← The Ben Shapiro Show
Loading summary
Transcript39 lines
- [00:00]
Ben Shapiro
Democrats love wearing costumes. It's their thing. Think of Hillary Clinton walking around talking about hot sauce or Kamala Harris changing her accent, depending on where she is. It's rare that a Democrat wins, particularly in a red or a purple area, by preaching openly weakness on foreign policy or, say, transing the kids or raising your taxes, because honesty doesn't tend to work out too well for people who push this kind of stuff. So instead, Democrats frequently put on costumes and they pretend and they lie. What's really fascinating is how they decide to pretend. What are they deciding to dress up as? So yesterday, Alexandra Ocasio Cortez did something kind of fascinating. She, of course, wants to run for president in 2028. Now, AOC is a chameleon. She'll go to a historically black church and she will start dropping her GS. She will show up outside an immigration facility and then cry at an empty parking lot. Yesterday she did something I have never seen before in American federal politics. She put on a hijab at an event in America. And that's important. It says something. It says something about her, about where the left is going, about where America is going. See, it used to be that if you were a terrorist supporting radical Muslim, you had to cosplay as a mainstream American or at least get the media to do your dirty work for you. Now Democrats are cosplaying as Muslims or as fellow travelers to radicals. Because here's the thing. The radical Islamists in America aren't cosplaying anymore. Ilhan Omar doesn't cosplay. Neither does Zoram Hamdani. Neither does Democratic Senate candidate in Michigan Abdul El Sayed. They may sometimes pretend to weigh some of their more radical Islamist edges, but they're not really trying to hide the ball very hard. And AOC is now cosplaying as one of those types. We'll explain why that is important in a moment. And of course, we'll get some other Democrats playing dress up. You got Graham Platner, the Senate Democratic candidate in Maine who is wearing a Trump voter costume. At least what the left thinks Trump voters are like. Or James Talarico, the Senate Democratic candidate in Texas who's pretending to be a Bible thumping Christian who loves ribs, when actually he just loves transing the kids. We'll get into all of that. Plus Jill Biden admitting the truth about her husband's apparent mental incompetence on the campaign trail. Now she can finally say it. The New York Governor bricking a dunk on Donald Trump and the Pope going After AI all of that on today's Ben Shapiro Show. Foreign. So yesterday marked the conclusion of Ramadan. That is in Islamic culture, signaled by a celebration and a feast and some services called Eid. Okay, that's. That's the end of Ramadan. It's also a time when, if any sort of military activity takes place, then radical Muslims pretend that that is not allowed because of Eid wealth's Jewish holiday mandatory, that there's a war launched on it. In any case, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez showed up to an aid dinner with Zoran Mamdani. Now, Mamdani is at least somewhat consistent here. During the campaign, he showed up a couple of times in a thobe. Kind of strange that he showed up in a thobe, which is the long robe marked by an Arsenal jersey. Says on an Emirates, and it says on the sleeve, visit Rwanda. Again. I'm not sure you could possibly signal your various allegiances to foreign interests better than this, but, you know, sort of fascinating. But Mamdani is Mamdani, right? Mamdani is precisely what you think Mamdani is. He is a radical Islamist who is masquerading as a Gen Z tiktoker. He's a socialist who wants to bring down the country. I mean, like, I don't think that you can really sort of hide what Mamdani is. And he's not trying too hard to hide what he is. He's not the story. The story is what AOC is doing here. So AOC is wearing hijab. That's what she's doing. And I've heard some people saying, well, she's just wearing a scarf. Okay? You can wear a scarf in a way. That is not a hijab. She is clearly wearing a scarf to look like hijab. There's no question that's what she is doing. It is indistinguishable from hijab. And we should say at this point what hijab is. Hijab in Muslim countries all over the world is mandatory. It is mandatory head covering. And if you do not wear it in, in places like Iran, they will kill you. If you do not wear it mandatorily in radical Islamist countries, you will be punished. Again, you can see there is a Muslim woman who's taking a selfie with AOC and they are wearing precisely the same head covering. She is wearing precisely the same kind of scarf in the same kind of way. That is what she is doing. And that is on purpose. It is not some sort of strange, aberrant Behavior by aoc. She is doing that for a reason. I can give you a contrast, by the way. Nancy Pelosi, way back in 2007, it was controversial for her to do this at the time. Way back in 2007, she showed up in Syria. And in Syria, she had a scarf and she wore the scarf kind of like a regular scarf, right? That just looks like your grandma going out in the rain to go down to the local market. That is not looking. No one would look at a woman like Nancy Pelosi wearing that head covering and imagine that she was in an Islamic country wearing hijab. No one would look at AOC dressed as she is dressed, wearing what she is wearing, and not think hijab. Clearly, she's wearing hijab. And that matters because there has been sort of a longstanding policy in the United States, bipartisan policy, by the way, that when women even go to the Middle east, in the United States in politics, they don't wear hijab. Laura Bush in 2007 went to Saudi Arabia, went no hijab. Hannah Lisa Rice, 2007, no hijab. Nancy Pelosi went to Saudi, actually, no hijab. That's why it was a controversy when she went to Syria and she put on the scarf. Hillary Clinton in 2012, no hijab. Michelle Obama in 2015, no hijab. Why does that matter? The reason that that matters is because when Western women go to the Islamic world, they are making a point very often, which is, I am not going to be forced into a traditional Islamic hair covering that has been used for hundreds of years as a way to treat women as second class citizens. That is just a reality. Ursula von der Leyen, again, not a right winger, former German defense minister. In 2016, she went to the Middle east. She did not cover her hair this way. And she said, no woman in my delegation has to wear the abaya. Abaya is a different kind of head covering. The right to choose your own clothing is a right shared by men and women alike. It annoys me when women are pushed into wearing abaya. Condi Rice wrote in her memoir about the time she went to Saudi Arabia and the crown prince handed her an abaya. And here is what she wrote at the time. She wrote, quote, the crown prince pulled out a gift wrapped package. I have a gift for you. He said it was a full length, beautifully embroidered abaya. The black robe and veil Saudi women traditionally wear. I had it made especially for you. He said tenderly. Our women wear them, yes, as a sign of oppression. I thought, which is correct. I mean, realistically speaking, millions, hundreds of millions of women all over the world are forced into these sorts of head coverings. And so it's kind of strange that AOC would don one in the United States. Now I know the response that's coming here, right? Cuz I wear a funny head covering, right? I'm an Orthodox Jew. I wear a kippah or a yarmulke. How dare I talk about AOC wearing hijab. Now you'll notice I'm not talking about Ilhan Omar wearing hijab. She's a Muslim woman. She wants to wear a hijab. Her business. But let me start with the dumb and wrong comparison politicians who will put on a yarmulke at Jewish events. So first of all, no Jew has ever asked a politician to put on a keepah. It is not a thing as an Orthodox Jew. Okay, let me just say this. Don't do this. No one's asking you to do this. It's silly. It's really stupid. You have no religious or moral obligation to wear a kippah or to cover your head in a synagogue. If you are, if you're a Jew, a non Jewish man, there's literally no reason to do it. So don't do it. It's stupid, it's dumb, and you look dumb. Also as an Orthodox Jew, I have never, never seen an Orthodox Jew ask a woman to wear what's called a shetal, which is the most religious hair covering. It's essentially a wig to cover your hair or a tichel, which is another sort of very religious hair covering. If Nancy Pelosi came to my synagogue, I mean, first of all she wouldn't be very popular. But if she did not a single woman at the synagogue would come up to her and say, here is a tichel or a shaitle, you need to put it on. It would be really weird. I've never heard anybody do it doing something like that. Okay, there's a category here that's like generic hair covering at a religious site. Again, that would be like theoretically Nancy Pelosi putting on a normal scarf in 2007 or the fact that lots of women will put on a veil to cover their hair if they visit the Vatican. Right? It's sort of a cross religious thing. You go to a religious site and you want to cover your hair out of respect. But that's not what AOC was doing. Again, she didn't just cover her hair out of respect for the religious ceremony. She look at the Picture. The picture is there. It is not distinguishable how she is wearing her scarf from hijab. And I don't think that that's an accident. That is a choice. It is an overt choice. She put on hijab for a reason. And so we should ask what that reason is, because again, hijab is a different thing all over the world. It is a sign of submission of women. That's a reason why France has banned particular types of head coverings in public spaces. Because France sees certain types of head coverings as submission to radicalism. And this is why AOC did it. That's why she did it. This is not a bug. It is not a mistake. It is a feature. AOC is cosplaying in solidarity with foreign radicalism. It's that simple. That is why she did it. She's not covering her hair in some sort of perfunctory fashion as a sign of religious respect, which, again, is cross religious and happens all the time. And I wouldn't be talking about this if she had just put a scarf on the way that Nancy Pelosi put a scarf on. And this is not a minor thing. She is cosplaying as a member of the supposedly oppressed foreign contingent in the United States. That is what she is doing. Because she believes this is the rising tide in the Democratic Party. She believes the rising tide in the Democratic Party is foreigners who come to the United States and say that America sucks. She believes that Ilhan Omar is the rising tide and that Rashida Tlaib is the rising tide and that Zoram Hamdani is the rising tide. People who come here as immigrants to the United States or the children of immigrants and decide that America is horrible and that the problems of the world must be laid at America's feet, and she is signaling solidarity with all of that. That's the idea. That is why she is doing that. This is not a sign of generic religious respect for Muslims. That is not what she is doing. If it were, that would not be newsworthy. The reason people were commenting on this is for a reason. Everything that lady does is scripted. Everything she does is thought out in advance. That is a deliberate choice. AOC is the most practiced actress slash politician of her era. If you truly believe she got up that morning and just grabbed a scarf from the shelf and decided that she was going to wear it and it just coincidentally looked like hijab, you were wrong. You're wrong and you're ignorant and you're being deliberately ignorant. She is doing that For a reason. It is a virtue signal to the people who believe that America is responsible for all the problems of the world, that Third world cultures all over the world have been put upon by the United States. And she is signaling her solidarity with that. It is why she is doing that. And that's what's fascinating, is that the left increasingly thinks that it is not worth cosplaying as sort of normie Americans. Instead, it is worth cosplaying as something else. In fact, if you're going to make a Nancy Pelosi comparison, the better Nancy Pelosi comparison, here would be the time that she decided to wear Kenzie clothes at that time, after George Floyd's death, when she decided to kneel in the Capitol building while wearing a kente cloth. Because the idea was submission to a particular way of thought. That's what that was. It was not a generic symbol. Politics is all about the symbolic. It's all about how we use speech. It's about how people act and it's about the symbols that they choose to identify around. AOC would not wear garb that was redolent of Trumpism. She wouldn't. AOC is not gonna walk out of her house wearing an American flag T shirt. It is not a thing that she is going to do. She's gonna dress in particular ways and she's gonna do that in order to signal particular ideas. And what's fascinating again is that inside the Democratic Party there is a deliberate attempt now to steer toward a Third Worldist ideology. Third Worldism is the concept that there is a Third World because the First World screwed the Third World. That basically people are poor in other cultures and other cultures are what they are because America is responsible for their problems. And the only way to break that cycle is for America to subjugate itself to the desires of people from those cultures. That is the basic concept of anti colonialism and Third Worldism. And AOC is in full solidarity with that. The fact that she is willing to put on particular costumes in order to demonstrate that is fascinating because again, there's nothing new about the costuming. There's nothing new about the cosplay. Democrats do it all the time. But it's how people are trying to cosplay that's really, really fascinating. Because again, AOC is not running a local campaign. AOC is clearly preparing for a presidential run. She wants to run nationally on this ticket. And she believes that there is a rising majority in the country of people who despise the country, think the country is responsible for all the ills of the world and that she can activate the most passionate base in primaries in order to get her over the top. And, and that's why she's doing what she's doing. That's what was said yesterday. And not not a shock that somebody like Hazaramdani is donning tob. He's a religious Muslim. I mean, to some people maybe it's shocking because they've ignored the fact that he is a religious Muslim with extraordinarily radical leanings when it comes to terrorism. His wife, by the way, the same. But that's just because you've decided to deceive yourself. You decided to hit yourself in the face with an ideological frying pan. Or for some, for some reason or other. He is exactly what he is. It's the cosplay that matters. It says something aspirational. How you dress says something aspirational about you. This has always been true. If you go in for an interview at a big business firm and you put on a really nice suit, you're doing so because you are demonstrating your aspiration to be part of that culture. And if you do it AOC is doing, you're doing it for a reason. Coming up, we'll get into other cosplaying Democrats. AOC is cosplaying as a third worldist, but other Democrats are cosplaying as blue collar oyster farmers and bible thumping gentlemen from Texas. We'll get to that in a moment. First, here's a question. How many brokers does it take to insure a modern business? Multiple policies, multiple portals, multiple applications, different renewal dates, different account managers, PDFs buried in email chains nobody can find when they actually need them. And the larger or more complex the business gets, the worse that fragmentation becomes. In modern businesses, it increasingly feels like you're managing a lot of systems. And that's particularly true with insurance. Well, super sure is trying to solve all this for you. Super sure acts as one centralized brokerage platform for your business insurance, what they call a super agency. Instead of juggling multiple brokers and scattered systems, businesses can manage coverage through one coordinated relationship backed by a team that works with you year round, not just at renewal season. And honestly, one of the smartest features they offer is something called fine print fact, which translates complicated insurance language into plain English so business owners can actually understand what's covered. Super sure also helps centralize policies, certificates and insurance documents into one organized system. Right now you can go to super sure.com, get a full report on your current policies with no obligation. Find out if you're overinsured, underinsured, somewhere in between. Go to super sure.com one super agency, one powerful platform, all your policies in one place. Go to super sure.com that's super sure.com paid for by Super Sure Insurance Agency, LLC, a licensed insurance agency. Also, a year ago, people were asking whether AI mattered. Well, now businesses are asking how quickly they can integrate it intelligently. The reality is businesses sitting on the sidelines too long. They're probably taking a real risk because competitors are already implementing these systems. That's where platforms like NetSuite become interesting. NetSuite by Oracle is the number one AI cloud ERP. It's trusted by more than 43,000 businesses. What makes it powerful is that it centralizes the actual operational infrastructure of a business. Financials, inventory, commerce, hr, CRM into one unified system. That matters because AI becomes significantly more useful when it has access to connected organized data instead of fragmented information spread across disconnected systems. AI is only as useful as the quality of the information feeding it. NetSuite's built in AI can intelligently automate routine tasks, deliver actionable insights, help businesses make faster decisions with more confidence, and importantly, the AI is integrated directly into the operational system running the business itself. I know a lot of people are concerned about what AI will do to your business. You should be thinking about what AI can do for your business because it is going to massively increase your productivity when you use it correctly. NetSuite offers flexibility across industries from software and IT services to healthcare, manufacturing, financial services, helping businesses adapt the platform to their specific operational needs. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get our free business guide to demystifying AI at netsuite.com Shapiro the guide is free to you at netsuite.com Shapiro that's netsuite.com Shapiro. Okay. Meanwhile, other people who are cosplaying now, Graham Platner is in fact a silver spoon socialist. He's white Hassan Piker, basically. And Graham Platner is cosplaying as what the left thinks Trump voters are. It's always fascinating. It's reading the signals is really interesting. I think it's really interesting because you get to see what people are trying to play at AOC is dressing a certain way because she believes the rising tide in the Democratic Party is Third Worldism. Graham Platner is trying to steer into what the left believes Trump voters are like. So it's like they built a stereotype of a Trump voter in their mind. And now Graham Platner is going to be that economically dispossessed. Yeah. Pursuit, you know, just a very, very big facial hair. Hair suit. And also you gotta speak like this. Down, down your stomach. And like Rolf the dog from the Muppets, you're gonna speak like this because that's, that's, because that's, that's a, you know, he's a bro. Because Trump voters are bros. And also Trump voters are complete derelicts, kind of Nazi adjacent. So actually the, the Nazi tattoo, that's just part of the. It's part of the thing. Or what makes Graham Platinum attractive is that, you know, Trump voters are like big Nazis. So if we run a guy who's kind of like a big Nazi, then probably the Trump voters in, in Maine love that. They'll identify with it. Yeah. And Graham Platner is what the left thinks Trump voters actually are, but not what Trump voters actually are. That's what he is. He is cosplaying as a Trump voter. He's an impoverished oyster farmer. No, he's not. His father is a Dartmouth college educated attorney and a former AD ada, like assistant district attorney. His mom owns an upscale restaurant. His grandpa was a guy named Warren Platner, who is a world renowned architect and interior designer. Dude grew up rich. He went to a school that cost $75,000 a year, the Hotchkiss School. His parents gave him a $200,000 loan to buy a home in 2017, which is not that long ago. But again, the cosplay is what matters. Here he is on the COVID of Time magazine, right? You can see it's Party Crasher. And there he is, man, look at him. He's wearing like a hoodie and he's wearing like, you know, he looks like he's going to go oyster farming. You know, he's like, you know, my hair's not really messed up and I'm like a bro. I'm like, you. Just like you with my Nazi tattoo. Yeah. This is what. The reason he's dressing up like this is because this is how Democrats think Trump voters are. Trump voters are not. All this, by the way. Turns out Trump voters are not Nazis. It turns out that Trump voters are not silver spoon people pretending to be oyster farmers. That is not what they are. Meanwhile, again, he continues to cosplay as some sort of economic populist. His parents were very wealthy. Here he is, he ran an ad trying to make. Again, he's trying to pretend that he's like, I'm a Boston Red Sox fan, just like you. I Like a brewski. I like to park the car. Here's his dumb ad about the evils of private equity. Graham Platner. Private equity has destroyed our favorite baseball team, stripping them for parts. Private equity is buying up our homes, our sports, and our lives. I will reverse the private equity curse. I'm Graham Platner, and I approve this message because I miss Mookie Betts. Oh, give me a break. I approve that I'm a socialist because I. Because I. I approve Monkey. Can I just point out that the owners of the Red Sox are very, very wealthy. And they were very wealthy before, and they've been very wealthy always. It's just ridiculous. Well, here is Scott Jennings properly going off on Graham Platner. I think Taya Kyle had it just right. I think Graham Platner lashes out against these other veterans, against a hero like Chris Kyle. Because Graham Platner knows deep down that he. Graham Platner, is a complete and total failure. A ne' er do well who has never done anything meaningful with his life whatsoever. He stands for a bunch of nonsense. He's been created. A narrative about him has been created by the Democratic Party so he can run for the United States Senate, but none of it's real. He's not some up by the bootstraps oyster farmer. He's not some, you know, working class heroic story. None of that is true. It is completely fabricated the way they're billing Graham Platner. And the thing is, he knows that. He knows that he's a joke. He knows that he's a lie. And Democrats continue to gather around him. Now, the New York Post says that there are some Democrats who are trying to break with him. I'm not seeing a ton of it, to be honest with you. Now they're going a little quieter because it turns out every day there is a worse headline about Graham Platter, ranging from his peculiar habits in Porta Potties to terrible things he said about people who have been shot while serving in the military. But Democrats are not going to disown him. But again, this is what it is. Fascinating. Democrats believe that Trump voters are either Nazis with beards or Bible thumpers. Like. Like true Bible thumpers. Not people who actually have, like, a biblical worldview, but Bible thumpers. And so if you just hold up a Bible and cosplay as a biblical believer, then magically they will resonate to you. If you play a Sunday school teacher, then suddenly all the dumb Trump voters will just go, oh, you know that guy, he's holding a Bible. Sure, he's pushing the transing of the kids, but he. But he's holding a Bible. Which brings us to James Talarico. This is the Senate Democrat candidate in Texas. Again, I think that Ken Paxton is a worse candidate than John Cornyn on a statewide level. That does not matter. Ken Paxton is going to swamp Talarico in Texas. The Democrats are going to spend extraordinary cash in Texas. Talarico is so far outside the mainstream of what Texans actually believe because the projection that Democrats have of Republicans is so wildly wrong. So Ken Paxton put out his first ad against Telo yesterday. Here's what that looked like. This is Texas. This is not.
- [23:01]
Guest or Interviewee
There are many more than two biological sexes.
- [23:05]
Ben Shapiro
In fact, there are six. This is Texas. This is not.
- [23:09]
Guest or Interviewee
The American flag is such a complicated symbol for most of us.
- [23:13]
Ben Shapiro
This is Texas. This is not.
- [23:15]
Guest or Interviewee
They're gonna call me a radical leftist.
- [23:18]
Ben Shapiro
This is Texas. This is not something that you love. That's not family or friends.
- [23:26]
Guest or Interviewee
I love. I'm just saying this because it's on my mind. The trans children.
- [23:33]
Ben Shapiro
This is Texas. This is not.
- [23:35]
Guest or Interviewee
Our southern border should be like our front porch. There should be a giant welcome mat out front.
- [23:41]
Ben Shapiro
This is Texas. This is not.
- [23:44]
Guest or Interviewee
It is now existential that we try to reduce our meat consumption. I am proud to say that our campaign has officially become a non meat campaign.
- [23:54]
Ben Shapiro
This is Texas. This is not. Okay. Talarico again is going to have such serious problems here. And it is fun to watch left wing political strategists trying to say that he's just going to be able to hold up a Bible and say a bunch of left wing crap and that this will somehow work out for them on Ms. Now, one political strategist was saying just he's wearing a cowboy hat. Badly, by the way. Really, really poorly. But since he's wearing a cowboy hat and looks like he's in a trailer, this political strategist must know Texas. I think a really unpopular Republican nominee in Ken Pax and this is going to be a good versus evil. And I think that Talarico is a just a different kind of candidate. He talks about values and he can out Bible the Republicans. That's Mark McKinnon. He can outbid the Republicans. Well, that might be a little bit difficult when you go to a church that actually distributes God is queer books. According to the Daily Wire, the Texas church where Democrat James Talarico has delivered his radical sermons is pushing radical gender ideology on children. Featuring books filled with sexually explicit content and transgender ideology. Talarico, the Democrat nominee for the crucial Senate election in November, attends a church called St. Andrew's Presbyterian in Austin. And there, children have access to a library stocked with banned books that promote ideas rejected by most Christians, including books that contain descriptions of anal rape, incest, and oral sex. Books include Genderqueer and All Boys Aren't Blue. Also, this book is Gay and Becoming Nicole and the Courage to Be Queer, in which the author claims that God is queer, which is going to come as a gigantic surprise to God, among others. So Talarico is trying to fight back against this by putting out a tweet of himself eating ribs. So yesterday he. Because there was an ad going around pointing out that he said he would have a non meat campaign, which is about the worst thing you could say in Texas. So here he is again. The cosplay is so strong, so he's wearing a Lone star shirt that he bought at the local Army Navy surplus or something, and he's eating ribs. But what is he doing wrong here, guys? It's always fun to watch Democrats try to, you know, cook meat. Remember, Chuck Schumer tried to do this quite poorly. What's he doing wrong? Quick quiz question for all those who can see. What is James Talarico doing wrong in this photo? He's eating a gigantic rib with a napkin around it. No one in Texas has ever eaten ribs this way. No one. There's not a single human in Texas. Honestly, it's like eating pizza with a fork and knife. What is this dude doing? What is he doing? This all culminated yesterday in Stephen Miller, an advisor to the president, calling him transgender. Things got pretty spicy pretty quickly. Online, Talarico put out a photo of himself next to a Texas flag in which she looks somewhat like maybe missing actress Ellen Page. Actually, we're still looking for Ellen Page. If anyone has a hint on where Ellen Page is, please call that one in. In any case, Stephen Miller then tweeted out, the Democrats made history in Texas by nominating the first transgender Senate candidate, which is not a nice thing to tweet. And the Democrats responded by putting out a tweet saying, shut up, you ugly f. Yes, folks, we have reached the heights of American politics. A land that once that once blessed us with Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Ronald Reagan has been reduced to. Your candidate looks like a transgender and shut up, you ugly f. Slow clap for America. And social media. Social media has not rotted us at all. Well, Republicans are getting behind Paxton. They understand that he's got a problem in terms of, you know, some of the allegations around corruption. But they also recognize that they can't let James Talarico win that sentence seat. John Thune, the Senate majority leader who had backed John Cornyn, he spoke to Paxton on the phone, apparently according to the Wall Street Journal, and publicly backed him. He said, pen Ken Paxton is our nominee heading into November. We've got to pivot and go all in to make sure we keep Texas red. That he wins. It would keep a far left liberal out of the United States Senate. And then he called on donors to defend Texas. So again, it is just funny to watch as Democrats cosplay. Now I will say it is more traditional cosplaying. What Platner is doing in Maine, cosplaying is the gruff oyster farmer or James Talarico a Sunday school teacher, right? That's sort of typical Democrats stuff. The AOC stuff is really telling because it shows you where Democrats think things are going, where AOC and the progressive wings think things are going already. Coming up, it turns out that Joe Biden knew the entire time that Joe Biden had brain problems. I know you're shocked. We'll get to that. Plus, Kathy Hochul had a dunk attempt on President Trump. It did not go particularly well. First, everybody agrees that eating a wide variety of real fruits, veggies, fibers, whole foods that it matters. The challenge is building routines that actually make that sustainable day to day. That's part of what Balance of Nature's whole health system is built around. Their whole health system includes 47 ingredients made from real fruits, veggies, spices, fibers, things like spinach, kale, wild blueberries, flaxseed, turmeric, mango, psyllium husk, shiitake mushrooms, pineapple, cinnamon and more. And what separates it from a lot of supplements is that these are real whole food ingredients that are vacuum cold processed, powdered, packaged without binders, fillers or flow agents. The whole health system is also surprisingly versatile. The fiber and spice supplement mixes easily into drinks and has a warm spice blend with ingredients like cinnamon and turmeric. The fruits and veggies capsules can also be opened and mixed into smoothies or or added to food so it fits into a daily routine without turning into some elaborate health regimen that takes over your life. And when I'm traveling, it's hard to keep a healthy routine going, hard to eat healthy. Balance of Nature helps me out. I bring it on the road, pop it in the smoothie and I'm good to go. Go to balanceofnature.com today. Get an additional 10% off the whole health system supplement subscription. When you use discount code shapiro Again, that's balanceofnature.com, use discount code SHAPIRO for an additional 10% off when you sign up for a subscription. Also, the week after Memorial Day, also known as the week everybody realizes they bought 12 things they didn't actually need because some website slapped the word sale in red font next to a countdown clock. Well, trust me, the checkout process is not always that simple. But every once in a while, online shopping actually goes the way it's supposed to. One of the few genuinely useful things in e commerce right now is that purple shop pay button from Shopify. Because everybody has had this experience. You're checking out online, your wallet is nowhere near you, you forgot your password, your phone is asking for a verification code sent to an email account you made in 2014. And. And then suddenly you see that purple button. One tap, done. That is Shopify. Shopify powers millions of businesses around the world and handles 10% of all E commerce in the United States. The reason so many businesses use it is because Shopify actually makes selling online easier. They have AI tools to help businesses write product descriptions and improve product photos. They help merchants run email and social campaigns. Inventory, payments, analytics, shipping, it's all in one place. And that iconic purple shop pay button helps businesses convert more sales with fewer abandoned cards. See, fewer carts go abandoned and more sales go with Shopify and their shop pay button. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.com Shapiro head on over to shopify.com Shapiro again, that's shopify.com Shapiro Joe Biden. They were lying to you the whole time. They were lying to you the entire time. The entire time. To understand just how badly they were lying to you, I want to point out that Joe Biden right out. You remember that debate. We all remember the debate. The debate where. The debate where the President of the United States literally went brain non functional in the middle of the debate and started staring off into the wings as though the grim reaper was awaiting him. We all remember it. It was real weird. It was the end of his campaign and Joe Biden right afterward congratulating him publicly, saying, joe, you did great, Joe. It was just great. I just want to flashback to that so you know how much she lied to you for years. Because Joe Biden is a truly nefarious political figure. Taking her adult husband and shoving him up there again. To be president because you want to be a powerful person is pretty bad behavior. Here was Joe Biden at the time Joe, you did such a great job.
- [32:10]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
You answered every question.
- [32:12]
Ben Shapiro
You knew all the facts. And let me ask the crowd, what did Trump do? Why? And Joe just standing there, not knowing what the hell is going. Where am I? Why am I here? Who are you? You did such a great job fa. Okay, well, yesterday it came out online. She did an interview the CBS Sunday Morning, and here she was admitting that she was scared by Joe Biden's debate performance. You could sense that fear in that clip, like from the time, but apparently she was lying. She was lying to you and to everyone. Remember, she was very mad. The Democrats moved him aside, but here she is saying she was scared. She was scared.
- [33:03]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
Were you horrified as you saw it unfold? I wasn't horrified. I was frightened because I had never ever seen Joe like that before or since. Never. Or since? Yes. Or since. I've never seen him like that. Never? No. Why did it happen? I don't know what happened. I mean, as I watched it, I thought, oh, my God, he's having a stroke.
- [33:33]
Ben Shapiro
But then you got up and said, he did a great job. So you took your. You thought he was having a stroke and it took you like a week for him to drop out of the race and you were pushing against it, lady. Pretty astonishing. Just to know again, people lie in politics all the time. This was, I think, truly there are many defining lies over the course of the last 10 years. It's one of the reasons why trust in our institutions and our political rivals is just gone. Between the lies of BLM and the lies surrounding Covid and the lies surrounding Russiagate, and then the biggest lie of all, which is that the president, who we could all see was falling apart mentally, was totally fine. You wonder why people have lost trust and faith in institutions and sometimes people who disagree with them. This would be the reason. Remember, Jen Psaki literally said that she did not see Joe Biden's decline. She didn't see it. It was unclear to her. This was the White House press secretary. I never saw that person, not a single time. And I was in the Oval Office every day. That was on that debate stage. I'm not a doctor. Aging happens quite quickly. Were things that people saw during that period of time that were similar to that or would have been in a category of that. I don't know. Possibly. Right. And all these books are gonna tell us. Okay. So, yeah, it was all a mystery. It was all a gigantic mystery. Here was Karine Jean Pierre at the time blaming his debate performance on a cold. Because when you have a Cold. You also go brain dead.
- [35:00]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
There are growing calls from Democrats, including
- [35:02]
Ben Shapiro
members of Congress, for the president to
- [35:04]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
step aside for the 2024 election because he's not capable of serving another four years. What is his response to this? So let me just step back for a minute and I guess deal with the questions that have come in about the debate. And honestly, this is something that the president has addressed himself multiple times since this past Thursday. And first of all, I want to say we understand the concerns. We get it. The president did not have a great night, as you all know, and many of you reached out during the debate. The president had a cold. He had a hoarse voice. You all heard it. That's why you reached out.
- [35:41]
Ben Shapiro
Yeah, because he had a cold that everybody reached out to. I just want to point out they now admit the thing. It's amazing. It always takes a couple of years for them to just admit the thing out loud. They just, they lied. They lied and they lied and they lied. They lied like it was not a big deal. They lied. It's crazy how much they lied. I mean, Karine Jean Pierre literally defended his mental state on tv. Okay. And she did this later. This was, this is later. This is after the election. She defended his mental state,
- [36:10]
Guest or Interviewee
the apparent
- [36:11]
Ben Shapiro
decline of Joe Biden.
- [36:12]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
You said you're a member of the
- [36:14]
Ben Shapiro
inner circle and you never saw the decline.
- [36:16]
Guest or Interviewee
And after that, I wrote, how you
- [36:18]
Ben Shapiro
even write, Kareem, that you were on
- [36:20]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
the plane with him going to the
- [36:21]
Ben Shapiro
debate and you didn't see anything.
- [36:24]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
Well, when we were Air Force One going on the, going to the debate, you got to remember his campaign, people were on the team. His family was on the team. I actually was one of those rare trips that I didn't really see him until after the debate, even though I was on the plane. So really, I take, I want everybody to know that I take this question incredibly seriously. I do. I was his White House press secretary, which means I had a role that saw him practically every day and traveled with him. And you saw nothing for more than 95%. We've always said we're not going to say, oh, he didn't age. He aged and he poked fun at it. We always owned up. And with age comes what happens when you get older, which is what I, what I. But when we talk about the mental acuity, and again, I take this very, very seriously. I never saw anyone who wasn't there. I saw someone who was always engaged. I saw someone who understood policy, pushed us on the policy, and also understood history. And there were Times. I'll tell you the story. There were times where he would call me into the Oval Office and I
- [37:29]
Ben Shapiro
would be like, oh, no. Oh no.
- [37:31]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
Because I knew whatever he was going to ask me was going to be direct, was going to be about a story. He read about how we're pushing back, how we're pushing a message forward.
- [37:39]
Ben Shapiro
And you all lied. They all lied. They lied and they lied and they lied again. They lie and they cosplay and they cosplay and they lie. And sometimes it gets exposed, sometimes too late, sometimes in time, because the American people could see through it. I will say it is funny when there is a cosplay that just goes wrong. So Kathy Hochul is the governor of New York and she does not know anything about basketball. Like, nothing about basketball. This is, it's reminiscent of that time that Barack Obama. One of my. There are many things that annoyed me about the former president. Many, many things. But there was a broadcast. Barack Obama tried to pretend he was a Chicago White Sox fan. Now, as a lifelong Chicago White Sox fan, which is, you know, something you don't do for fun, you don't become a Chicago White Sox fan for fun. Barack Obama did it because the Chicago White Sox play on the south side, which is a largely black area of Chicago, and he pretended he was a White Sox fan. And one time he goes to a Chicago White Sox game and he's asked on the broadcast, name your favorite White Sox player, present or past? Now, that's not a hard question. If you ask me. I could name off the top of my head several dozen White Sox players, even players right now. Murakami having a massive season, by the way. But Barack Obama's answer at the time was all of them. Which is the same answer my wife would give when asked her favorite Chicago White Sox player because she doesn't know how baseball works, no matter how many times I explain it to her. Okay, well, this is kind of what Kathy Hochul did yesterday. So Kathy Hochul is the failed upward, inherited her position, governor of New York. You gotta love politics. A game where you just get to climb the chain by the person above you getting caught in a sexual harassment scandal. It's pretty wonderful. Anyway, Kathy Hochul was attempting to dunk on President Trump because the New York Knicks have made the finals. And she tried to smack President Trump over the Knicks and blows this dunk. I mean, just truly, truly screws this up. This is a wide open dunk and she just blows it.
- [39:36]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
What do you think of him saying he's a lifelong Nixon.
- [39:39]
Ben Shapiro
I think that's how the Times reported it.
- [39:42]
White House Press Secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre)
I asked him to name the starting lineup from 1993 championship team and see how he does.
- [39:49]
Ben Shapiro
There was no championship New York Knicks team in 1993. They weren't even in the finals in 93. They were in the finals in 94 and they didn't win. So, yeah, great job. By the way, you know who was at the 1994 finals? This is the best thing about President Trump. President Trump is like the Forrest Gump of politics. He's just everywhere. If you go back in time and you're watching like newsreels from 1923 and there's President Trump in the background just waving at you. Whether it is a. Whether it is a Home Alone movie or whether it is a 1994 Finals appearance, the President of the United States has been everywhere at all times. The most ubiquitous man in human history. Here he was back in the 1994 finals, the much younger Marv Albert. I'm just emotionally crushed by this. It should be pointed out. 43. It's your good friend Donald Trump, my business fighter. What does it say? Walk on. It's very nice. By the way, Charles Oakley fell in his lap, actually, at that game. I believe President Trump says he's going to actually go to the game, which be hilarious. I'm sure people in Manhattan will love him. I'm not so sure. Some will love him. Some will hate him. Anyway, here he was. No, I was invited to the. I was going to go on Wednesday, but they closed it out very quickly. They're great. And Jim Dolan's great guy. He's, as you know, owns and in charge of Madison Square Garden. He's having a good year. Boy, what a team. They win all their games. They really. They have some great players. I think I'll be going to one of the games. Yeah, I was invited by numerous people and Jim and I think I'll be going. Great, great to see it. For what it's worth, I hope that the spurs beat the Thunder. I would much rather see a Spurs final against the Knicks than a Thunder final against the Knicks. Mainly because I don't like flopping. I know this is the biggest controversy of the day is that I'm going to call the OKC team and a bunch of floppers because they're flopping like nobody's business. Stop it. It's in soccer anyway. The same New York that again, cosplays as pretends to be the place where if you make it here, you can make it anywhere. They're just continuing to drive out all investors. So New York did pass their Pieta terror tax, which is their tax on second homes in New York. All this is going to do is drive people out of New York because if you're rich enough to afford a place in New York, you're certainly rich enough to afford a place elsewhere. And why would you want to sponsor. I think there's actually a moral question as to whether you should buy a home in New York at this point unless you have to. Because sponsoring the predations of Zoran Mamdani's government, it seems to me that that may become a moral issue at a certain point. If you are to legitimately, you know that you have a choice and your tax dollars are subsidizing the horrible policy of Zoran Mamzani. I think you. There's a, there's an actual moral question as to whether you should be buying a home in New York at this point. New York, by the way, continues to go as radical as humanly possible. Big controversy in Park Slope where the Park Slope Food Co Op voted to ban all Israeli products from the shelves and then got rid of their five products because it's a grocery store. So it's like hummus. That's what they got rid of. Good luck to you over in New York. Things are going beautifully okay on a more important level. So we've been discussing for a while on the program the importance of AI. Now there are lots of honest questions to be asked about AI. How do humans interact with it? How do you best use it so that it doesn't sort of rot your brain because you become so reliant on AI that you stop reading books and thinking for yourself? How do we ensure that the power of AI is not given to people who are terrible or that people don't use it for terrible things? What sort of restrictions need to be placed on the data capacity or investigative limits of AI? And these are all open questions. All of that makes some sense. But the overall anti AI campaign or the idea that there should be significant overall restrictions on AI putting us way behind the Chinese, or that the best thing we can do for the economy is somehow a gigantic redistributionist scheme because of AI that's foolish. And it's foolish whether you are a left wing politician or whether you are Tucker Carlson or whether you're Pope Leo. Policy is policy is policy. A bad political line pursued by anyone remains bad no matter what office you hold. And that is said with all due respect to the papacy. Again, as someone who gave the Pope a baseball and traveled to the Vatican to do so. I have a lot of respect for the office of the Papacy because of the historic role of the Papacy in preserving many of the pillars of Western civilization. With that said, that doesn't mean that the Pope knows what he is talking about when it comes to economics. I do not think that the Pope is coding on Claude. I do not think that the Pope is using ChatGPT. I do not think that the Pope has any idea how any of this stuff works, frankly. And religious knowledge and understanding, religious wisdom that applies to human nature and the nature of things sinful, it does not mean you understand how economics works pretty clearly. So over the past few days, the Pope presented an AI focused encyclical. Now, I should point out, first of all, that an encyclical from the Pope is not Catholic doctrine. It is not. It does not fall under the rubric of papal infallibility. It is not as though what the Pope says in these encyclicals becomes kind of black letter Catholic law. That's not how it works. So he's up for criticism just as much as anybody, or at least his ideas are up for criticism just as much as anyone. So he said that AI needs to be disarmed, like nuclear energy. Here's what he had to say.
- [45:35]
Guest or Interviewee
Artificial intelligence needs to be disarmed. The word is strong, I know, but deliberately chosen because this moment needs words capable of attracting attention, awakening consciences, and indicating paths forward for humanity. The Church has long been working for nuclear disarmament, aware that every great technical power can affect people's lives and so must be accompanied by adequate moral discernment and public control. Nuclear disarmament remains a service to peace and the dignity of the human family. In a similar sense, artificial intelligence now demands to be disarmed, freed from logics that turn it into an instrument of domination, exclusion and death. Like nuclear energy, it must be at the service of all and of the common good. Decisions about technology must never be separated from conscience and responsibility.
- [46:44]
Ben Shapiro
Okay, all of this is platitudinous. Yes. We would like for AI not to be used as a weapon against others. With that said, should AI be a part of our supply chain when it comes to development of military capacity? Of course. Should it be a part of how we actually perform war services? Absolutely. It is very important, actually, that we do that now. No, it's very easy to say, I don't want bad things to happen with AI Nobody wants bad things to happen with AI but this is where we get to the distinction between matters spiritual and matters practical. So the Pope's encyclical is called Magnifica Humanitas on Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence. And in this encyclical, he says that he. He compares AI to the Tower of Babel. He says, in the abstract, technology in and of itself is not a solution to humanity's problems, just as it is not inherently evil. In practice, however, technology is never neutral because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate, and use it. Therefore, the primary choice is not between a yes or no to technology, but rather between constructing Babel or rebuilding Jerusalem. Now, again, I would prefer that good people with whom I agree build the AI. I get it, but that's not where he goes. And when it comes to sort of his general statements about how we have to remain human and how that's necessary to us, obviously that's true when he says, in the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human, we must lovingly safeguard the grandeur of humanity. Sure, fine. But it's when he gets to the practical that I start to get a little queasy because this pope, like Pope Francis, has a tendency toward big government redistributionism and global government redistributionism. And my answer to that is no. Nope. Ain't going to be no global government redistributionism. Not into it, not interested in it. Don't want to hear it from any authority secular like the UN or religious like the Pope. Not interested. It's going to be a big no from me, dog. So he says here in this encyclical, it is necessary to establish adequate regulatory tools capable of upholding justice and curbing the distorting effects of. Of technological power. In the past, it was largely up to the state to guide and direct innovation. Today, however, the main drivers of development are private, often transnational, parties that are endowed with resources and the capacity to intervene that surpass those of many governments. For this reason, it is necessary to begin a shared discernment process for identifying the spiritual and cultural roots of ongoing transformations. And then he says that communities and intermediary organizations must be involved. And he calls for more diffuse technological property. Quote, Today, among the goods that are universally intended for everyone, we must also include new forms of property, such as patents, algorithms, digital platforms, technological infrastructure, and data. In a context where the wealth of nations depends increasingly on knowledge and technology, when these goods remain concentrated in the hands of a few without adequate Forms of sharing and access. A. A new imbalance is created that contradicts the universal destination of goods. In turn, it widens the gap between the included and the excluded, between those who can participate in the digital revolution and those who remain on the margins. Okay, first of all, this is just rote Marxist nonsense. It's not true. Every time a technology is developed, the people at the top end up developing the technology, and then it disseminates across a society. Literally every product that you consider commonplace today and necessary today started off as a luxury good. Why? Because when you first develop an innovative product, the per unit costs are very high. That means only rich people can afford them. Then, as a profit margin is developed, other competitors come into the space and the price begins to drop. This is why the original microwaves were rather expensive, and the microwave today is very inexpensive. This is why the cell phone that you hold in your hand, that has more technology than that which we use to put a man on the moon. That cell phone, far more sophisticated than any computer that was around at the time of Gordon Gekko. The really, really basic equivalent would have been Gordon Gekko on the beach in Wall street holding a shoebox to his head, and only he would have had one. Every necessity starts off as a luxury. Basically, that is the way that all of this works. And so the idea that you cut short the innovation for redistributionist purposes is. Is just economic nonsense. And again, it doesn't matter who says it. If a proposition is wrong, it remains wrong, regardless of the mouth from which it springs. The Pope says today, he says, when it comes to decisions regarding economic flows and digital platforms, as well as the governance of data and algorithms, we cannot allow a handful of actors to dictate these processes on their own. Instead, we must build forms of cooperation that respect the various levels of the global community and make them jointly responsible for the common good. Who would be doing this? Who are we supposed to take into account? The desires of Zimbabwe? How about China? How about Iran? How about Pakistan? Should we take into account their deep thoughts on AI in the digital age? A just social order guarantees everyone equal access to opportunities, protects the youngest and weakest members of society, combats hate and misinformation, and subjects the use of data and technology to public oversight so that the guiding principle is not solely profitable, but the dignity of every person in the common good of all people. See, this is where you start to smuggle in a bunch of stuff that ends up actually being immoral. Very often, when people want a centralized tyranny, they never. They Never propose a centralized tyranny in the name of injustice. They always do it in the name of the common good, of all people. That's always how it starts, always. I would rather have diffuse mechanisms in competition with one another than centralized government control under the auspices of. Of any organization. This. I particularly bridle at some of this stuff because Pope Leo has refused to call out governments. He's big on government control and centralized oversight in all of this. But he has been reticent, shall we say, to criticize governments that have slaughtered Christians in Africa, that are slaughtering Christians in the Middle east right now. He has been extraordinarily shy in condemning Iranian aggression. He has traveled literally to countries that oppress Christians in order to, I don't even know, try to go along, to get along. And it seems to me that if you are going to demand global rules, then maybe we ought to articulate what those rules look like. Maybe we ought to articulate what your desired regime would be as opposed to these sort of broad statements that private industry and diffuse dissemination of knowledge is unjust and we need centralized control. Centralized control always sounds more fun to people and more understandable to people than diffuse knowledge, than lots of people knowing things, or the ugliness of competition. It always sounds better to say, we'll just put this guy in charge and then he'll run it, or this group of people in charge. But that's precisely what you say you're fighting. And frankly, the lack of understanding of free market mechanisms and technological development here, I think is a problem. I think it's a problem regardless of whether you speak with the mantle of religious authority or not. And in some ways worse if you're speaking with the mantle of religious authority but outside your area of expertise. I think there are lots of places where the Pope's wisdom is useful. I think when it comes to his questions about how human beings adjust to technological change, all of that is fine and dandy. But the Pope literally calls for gigantic redistributionist mechanisms. Here, he says in this encyclical, while AI promises to boost productivity by taking over mundane tasks, it frequently forces workers to adapt to the speed and demands of machines. More than ever, in the age of AI and robotics, it is no longer possible to. To rely solely on the invisible hand of the market. Well, what are we supposed to rely on? A bunch of people in a closed room somewhere figuring it out for the rest of us, the free market I will trust every single time on matters of technological development and innovation over decentralized control of anybody. No matter what mantle they claim to speak under, because freedom remains a basic necessity for human innovation and development. And this is a broader conversation that requires, I think, explication. Inside the right is a battle that is clearly emerging on the right between values of liberty and freedom and people who believe that virtue must be instituted by centralized control. You can be a big believer in both virtue and freedom. It's the structures in which both exist that need to be talked about. And once, once you have religious authorities calling for government involvement, I start to get a little skittish. A little skittish. I believe very strongly in the power of social institutions, in the, in the teaching function of churches. I think it's deeply important. But once you start claiming it's time for the government to grab the reins, I'm going to, I'm going to get very cold on that very quickly. All right. Coming up, we'll get to the latest in Iran. Will there be a deal? Where the Will there not be a deal? Every day it seems like there might be. There might not be. The show continues for our members right now. Remember, in order to watch, you have to be a member. If you're not a member, become a member. Use code Shapiro at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Click that link in the description and join us.