media have completely ignored the fact that during that debate, Joe Biden refused to condemn an actual violent group, Antifa, who've been committing acts of heinous violence up to and including murder in America's major cities. And that's gone completely by the wayside like he openly did that. OK, you didn't have to read into the comments to get there. Joe Biden literally refused to condemn Antifa from a presidential stage, and no one gives a damn in the media.
And that's an actual violent group. The vast majority of the violence happening in our cities right now, the cities burning, that is not white supremacist. It is not white supremacists in Chicago and L.A. and New York and D.C. is not white supremacists in Portland. It's not white supremacists. In Seattle, there's a bunch of left wing groups. Joe Biden has been able to get away with that because the media are so militarized against Trump that they seriously do not care if Joe Biden decides to make excuses for antifa.
And Chris Cuomo was a big Antifa defender in the early days. He still occasionally will kind of let that mask slip a little bit. So he's right about. But the key quote there is, of course, I defend this. I of course, I denounce white supremacy. I denounce all forms of this. I've always denounced all forms of this. OK, so let's just replay for for the sake of people's ears and eyes who are going to believe Seth Rogen and Joy Bahah and the members of The New York Times editorial board or your own ears.
So I'm going to replay the exchange that happened from the debate the other night and see if you can find in here Donald Trump not denouncing white supremacy. Seriously, there is only one way that you can get there and I'll explain in a second. But you have to have the preconceived notion going in that Trump is a white supremacist in order to come away with that conclusion. OK, let's play the clip.
Are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence? And a number of these cities, as we saw in Kenosha and as we've seen in Portland.
Are you right there for a second? He has now said in the first 10 seconds of this clip. Sure. Twice. Sure. And then he says again, sure, I'm willing to do that. And then Trump turns, right. He turns and he swivels and he says, I don't understand why we're talking about right wing violence in cities that are being dominated by left wing violence. I don't understand this. Why aren't we talking about BLM? Why aren't we talking about antifa?
That is a perfectly legitimate point. OK, and then Wallace, because he was terrible the other night, decides that he's going to double down on this. Yes, sir. But will you. He already did twice. He said sure. Two times. If he wanted to say no, he would just shake his head or he would say no. You think Donald Trump is is unwilling to say things that piss people off? He does it all the time.
OK, but the fact is that he does condemn white supremacy. He does condemn these people who are committing violence in the cities. If they are from the right, like, I'm sorry, but OK, so there's only there's literally a three word thing. And that Trump says and the rest of this exchange that everybody on the left is hanging their hat on to claim that he is, in fact, a white supremacist. OK, and the only way that you can read this is if you think that Trump is exact with his language, which we all know he is not.
It is amazing how the left, which fully understands that Donald Trump is wildly inexact with his language, that Donald Trump routinely says dumb crap, how suddenly they get super serious and meticulous about his literal language all the time. Now, listen, I understand the left saying to people on the right, you know, you guys, you say that you should take them seriously, not literally. And that that lets him out of that, lets him basically say whatever he wants to say.
And we're supposed to read into his words, but I don't even take him seriously.
I've said this all along. I've been very consistent about this. I don't think that virtually anything from says ought to be taken seriously, because I don't think that he's the world's most serious person. I don't think it's possible to look at Trump and think he's the world's most serious person. I think very often there's a core of truth to things that he says. But I do not think that he is exacting his language. I don't think that he thinks that what he's doing beforehand, it doesn't.
OK, so here is the rest of the exchange specifically. Do it. Go ahead.
I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right. So what do you what are you what are you saying? I'm willing to do anything I want to see. And do what, sir?
I do it say do you want to call them? What do you want to call them. Give me a name.
Give me a white supremacist like music in different voices and right from my. Stand back and stand by, but I'll tell you what, I'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about Antifa and the left, because this is not a right wing problem. This is a I directly said, OK, so stop it there.
So he already said right at the top. Sure. Twice. I'm willing to condemn white supremacy and then the thing stops dead. Right. For the first time, the entire debate, it stops dead because he literally is confused. You can tease confused. They're saying to him, both Biden and Wallace then do it or do it. And he's like, I don't know what you want me to do. I literally just said that I condemn the white supremacists and I condemn the violence in the cities.
Who are we talking about? Like, I don't know who are talking. And the reason he says I don't know who are talking about is because the left lumps every single human being together. The left pretends that everybody they disagree with is a white supremacist. OK, this is unfortunately a common left wing trope is that everyone they disagree with is a white supremacist. Let me give you a perfect example. So yesterday, Joe Biden releases an ad, OK, this ad is about Donald Trump not apparently fighting back against the white supremacist hard enough.
You'll see even in the Chris Wallace question there, he says white supremacists and right wing militia groups. OK, so no. One, you can condemn anybody who's getting involved in violence that is illegal. That's fine. But if you are going to say that all of these, quote unquote, right wing militia groups are the same ideologically as white supremacist, that is inaccurate. Right. But the the left likes to do that. Ideologically, they're not the same.
The left has now grouped together, for example, Patriot Prayer, which is not racist group with actual white supremacists who are, in fact, racist. Joe Biden did an ad yesterday where he grouped together in order to in order to group together everybody who they disagree with. They group together Kyle Rittenhouse and and white supremacists who were marching that unite the right garbage people rally. OK, Kyle Rittenhouse, for all the idiocy of going to a riot site with a gun, OK, he shouldn't have done it.
I've said that a thousand times. He's not a white supremacist. There's no evidence he's white supremacist. Joe Biden, Group seven, together with the white supremacists in this ad say here is that ad from from Joe Biden yesterday.
Are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence? And a number of these cities, as we saw in Kenosha and as we've seen in Portland, are you prepared to do it? Go ahead. I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right. So what are you what are you saying? I'm willing to do anything. I want to do it, sir.
Do it. Say we want to kill him. What do you want to call him?
Give me a name. Give me a surprise. Like the promises and promises.
Stand back and stand by.
OK, and then. OK, so here's here's where they are. Here's what they're relying on. They're relying on those three words and stand by. And so what was Trump saying when he said on standby? Do you really think that he was saying, stand back and then I want you to stand by as a paramilitary organization? Or do you think that what he meant was stand back and stand down? OK, which one do you think that he meant?
I can tell you what Gavin McGuinness, the founder of the Ratboy, said. He literally was he was doing an online follow of this particular debate. And in the middle, he said, wait a second, he just told us to stand back and stand down. I'm the head of the probably Donald Trump isn't the head of the GRABOIS. So Gavin McGuinness, the head of the framboise, understood that what Trump is saying was stand down. But Donald Trump isn't the head of the it's beyond that.
Notice the attempt by the left to again lump everybody in under one rubric. Now, I'm not a proud boys guy. I don't like the proud boys. I've told them before. I don't want them involved with anything that I do. Right. They've offered in the past some of the boys to go to like speeches that I give and provide security, like, what the hell? You guys are a paramilitary group. I don't want anything to do with the proud boys, but to lump them in as white supremacists.
Right. That is the next step. So in order to get to Trump didn't condemn white supremacy, you have to make a logical leap here. The logical leap is that the proud boys, No. One, are white supremacists. No to Trump was attempting to embolden them rather than telling them to stand down. OK, those are two logical leads, neither of which is in evidence. Number one, he told them to stand back when he said stand by.
Do you think he meant stand back and I want you to stand by in paramilitary fashion? I suppose you could interpret it that way if that's how you want to. But I don't think that's what he was saying. And I think it's fairly obvious that he meant stand back and stand down. Look beyond that. In order to get to this point, you have to lump together whites. OK, so he says twice in that exchange, we condemn white supremacy.
Sure. OK, and then he says, what are you talking about specifically? And Joe Biden jumps in and gives the name proud boys. Hey, now, in order to get to Trump is soft on white supremacy, you then have to say that the proud boys are white supremacist group. In fact, as CNN reported yesterday, they are not a white supremacist group. They may be a paramilitary organization. They may be an organization whose members engage in illegal activity.
They may be an organization, some of whose members have engaged in white supremacy. But as an organization, they actually condemn white supremacy, as CNN's own reporters acknowledged yesterday.
We should be really clear that the proud boys do not consider themselves a white supremacist group. They have members from many different ethnicities. That doesn't mean that they have not wreaked havoc. And they're more like a political fight club, if you will, than a white supremacist group and have distanced themselves.
So in order to get to Trump is soft on white supremacist, you have to say, number one, the boys are a white supremacist group and to Trump is taking leadership of them and telling them to arm up, which he was not doing, which he was not doing, in fact. What are the chances that Trump actually knows who the rebels are like, really knows who they are? Trump does this crap all the time because he has never not sounded off on an issue.
He says, Who are you talking about? It's Joe Biden who inserts the proud boys into that conversation. Trump yesterday was asked about the problems and Trump was like, I don't even know who they are. You mention a name. You threw it out there. I was like, OK, so stand back and stand down or stand by or whatever it is. It was Trump yesterday. I don't know who the proud boys are. I mean, you have to give me a definition because I really don't know who they are.
I can only say they have to stand down, let law enforcement do their work. Law enforcement will do the work more and more as people see how bad this radical liberal Democrat movement is and how weak the law enforcement's going to come back stronger and stronger. But again, I don't know how proud boys are, but whoever they are, they have to stand down, let law enforcement do their work.
OK, this is a completely manufactured media narrative, this one. It really is. There are times when Trump has said things and it is not a manufactured media narrative. This one is manufactured out of whole cloth. You can watch the clip yourself. You can analyze it yourself. Unless you go in with the predicate that Donald Trump is a white supremacist. You cannot read that as a white supremacist statement, nor any of the statements to follow. You know, white supremacist generally don't do the following day again, say, for the thousandth time they condemn white supremacy and also that the proud boys should stand down.
That's the thing they don't do. I mean, it's amazing the media conflate every single person they don't agree with with white supremacy and then say that if you condemn those people or if you tell them to stand down, you're a defender of white supremacy. Again, go back and listen when I think the Trump has said things that are soft on white supremacy, I have blasted the living crap out of him, probably more than anybody on the right. Actually, I would say probably.
Certainly more than anybody on the right. That is not what happened in the debate last night and the attempt to manufacture this narrative in advance of the election is really a media creation and quite a disgusting media creation at that. And you can see, by the way, the media spinning this narrative up in real time on everything. You wonder why there's such a level of distrust in the country on these sorts of issues, on racial issues. Maybe it has something to do with the media that will somehow come up with the idea that this was a soft on white supremacy moment for Trump in the debate.
And at the same exact time, they will throw out there that Kyle Rittenhouse is a white supremacist. I mean, there are members of the media who are saying this at the time in Kenosha. In a second, I'm gonna get to a piece from NBC News that is truly incredible in terms of its bias against Kyle Rittenhouse and against the Trump administration. We'll get to that in just one second. First, let us talk about something great that you can do for your parents, something great you can do for yourself.
That is, you can preserve all of those family memories. So out in the garage, you get a bunch of old pictures, you got old film reels, you've got VHS tapes that you're never going to look at again. You know, you should do with all that stuff. You should get it translated over into a digital format. But how can you accomplish this incredible thing? All you have to do is head on over to legacy box legacy boxes and ingenious mail in service to have all those irreplaceable moments trapped on videotapes, camcorders, tapes, film reels, pictures converted to DVD or digital.
One song, one photo, one sniff of nostalgia can take you back to the past. But with all that stuff smoldering in the garage, you can't do anything. This is why you need legacy box. It's a way for you to easily and affordably, digitally preserve your past. The process from start to finish is incredibly easy. You pack and you send their team, digitizes everything by hand and then you enjoy get back perfectly preserved digital copies on Thumb Drive DVD or the cloud ready to watch, share and enjoy.
They've thought of everything. They even provide state of the art tracking and send you updates at every step of the process. Send your precious recorded moments to a company you can trust. It was founded by college roommates Nick and Adam over a decade ago. I know them. They are great dudes. You can certainly trust them with your family. Memories get started preserving your past today. Go to legacy box dotcom slash appear to get an incredible forty percent off your first order.
I've done this for my own parents. It's great buy today. Take advantage of this exclusive offer. Send in when you are ready. Go to legacy box dotcom Shapiro say 40 percent while supplies last. In just a second, we'll get to more of this. Make sure to go over to Daly Daily Wire and and get behind that paywall. You are listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation and.
OK, so you want to know why Trump is so skeptical of the media whenever they say we want you to condemn X group or Y group, because he literally doesn't know whether they are asking him to give them a white supremacist group or whether they're asking him to kill them and not a white supremacist group. The reason that he doesn't know that is because the media are dishonest about this sort of stuff. They are they will just lump everybody together. They will say that everybody they don't like is a white supremacist.
And that, by the way, is in fact the the anti-racist theory that the media have been pushing. The media have been pushing the theory that if you are what you are by nature, a white supremacist because you engage in a system of white supremacy. Gavin Newsom, the garbage governor of California, said I'm about to leave. He tweeted out yesterday that California just became the first state in the nation to mandate the study. And development of proposals for reparations are passed, he says, is one of slavery, racism and injustice.
Our systems were built to oppress people of color. Our systems are not built to oppress people of color. But if you believe that, and then if you believe that you are quote unquote complicit in those systems, you are a white supremacist by nature. The same media we're on the side of people like Gavin Newsom, these same people. This is a crazy story. NBC News printed an article today called Internal Document shows Trump officials, we're told, to make comments sympathetic to Colbert and House is what you would think is that they were told to lie to make comments sympathetic to Carl Rittenhouse.
No, they weren't. They were told to say accurate things about Kyle Rittenhouse. And NBC News found this worthy of reporting on. According to NBC News, federal law enforcement officials were directed to make public comments sympathetic to Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager charged with fatally shooting two protesters in Kenosha, according to internal DHS talking points obtained by NBC News. The document suggests that the DHS note that he took his rifle to the scene of the rioting to help defend small business owners.
He is on tape saying exactly that. That is not biasing the case with regard to Colbert, and that is a documented fact. Another set of talking points distributed to Homeland Security officials said the media were incorrectly labeling the group as racist after clashes erupted between the group and protesters in Portland, Oregon. Again, that happens to be a fact, Patrick. Prayer is not a white supremacist group. The media were falsely labeling them a white supremacist group to say that white supremacists had caused the violence in Portland.
The media think that this is bad. The media shouldn't be fact checked on their attempts to smear everybody to the right of Hillary Clinton as a racist. So that conversation is so fraught that Trump is, I think, rightly skeptical of the media's take on what constitutes racism and what does not constitute racism.
But putting that to one side, the entire narrative here, which is that the take away from the debate is that Trump was soft on white supremacy. Again, if he had been, I would blast him. I have done so in the past. The reason people are very angry with me today is because I'm using my best judgment to determine that in that quote, he is not doing that. OK, now there's another narrative that the media are trying to draw out from the debate the other night, and that is all of the election fallout.
So they are suggesting that Trump is a threat to the election. Now, again, this is a media creation into which Trump absolutely steps. So for months we have heard from months, years we have heard from Democrats that Donald Trump is not a duly elected president, that he was, in fact, put in place by the Russians. As it turns out, that is not true. And then we have heard that Republicans have biased every major election.
Right. George W. Bush was not legitimately elected. Donald Trump was not legitimately elected. Stacey Abrams is the actual governor of Georgia. Voter fraud is rampant in Republican states. Republicans attempt to suppress the vote. This is a generic Democratic talking point at this point. There been full articles written about John Podesta prepping for the possibility of insane post-election maneuvering should Donald Trump win victory. We know that the Biden team has hired hundreds of lawyers in preparation for exactly that.
There's a weird 20 thousand word piece in the Atlantic positing all these bizarre scenarios whereby Donald Trump was going to hole up in the White House like Al Pacino at the end of Scarface, snorting coke and firing guns to prevent being dragged out of the Oval Office even after losing an election legitimately. So this is left wing wish casting. If Donald Trump loses the election, he will go. Now, Donald Trump made a booboo in the last debate because he decided to play right into all of that.
So Donald Trump plays the same game as left. This is this is the deep truth of Donald Trump. He is a funhouse mirror for the left. Everything the left does, Donald Trump does, except a little bit more. So if you get Chris Cuomo doing the cable news routine, you get Donald Trump doing the cable news routine, except more.
If the left suggests that election fraud is going to skew the election such that Republicans are going to win, you'll get Donald Trump saying exactly the same thing back to them. You guys are going to skew the election results so that you guys win and then that plays into the left wing narrative. So this has been the left wing narrative for the last couple of days because Donald Trump, when asked about the election, said there's the possibility for serious election fraud.
There's the serious possibility of voter fraud and votes not being counted, and it could be a mess. Now, the real answer to that is a duly certified election is one that I will respect. If we have evidence of malfeasance, then that is something that we'll have to deal with when it comes up. And that's the actual answer. That's always the answer. But because Trump is Trump, he immediately went to well, you know, we'll have to see.
And then when we see, maybe we won't. Maybe we will. OK, so now the media have spun up. This entire narrative as an attack on voting, so there's a huge article in The New York Times about how Trump is depressing the vote, right. They literally say that Trump is undermining the election by claiming voter fraud. So I have a question there saying that Donald Trump is a threat to the legitimacy of the elections, but also he is a threat to the he's a threat to the election because he himself is responsible for voter fraud.
So either he lied to the voter fraud or he doesn't like the voter fraud, but apparently he likes both. Right. No matter how the election goes, Donald Trump will be responsible. So if Donald Trump wins, it will be due to voter fraud. Also, if Donald Trump loses and then claims voter fraud, it's because he's bad. This is the way that the media are playing his comments the other night. That doesn't mean that Trump has handled that issue properly.
I criticized him yesterday on the show for handling the issue that way. But this is the narrative the Democrats are drawing because it's a heads I win, tails you lose scenario again. If Donald Trump wins is because of voter fraud. There's an attack on Trump in The New York Times called the attack on voting with just a bunch of and basically the entire story is just a bunch of tweets from Trump about how their various forms of voting that are a problem.
Now, all those headlines about voter fraud amplified daily on Facebook and Twitter, served a purpose as The New York Times, they laid the groundwork for a legal challenge. The Trump campaign had a team of election lawyers standing by to dispute election results throughout the country. And Republican National Lawyers Association had ready to self-described Navy SEAL type operation to fight similar cases in the event of a Republican loss that would need a story on fraud. It was the truth appeared to be a secondary concern at best.
There is only one problem with this, which is, of course, Democrats have also hired the exact same number of people as the twenty 20 presidential election years as The New York Times. It is becoming clear the Trump administration and the Republican Party are not just looking at, but heavily investing in the largely non-existent problem of voter fraud.
A New York Times magazine investigation based on a review of thousands of pages of court records and interviews with more than 100 key players, found an extensive effort to gain partisan advantage by aggressively promoting the false claim that voter fraud is a pervasive problem. The story did not originate with Trump, and then, of course, they suggest that this is all about racism. Of course, of course, it's not that Trump is trying to suppress votes that of people who don't vote for him.
It's that he's a racist. Voter fraud is an adaptable fiction, says The New York Times, and the president has tailored it to the moment. So what instead you have from the left is voter suppression. And if Trump loses, then it's because he lost legitimately. But if he wins, it's because of voter suppression. If he wins, it's because he said voter fraud and that created voter suppression, which again, is a myth. There is no voter suppression in the United States.
Nobody is blocking anybody from voting. So, again, another media craft, a narrative into which Trump falls headfirst because this is the way our stupid politics work. And by the way, if you think that it's getting better after if Trump loses, it's not getting better. It's just that all of us will be weaponized on behalf of Biden, the same way that it was weaponized on behalf of Barack Obama and enemies of the Biden administration will become enemies of the press.
OK, meanwhile, speaking of the militarization of certain aspects of our government, James Comey went to the Hill yesterday. So as it turns out, there have been a variety of stories that have arisen over the past several years demonstrating that the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign was falsely premised, that the Steele dossier, which was the center of the thing, was basically Russian disinformation and that people knew by the end of 2016 was Russian disinformation. They continue to promulgate it as the basis for FISA warrant.
So James Comey, who presided over the FBI during this entire period and is going to go down in history as maybe the worst FBI director ever. I mean, really, truly an awful FBI director. So James Comey testified on the Hill and he testified in the aftermath of a bombshell allegation. Andy McCarthy reporting for National Review. Hillary Clinton personally signed off on the Russian efforts to distract attention from her email scandal, according to a Russian intelligence analysis obtained by U.S. intelligence agencies in July 2016.
That is the bombshell allegation. National intelligence director John Ratcliffe has just dropped on the Senate Judiciary Committee, but the first presidential debate just a few hours away. And with former FBI Director James Comey scheduled to testify before that committee tomorrow morning. Ratliff's Radcliffe's letter to committee chairman Lindsey Graham asserts that in late July 2016, American intelligence agencies obtained insight into an analysis by Russian spies which allege that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a plan to stir up a scandal against her Republican opponent, Donald Trump.
The plan involves, quote, tying Trump to Putin and the Russians hacking of the DNC. Let's put this information in context. Clinton was cleared of criminal charges in a July 5th, 2016, presser by Comey. This prompted outrage over whether the Obama administration had distorted the criminal law applicable to mishandling classified information to give Clinton a pass the email scandal to dog Clinton throughout the campaign on July twenty fifth, less than three weeks after the Comey press conference. The 2016 DNC convention began in Philadelphia three days earlier July 22nd.
They hacked DNC emails began to be published. By that point, former British spy Christopher Steele had been commissioned by the Clinton campaign to compile research time. Trump's Russia still ran a London based private intelligence business whose clients include Russian oligarchs. Moreover, in compiling the dossier, Steele relied heavily on Gordon Chanko, a man the FBI investigated in 2009 2010 on suspicion he was a Russian spy. Days after the hacked RNC emails began being published, Steele generated a dossier report alleging that Trump was in a, quote, well-developed conspiracy of cooperation with Russian leadership.
The evidence of extensive conspiracy between Trump's campaign team and the Kremlin, Steele claimed, included the hacking and publication of the RNC emails. Quote, The Russian regime had been behind the recent leak of embarrassing email messages emanating from the DNC to WikiLeaks. The operation, said Steele, and the full knowledge and support of Trump and senior members of the team. In exchange, Trump had purportedly committed to both downplay Russian intervention in Ukraine and raise American defense commitments to NATO as campaign issues.
Further, Steele claimed that Trump had, quote, moles within the DNC and hackers in the US, as well as outside in Russia on the Trump side. Steele said the conspiracy was managed by Paul Manafort, who is purportedly using Carter Page as an intermediary. The story was absurd through and through. As McCarthy says, Clinton is not a correspondent in the DNC emails and was not harmed by them. Plainly, it would've been easy for Steele to weave this tale together from public reporting pigeon Manafort to know each other in the same Dossie report.
Steele claimed Russia was using its consulate in Miami as a hub for the arrangement with Trump. Russia didn't even have a consulate in Miami.
Radcliffe's letter concedes the U.S. intelligence community does not know the accuracy of the allegation that Hillary personally orchestrated the collusion scandal, nor can our agency say whether Russian intelligence analysis is disinformation. Nevertheless, the allegation about Clinton's role was known to the Obama administration at the time. Ratcliffe elaborates that handwritten notes from former CIA Director John Brennan show Brennan briefed Obama and other senior national security officials about the intelligence, including the alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016, of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.
Apparently, in early September, US Intel officials forwarded to FBI Director Comey and Agent Peter struck an investigative referral regarding, quote, US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers, hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server. Director Radclyffe closes his letter by explaining there is other related intelligence that remains classified, apparently that intelligence will not be declassified. It turns out that CIA Director Gina Haspel, according to Sean Davis over at the Federalist, is blocking release of further Russian documents.
OK, so now we have a Russian intelligence document, which itself could be disinformation, claiming that Hillary Clinton basically concocted the whole Russia gate scandal in order to distract from email gate. Is that true? Is that not? We have no idea. But we certainly know that the Russian dossier, the Steele dossier was Russian disinformation. So we know that much. Do we know that this was Russian and we have no idea. One thing we do know, the FBI botched this thing from beginning to end.
So James Comey, the self-righteous former FBI director, he appears in front of Congress yesterday and he proceeds to spout a bunch of conspiracy theories. So, for example, he was asked about Trump's finances and he just speculates that Trump's finances make him susceptible to blackmail. Again, this is the guy who is tasked with leading. He was with the leading the leading law enforcement agency of the United States, the FBI. He was tasked with heading that. And he's just out there engaging in rank speculation this doofus was running the entire operation.
Mr. Comey, is personal debt an important consideration when an individual is seeking a security clearance? Yes. Why? Because a person's financial situation could make them vulnerable to coercion by an adversary and allow an adversary to do what we try to do to foreign government officials, we find her in debt and that is recruit them to our side.
So you go ahead. I'm sorry. So it's a serious issue in any background review.
So someone with substantial personal debt may be vulnerable to influence by a foreign adversary?
Yes, a government official. OK, so this is the the again, the Democrats trying to concoct various conspiracy theories about Trump. Now, those conspiracy theories about Trump were used to target the Trump campaign. They were used to target Carter Page falsely. Now, hilariously, James Comey then testified in front of Congress that everything in Russia was done by the book, which is patently untrue.
I mean, it's clearly, clearly untrue. Here's Lindsey Graham asking him about it.
How would you rate the CROSSFIRE hurricane investigation in terms of being done thoroughly by the book, an investigation the FBI should be proud of?
I'm not sure I can apply a no scale, but I would say in the main it was done by the book, it was appropriate and it was essential that it be done.
OK, so you're proud of it? Overall, I'm proud of the work, there are parts of it that are concerning, which I'm sure we'll talk about. But overall, I'm proud of the work, proud of the work. OK, so what exactly did James Comey know about the work? As it turns out, he knew nothing about work, so he was asked over and over again about the investigation.
And he just said, I can't recall. I don't know. I don't know. I can't recall. But I'm very proud of it.
I don't remember. That's about all I recall. I don't remember I don't remember learning anything additional about steel sources. Not that I recall. No, I don't remember this. Or ever you forgive here. I don't recall that.
So do you recall? I do not. Do you recall? I do not.
I don't remember any discussion. I don't remember using that word. But I don't remember using that word. I don't remember ever being informed. I don't recall being informed of that.
Did you ask any questions or do any due diligence on this at all?
I don't remember anything about the facts that have been revealed recently about some source.
OK, so but he's very proud of the work. That was the guy who was trusted to lead up this operation. And in Quarmby himself said, by the way, that there's this FISA application to get out against Carter Page. It was based on that steel dossier. It was predicated entirely on crap and they knew it was crap, apparently when they took out the renewals of the FISA warrant. Lindsey Graham asked Comey about it and was like, well, you know, even though I personally signed the documentation, it's not my job to make sure the FISA applications are accurate.
Oh, is that how that works? Whose job is it to make sure the facts are right when you present them to the FISA court?
Well, the most basic level will be affiant, whoever is signing the affidavit. Did you sign the affidavit? No, I signed a certification which is required of the FBI.
Does the FBI director have any responsibility to make sure the facts are right when they're given to the court, not in connection with the certification, but in general?
The FBI director is responsible for everything that's being done underneath the FBI director.
Oh, but but he's not responsible for anything because it's not his job. It's not his job. Ted Cruz concluded this line of questioning by basically slapping Comey around. He says, at this point, I don't know what to tell. Is this just incompetence or deliberate corruption? Like what the hell happened here? This investigation of the president was corrupt, the FBI and the Department of Justice were politicized and weaponized. And in my opinion, there are only two possibilities, that you were deliberately corrupt or woefully incompetent.
And I don't believe you were incompetent. This is done severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and women at the FBI because law enforcement should not be used as a political weapon and that is the legacy you have left.
So how easy is it? You know, people say how easy is it for the media to concoct various narratives about political figures? The answer is very, very easy. For three long years and now into the fourth year, we've been told that Donald Trump was a cat's paw of the Russians. And now the media have concocted other narratives in their narratives include that Donald Trump is going to steal the election. Somehow he is not. They've concocted the narrative that Republicans routinely engaged in voter suppression, that they have not.
They've concocted the narrative that that debate the other night was all about Trump going soft on white supremacy. It was not. In the end, will there be a comeuppance for the media, I think to come is already happening and that people are tuning out, they're tuning out from the media and, you know, one that's really going to become apparent when Donald Trump is not president. The sad irony of all of this for the media is that their greatest wish, which is to throw Trump out of office on this year their greatest wish, which is to take Trump down and replace him with, again, the next step in the leftist revolution, the elderly Joe Biden and his Potemkin village of an administration.
The goal is going to result in their utter destruction. Why? Because it turns out that they feed they prey on Donald Trump. They feed on him. Trump feeds into it, obviously, but they need Donald Trump. It is a symbiotic relationship. They require Donald Trump in order to get the ratings that generate all of the money that they use to push forward the the agenda that they want. And what happens when they are deprived of that. Well, then it turns out more and more people are going to recognize them for the propaganda outlet they are.
And people are going to start ignoring the media again. And you're going to see an uptick in the number of people who are going to alternative media sources. And frankly, I think that will be great for the country. OK, we'll be back here later today with two additional hours of content. Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow. I'm Ben Shapiro. This is The Ben Shapiro Show. If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe, and if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five star review and tell your friends to subscribe to.
We're available on Apple podcast Spotify and wherever you listen to podcasts, also, be sure to check out the other daily WYO podcasts, including the Andrew Clavon Show, The Michael Moore Show and The Matt Walsh Show. Thanks for listening. The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Kolten has our technical director is Austin Stephens executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producers are Matthias Glover and Robert Sterling, assistant director for the White House. Our associate producer is Nick Sheehan.
The show is edited by Adam Simon's audio mixed by Mike Kamina. Hair and makeup is by Neka Geneva. The Ben Shapiro Show is a daily wire production copyright Daily Wire 20.
Trump refuses to condemn white supremacists, except for all the times he's condemned white supremacists. A leftist TV host called Presidential Debates, quote, a threat to black life. And a professor is forced to apologize for liking college football. Check it out on the Michael Noll show.