Loading summary
Transcript70 lines
- [00:00]
Ben Shapiro
As an organization grows, time becomes the most valuable resource. Everybody wants more of it, and nobody has enough of it. That's especially true when you're trying to fill important roles, because most people don't wake up excited to spend hours sorting through resumes or coordinating interviews, trying to figure out which candidates actually match what they're looking for. That's why tools like ZipRecruiter have become so useful. ZipRecruiter's matching technology helps employers quickly identify qualified candidates for the roles they're trying to fill, making the process faster and more efficient. From the very beginning, their screening questions help surface candidates who meet your requirements. You can immediately see how many qualified job seekers are available in your area. That's exactly why so many businesses use Zip Recruiter. The platform helps simplify one of the most important parts of running an organization by helping employers connect with qualified candidates quickly and efficiently. There's a reason ZipRecruiter is the number one rated hiring site based on G2. Whether you're filling a single role or planning for the future, having the right tools makes a gigantic difference. Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter will get a quality candidate within the very first day. The Daily Wire is one of them. Try it for free today at ziprecruiter.com/daily wire that ziprecruiter.com/ daily wire ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire. We'll get some more on this in just one moment. First, a lot of people think that investing is only for rich people. This is a dumb idea. It turns out that everyone thinks that you have to have everything figured out before you start investing. You like a finance degree or a gigantic amount of money. Or you need to monitor the markets all day long like you're in Wall Street. Well, because of that, a lot of people delay investing for years. And that's one reason why apps like Acorns have become so useful. Acorns is a financial wellness app designed to make investing feel much more approachable. The idea is simply helping people start building healthier financial habits over time. One thing Acorns does very well is making the process feel manageable. You can sign up in minutes, connect your cards automatically, invest spare change through their Roundups feature, where everyday purchases get rounded up and the difference gets invested automatically. Acorns also lets users set up recurring investments starting at just a few bucks and choose from diversified portfolios based on different goals and risk preferences. Financial wellness is all about sustainable habits. Acorns also keeps everything centralized in one place, which matters because most people already feel overwhelmed by financial information. Sign up right now. Acorns will boost your new account with a $5 bonus investment join the over 14 million all time customers who've already saved and invested over $27 billion with Acorns. Head to acorns.comshapiro or download that Acorns app to get started. Paid non client endorsement compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns tier 2 compensation provided potential subject to various factors such as customers, accounts agent Investment settings Does not include Acorns fees Results do not predict or represent the performance of any Acorns portfolio Investment results will vary. Investing involves risk Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor View important disclosures@acorns.com Shapiro we'll get to more on this in a moment. First, remember when AI was just complaining about customer service? Chatbot? Well, now it's showing up in boardrooms, strategy meetings, investor calls, quarterly planning sessions. At this point, every business is asking the same question. How do we actually use AI to become more efficient, more productive, and more competitive? And while there are plenty of companies promising magical AI solutions, the reality is that AI is only as good as the information that feeds it. That's why NetSuite is interesting. NetSuite by Oracle is the number one AI Cloud ERP trusted by more than 43,000 businesses. What makes it different is that it brings together the core systems running your company financials, inventory, commerce, hr, CRM into a single source of truth. Instead of spending time chasing spreadsheets, reconciling reports, manually moving information between systems, NetSuite can intelligently automate routine tasks, deliver actionable insights, help reduce costs, and support faster decision making with confidence. Whether you're in software, healthcare, manufacturing, financial services, or any number of other industries, NetSuite can be customized to fit the way your company actually works. Whether your company generates millions or hundreds of millions in revenue, NetSuite helps you stay ahead of the package. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures. Get our free business guide demystifying AI at netsuite.com Shapiro that guide is free to you at netsuite.com Shapiro again. Netsuite.com Shapiro Vice President JD Vance is undeniably a talented politician. Yesterday, he went on the View to pitch his new book, and he showed why it's always pretty funny when a Dude with a 130/ IQ has conversations publicly with people who barely crack triple digits. But we'll also get to the rest of Vice President Vance's day defending an Iran deal that looks increasingly not great. Appearing with Megyn Kelly to make overtures to Tucker Carlson and prepping for a photo op on Friday with, you know, a mass murderer from Iran. Yeah, it's kind of a mixed bag. Plus, we'll get to a mass casualty terror plot at the UFC event on Sunday. A shocking new report on the UK's Islamic rape gang scandal and Major League Baseball cracking down on Bible verses. This is the Ben Shapiro Show. Okay, so let's begin with the fun part. Okay. Cause we'll get to the not fun part in a little bit, but we'll, let's start with the fun part. So yesterday the vice President appeared on the View and he made mincemeat out of them. Now, admittedly, this isn't exactly like boxing Mike Tyson in his prime. It's, it's, it's kind of like fighting Mike Tyson now. But the VP is particularly good when he is put up against people in these sorts of scenarios. He's good adversarially. He's very good in the debate with Tim Walls. And again, the average IQ of the View is about the IQ of Tim Walls. So it went very poorly for the ladies of the View. So, for example, the ladies of the View started ripping on Trump about affordability, and the vice President handled them with aplomb.
- [05:24]
JD Vance
What the President said is the idea that Republicans cause the affordability problem is a hoax. And, and I think that's true. If you go back to the Biden administration, inflation got up to 9% under the Biden administration. Okay. Right now it's at 3.5%, by the way, too high. We're doing everything that we can to bring it back down to 2.5%, which is where most people would like to see it. But we inherited an affordability problem. We're doing a lot to make it better. It's going to take a little bit of time. There's a lot more work to do. But the President knows that a lot of Americans are struggling. In fact, he ran on that. He talked about it, and we've done some things and made some good progress on that point.
- [05:59]
Ana Navarro
Said he loves the inflation.
- [06:01]
JD Vance
What he said, Anna, what he said is that he loves the fact that the inflation is going to come down when this war is over. That's, that's what he said.
- [06:11]
Ben Shapiro
Okay. Now again, this is where the vice President is really good. Again, his affect is open. He's smiling the whole time. He's being very calm. This is where he's at his best he's also great when he's fact checking, folks. So here he was with Whoopi Goldberg. Whoopi was again suggesting, as per her usual arrangement, that the Trump administration is racist. She does not have any good examples.
- [06:31]
Whoopi Goldberg
What did black people do to this administration that has allowed it to really stigmatize folks of color? And you know how hard it is. You have folks of color in your family.
- [06:49]
Cabot Phillips
Sure.
- [06:50]
Whoopi Goldberg
So when you see, you know, things, the Emmett Till stuff coming down or them doing all kinds of removal of information of black heroes, how do you, how do you, how does that sit with you?
- [07:07]
JD Vance
Well, what do you. What exactly are you talking about, Whoopi? Because you just wrote. I'm talking about the. No, no, I want to know what she's. You don't know what I'm talking to your actual point.
- [07:17]
Whoopi Goldberg
So in a lot of the museums, museums just. There's so many. I just, I, you know, where they're taking down the actual history that happened in this country.
- [07:33]
Ben Shapiro
Okay. Now, again, she can't name them because it isn't actually true. The reality is they've shifted around some of the displays, but it's not as though they are taking black heroes out of museums or anything like that. And that is why when he asks her a simple question like, what are you talking about? They're just too many to name. Too many. Too many to name is always. You can't name one. And of course, it went poorly for Whoopi when she asked about his Catholicism and his border politics, there was the vice president.
- [07:59]
Whoopi Goldberg
You talk a lot about your Catholic faith, but the Catholic faith says we take in immigrants, we take in people who don't have or who are having a hard time or why did. How do you justify both things?
- [08:16]
JD Vance
The Catholic faith is actually very. I think it strikes the right balance here. It says the Christian faith. I think this is true of Protestants and Catholics, that you can have borders. You're allowed to enforce your borders. That means the law enforcement piece of it. But you also have to take certain precautions and certain care. Okay. And again, you know, your argument is fundamentally. Whoopi, you're saying that we don't strike the right balance. I disagree with you about how we apply that, but nobody, hopefully, is saying we're not allowed to have a border. What I'm saying is that in order for us to actually enforce the law, you can't set a standard that says you're not allowed to deport anyone unless they've committed a violent crime. You've got to enforce the law equally.
- [08:59]
Ben Shapiro
Again, this is where Vance said his best when he is explaining in moderate and calm fashion, basic Republican policy. He is great. I mean, he did this with Tim Walls, and again, he's doing it there with Whoopi Goldberg, and he is calling her on the fact that essentially she's arguing for zero borders at all. And then he went on the offensive with ladies of the View, and he went after Joe Biden's open border policies.
- [09:20]
Ana Navarro
Majority of people that ICE is rounding up and taking, taking out of their homes from their families, they're separating families. They're using children as bait. The majority are not criminals.
- [09:31]
Ben Shapiro
But can I respond to that? Let me just say this.
- [09:33]
JD Vance
Okay, so you talk about the children. Here's what I'd say. Do we know that during the last administration, we had tens of thousands of children who were sex trafficked by the cartels who were brought into our country in profoundly dangerous and predatory conditions? Let's talk about this administration. But here's the point. Unless you enforce the border, you invite that kind of conduct, you think that our immigration policies are inhumane based on the reporting of one person with a political bias. What I'm telling you is that it's inhumane to allow cartels to sex traffic people across our border.
- [10:11]
Ben Shapiro
Again, this is very good stuff from the vice president. And of course, Ana Navarro was getting more and more and more agitated. Some of the ladies of the View were kind of into JD Vance until Joy Behar was kind of into it. Ana Navarro, not so much.
- [10:24]
Ana Navarro
There is no evidence that Maduro was releasing people from insane asylums or jails like Fidel Castro did do. This was made up. And we just can't, you know, accept it without pushing back.
- [10:35]
JD Vance
Anna, we know that there were people who were released from prisons who were encouraged to come into the United States.
- [10:39]
Ana Navarro
It wasn't like it wasn't the Marielle, Mr. Vice President. It wasn't where. It was like a purposeful release. Open up the jails, open up the insane asylums, and let people flood Florida. I listened to that in Miami.
- [10:49]
JD Vance
If you go, it may not been like Marielle, but if you go back to the caravans that were happening in 22, 20, 23, we know that those things were funded. They were in some ways supported by the government. So I don't know how you define support or not support, but if people are encouraged to come into our country after having spent time in prison by their own governments, I think that's a problem.
- [11:10]
Ben Shapiro
Okay, now, the ladies of the View thought they had Vance by quoting old Things that he had said about President Trump way back when, 2015, 2016. And Vance made the obvious point that you can change your mind when you realize you're wrong.
- [11:23]
JD Vance
It's been well covered that I was a critic of Donald Trump back in 2015 and 2016. Now, obviously, I'm sitting here as the Vice President, United States, in the Trump administration. Well, Joy, a little humility, actually. I think that when you make predictions and those predictions turn out to be false, you gotta ask yourself, well, what. What made me wrong about that? What did I not understand or not appreciate? For example, I said that Donald Trump's economic policies would not lead to wage growth. They did in the first term. That was actually a major, major thing. I said that we couldn't bring back any of those factory jobs because I kind of had given into this idea that those jobs were disappearing. But actually, Donald Trump, you saw a manufacturing boom during that administration. So there's a certain point. Let me just. So there's a certain point where you say, you know, I made predictions about this. I ended up being wrong. And in politics and anything, I think it's important to just say, you know what? I got some things wrong, and I was wrong about him.
- [12:21]
Ben Shapiro
Okay, again, all of this is fine, and all of this is good. And this is what the vice President is very good at. All right, coming up, the vice President didn't spend his whole day, you know, beating up on the imbeciles at the View. He also spent a lot of the day defending this deal with Iran. And here is where things take a turn. We'll get to that in a moment. First, Father's Day is this Sunday. Here's a question worth asking. When's the last time you actually watched old home videos with your family? Most people have not. Not because they don't want to, but because the tapes are buried somewhere. The camcorder died 15 years ago, and nobody has a VCR anymore. Here's the thing. Nobody tells you that footage isn't just inaccessible, it's. It's dying. VHS tapes, film reels hold photographs. They degrade every single year. Heat, humidity, time. Once it's gone, it's gone. There's no recovering it. Legacy Box fixes that they're the world's largest digitizer of home movies and photos. And the process is genuinely simple. You pack up your old media tapes, film reels, photos, whatever's collecting dust in the closet, ship it to their team in Tennessee. They'll digitize everything by hand. You'll get it all back as Digital files on the cloud or a thumb drive. Plus your originals. Return safely. They handle over 15 types of of media now. I have video of my father as a child with his dad when my grandfather was young. My father cherishes these kinds of memories. This Father's Day. Give your family something that actually lasts. Join over 1.5 million families who have trusted Legacy Box with their memories. And don't wait, because the longer you do, the more you risk losing. Go to legacybox.com Shapiro Save 50%. Get started today. That's legacybox.com Shapiro now, again, the White House is claiming we don't have the text. We don't know if that is true or not. I suspect that it is probably not true. The reason I suspect it is not true is Bloomberg has now released a version of the text. The Saudis have released a version of the text, and the Iranians have released a version of the text. And the text is substantially the same. So we'll treat the Bloomberg leak as largely credible at this point. And if the White House wishes to rebut that, they can't just keep saying that the text is different. They need to actually release the text. Again, the way that you rebut an alternative text is by releasing the actual, real text. And now the administration seems to be playing and Vice President Vance, who is the chief negotiator, make no mistake, the vice President was the chief negotiator here. He and Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were the guys negotiating the deal. They're the ones who allegedly are doing all the background briefings. They're doing all of the public defense of the deal. Vance is the lead on this. J.D. vance is playing a bit of a game here when it comes to how this deal ought to be perceived. So just a couple of days ago, on June 12, five days ago, he was going after people who were critical about rumors of the deal. And we've been saying this entire time, the entire time, we weren't going to judge the deal until we saw the text. We could judge the tea leaves. We could judge the comments that were being made about the deal. We could, we could talk about the media reports. But on June 12, the Vice President said, you can't. You're not allowed. You should stop paying attention to, quote, unquote, unconfirmed media reports or to the things the Iranians are saying on their social media posts. Apparently, we should, we should believe what IRGC is pledging to the United States in terms of, you know, nuclear development or opening the strait. But we shouldn't believe what they say in social media, but fine. So the Vice President was making the case that until we see the text, we shouldn't judge. Well, now the text is pretty obviously out. JD Van said that they had not yet released the text because of diplomatic sensitivities in the Muslim world. Well, that's weird because you know who actually has released the text? Al Arabiya, which is a Saudi outlet. Mers, which is an Iranian outlet. It seems like the administration is the party that is very, very reluctant to release the text. So here he was literally yesterday saying that the reason that the text hasn't been released yet, he doesn't really know. It's all a mystery. Here we go.
- [15:56]
JD Vance
The reason why we haven't released it yet is there are some delicate diplomatic things going on where the Iranians, and not just the Iranians, but some of our mediators, the Pakistanis and the Qataris, have asked us to sequence this in the right way. I don't frankly fully understand it, but there are sensitivities that exist in the Arab and Muslim world that we're trying to be responsive to. Fundamentally. Does it really matter if the deal comes out on Wednesday versus Friday?
- [16:21]
Joe Biden
No.
- [16:22]
JD Vance
That's why we haven't emphasized it so much is because at the very latest, the text is going to be out on Friday.
- [16:29]
Ben Shapiro
I mean, the answer is yes. It actually does matter quite an awful lot because there is a public photo op scheduled between the Vice President of the United States and a mass murdering terror leader named Mohammed Koliboff on Friday in Switzerland. Okay, but here's the thing. Now Bloomberg and CNN have released a version of the text. The White House claims this is not the text, but will not release the text still and may never release the text for all we know. Now I have a wide variety of sources who say that this text is substantially identical to the final text. And we have multiple versions, all of which basically match. So now the White House's move is to claim that the text doesn't matter. So before you couldn't judge unless you got the text. Now that we have versions of the text floating around, it turns out that even the text doesn't matter. So you can't judge based on the text and you also can't judge based on the not text. This is what we call a catch 22. It has now created an unfalsifiable premise that the deal is good. Nope, not going to do that. So CNN is reporting that U.S. negotiators are working to quickly release the text of the agreement between Washington and Tehran. Even as they downplay the significance of the specific language in the document, the officials described the text of the agreement as incredibly vague, mainly intended to create a more favorable environment for the highly technical in person talks to come. They added that the framework is aimed at providing Iran the ability to sell it politically to their internal audience. So I mean, first of all, we should point out at this point that that's bullshit. The reason I say that's bullshit is because you know who doesn't care about their internal audience? The Iranian government, which shoots its internal audience. You know, who should actually be concerned about their internal audience. The democratic government of the United States should be deeply concerned about its internal audience because we have a thing called a democratic republic where you don't get jailed or shot for your opinion. Do you truly believe that the Islamic Republic of Iran is deeply afraid of the terrible cracks that will emerge in its tyrannical facade if the text is released? If so, why did their semi official agency, remember, free speech is not a thing in Iran. Why did their semi official agency MERS release the text? That's nonsense. Additionally, the officials said that the text of the Memo of understanding, which Vice President J.D. vance told CNN Monday, is one and a half pages long, didn't reflect critical back channel commitments Iran has made to the U.S. oh, so. So it's secret. It's secret negotiations that are happening. Secret, not written negotiations. So we can't judge based on your public statements. We can't judge based on the text, but we should judge based on you have a secret. Great. Can't imagine how this will go wrong. Because if there is one group of people that you should absolutely keep back channel secrets with, people who are super trustworthy, the kind of people that you know you can put your faith in, it is the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. One of the officials said, quote, people shouldn't read too much into the language of the MoU. It's a political document. What's more important than the actual document is the understandings we have with each other. What are we doing now? Rom com slogans? What's more important than our actual document is the understanding and love we have developed over years with each other. All right, coming up, we'll get to why the Vice President now sounds so much like Barack Obama. It's a problem. It's not great. First, everything we do starts with how we sleep. It affects everything. Focus, energy, mood. We all know what it's like. Especially I know what that's like. Honestly, the fix turned out to be pretty Simple. I was sleeping on the wrong mattress for years and now I sleep on a Helix sleep mattress. Just gotta tell you, a Helix sleep mattress means that you're gonna sleep more soundly, you're gonna stay asleep for longer, you don't wake up with the back pain. Helix is not one size fits all. They offer over 20 models. So you take a quick quiz and get matched to the right mattress for how you actually sleep. Your position, your temperature, your firmness preference, all of it. Free shipping, a 120 night sleep trial and the Happy with Helix guarantee make it completely risk free. They're the most awarded mattress brand out there, tested and reviewed by Forbes and Wired. If your sleep is off, everything is off. Fix it. Go to helixleep.com men for 20% off site wide, 25% off luxe mattresses and 30% off elite mattresses. That's helixsleep.com Ben Again, 20% off site wide, 25 percent off luxe mattresses, 30% off elite mattresses. These are great deals and the mattress is made just for you. What are you waiting for? Go check them out right now. Helixsleep.com Ben to be clear, the administration's case is that we should not actually judge the deal until we see it. And also once we've seen the deal, we still shouldn't judge it because the deal text doesn't matter. So the administration has been forced, and I say the administration, I mean the Vice President. The Vice President has been forced to basically claim that the deal is the only way to prevent endless war. We are now relegated to just repeating a Barack Obama talking point. I'm going to play you a clip of Barack Obama from 2015 defending his garbage. JCPOA a deal that the Vice President supposedly believes is garbage and that the President believes is garbage. Here is Barack Obama at American University in 2015 and his case is, you accept my deal or there's war. Endless war. This is Barack Obama.
- [21:33]
Barack Obama
And as someone who does firmly believe that Iran must not get a nuclear weapon and who has wrestled with this issue since the beginning of my presidency, I can tell you that alternatives to military action will have been exhausted once we reject a hard won diplomatic solution that the world almost unanimously supports. So let's not mince words. The choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form of war. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now, but soon.
- [22:12]
Ben Shapiro
Okay, that was a bad case then, it is a bad case now. So J.D. vance appears on Megyn Kelly's podcast, Remember as we'll get to Megyn Kelly is a person who has said that the Israelis manipulated the administration into war, who has laughed along to the proposition that the Republican Party is a bunch of Israel loving pedophiles. This is where the Vice President chose to retail the argument. So the Vice President says that actually the only reason that people would oppose the deal is because they want endless conflict.
- [22:39]
Whoopi Goldberg
Well,
- [22:42]
Ben Shapiro
let's hear what he has to say.
- [22:45]
JD Vance
I think that fundamentally, if you look at what they're proposing, they're proposing an endless conflict. They want this to go on until every bomb has been dropped or until every Iranian is dead. That is not what the President of the United States wants. What he said is, I set about this to end their nuclear program, to eliminate their ability to threaten their neighbors and project power, and to fundamentally make sure that no future child would have to deal with a terrorist regime with an atomic bomb. That's why the President set out to do this. He feels, and he's right, that he's accomplished that goal and now we can get to the negotiation to see what are the other benefits that we can get from this and frankly, what are the benefits the Iranians could get from this if they behave. I just don't think that people who are criticizing this, one, they're not actually dealing with the reality of what's in it. And number two, they don't have an alternative. If your alternative is just to drop bombs without any clear goal or any clear American interest implicated, then you're not making the wise decisions on behalf of the American people.
- [23:53]
Ben Shapiro
Well, an entire field of straw man is now burning because this is what we colloquially call a lie. This is a lie. An endless conflict would be, say a 47 year conflict with an intransigent radical Islamist enemy that wants to destroy America. Some of us have been calling for the President to end this war quickly, like from the beginning. I've been saying for literally months that instead of signing onto a useless ceasefire that we ought to take or bomb Kharga island, open the strait with operations like Project Freedom, which the President announced, and then unannounced, and then leave overwatch to our allies like Israel and the uae. That is not an endless war. You know what an endless war looks like? It looks like a bad deal. You know how I know that? Because Barack Obama did it and that war didn't end. And now JD Vance is pushing one and the war ain't ended. You want to make sure that you have an endless war. An endless war looks like pouring hundreds of billions of dollars in unfrozen funds into a terror supporting a nuclear weapons seeking sworn enemy of the United States in an attempt to get them to open up a strait that was open before the war started. If that's the deal, and we'll get to whether that's the deal in a second, that would guarantee chaos and war for at least a generation. And again, the vice president is now burning strawmen. He is making the identical case to the case that Barack Obama made in 2015, which is either buy my crap deal or you want endless war. It was a lie then, it is a lie now. It is not true. And if you are relegated to lying about your opposition in order to sell a bad deal, that means the deal is even worse than what you are pitching. So in the end, the only good argument that the American people should accept is that this is a good deal. So the vice president, again, the architect of these negotiations and the front man and the point man for them, is making the case that actually the deal is awesome and we got what we came for.
- [25:46]
Megyn Kelly
I think this is what is fundamentally different. Trump's foreign policy compared to, you know, Barack Obama's or George W. Bush's is we will empower people on the ground who yearn to breathe free, but we're not going to force them to do what, you know, we're not going to force them to elect their own government. What we're going to do is pursue our best interests. And what did the United States want out of this? We wanted an Iran that didn't have a nuclear weapon. We wanted an Iran that had a conventional military that was not able to threaten its allies in the region. And that's what we got. And so the President is saying, we accomplished what we wanted to accomplish. We accomplished what we needed to. I think it's actually a great virtue and, and wisdom of the president's foreign policy that he's not now saying, you know what? Now we're going to go do something else that's not related to our core national security objectives. He's saying, we got what we came for. Let's negotiate with these guys to see if they're willing to change their behavior. And if not, we still got what we came for.
- [26:42]
Ben Shapiro
Fundamentally, okay, so we got. We came for. It's over whether they give us more or whether they don't, according to the Vice President. So let's analyze whether that's true. Again, we are going to base this analysis on the released texts, which are substantially the same. We'll work off the Bloomberg release text. If the administration wishes for us to work off a different text. They can release that text at literally any time, at any time. And if there are differences from the text that has been released, perhaps they should explain what those differences are. Because again, I'm not going to buy the idea that the Iranian government doesn't want the text released because they are afraid of what their own population is going to do. But somehow you have no obligation to the American people to release the text on a deal that supposedly ends a war and creates a ground shifting new model in the Middle East. So what exactly were the goals? I will say it again. I've been saying it consistently for my and not, by the way, not my goals. The President's goals. The goals that were established by the President of the United States, which is the reason why I supported his action in Iran, is because his goals were correct and good for the United States. One, no nuclear development, no enrichment, zero enrichment. That was the President's goal. Two. No further ballistic missile development capable of threatening surrounding nations. 3. No continued support for terrorism and terrorist groups abroad. 4. The opening of the strait toll free, permanently. Fifth, when all of those things happen, then the money can flow. So that is the our benchmark has been totally consistent. Totally, utterly 100% consistent. So here's the question. Does the deal actually accomplish any of those things? And this is where what the VP is pitching and what the text allegedly says do not seem to match, like at all. All right, in a second we'll get to all the elements of the deal, including nuclear development. So does it do all the things that it's supposed to do? First, every morning starts the same way you tell yourself is the day I will eat healthier. More fruits, more veggies, less junk. And then, you know, life. A meeting runs long and the kids want something completely different for dinner. You grab whatever is at hand. Suddenly it's 9pm Your nutritional master plan has somehow turned into a coffee and a protein bar. And that's like best case scenario. Welcome to being an adult. It's one of the reasons I like balance of nature. They don't pretend life is perfect, they just make it easier to get more of the things we all know we should be getting. Fruits, veggies, fiber, whole food ingredients. Their whole health system is made from real fruits, veggies, spice and fiber. It's become a regular part of my routine. In fact, it's become pretty popular around the daily wire offices as well. I have to mention those freeze dried snacks. They are genuinely awesome. They're convenient, they travel well, the kids love them. Unlike a lot of kids snacks, they don't somehow end up covering every single surface in your house like all over your couch and such. Next week I will actually be speaking with Dr. Howard, the founder of Balance of Nature and we'll be talking about foods to avoid, foods to implement in your daily life, and a lot more. So if you've heard me mention Balance of Nature before, but you haven't checked them out yet, now would be a great time. Visit balanceofnature.com today. Subscribe to the whole health system to get an additional 10% off your subscription with Promo code Shapiro as balance of nature.com promo code SHAPIRO so on nuclear development, here is what the deal says. On nuclear development, this is point number eight. Quote the Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates it will never produce nuclear weapons. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States have agreed that the fate of enriched material and the fate of all other mutually agreed nuclear related issues, including Iran's nuclear needs, will be adequately addressed in a final agreement. So let us be clear, when I delegal that for you, that means zero. It means nothing. Iran has been pledging that it is not building a nuclear weapon for decades. And they were lying the whole time, which is why they have gigantic underground facilities like Pickaxe Mountain or at Natanz or at Fordo or at Isfahan. So now they're saying words. And by the way, those words will not even emerge in agreement until a final agreement. So this does not achieve the goal of ensuring that Iran does not have nuclear weapons, not remotely. You know what? Assured that in any way, shape or form, bombing the facilities, that was the best thing Trump has done. It was great. You know what's not going to do a word of good? This also article 9. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States agree that pending a final agreement, it will maintain the status quo. Iran will maintain the status quo on its nuclear program and the United States will not impose new sanctions on Iran or strengthen its forces in the region. Okay, so what does that mean? First of all, Iran doesn't have the capacity to rebuild their nuclear program right now. They have no money. But you know what that provision does? It creates a deliverable for the United States. It says that we cannot strengthen our forces in the region. So under this agreement, if we held to it, we would not be shipping in more troops or more weaponry or anything like that. And you can see the goalpost moving. The President of the United States did the G7 yesterday and he said that maybe we won't bother Getting the nuclear dust. Remember that time that he said that we would get the nuclear dust? Now we have shifted the goalpost to why bother?
- [31:47]
Joe Biden
So the Atomic Energy just reported that it was one of the most devastating bombings that they've ever. The whole mountain collapsed on top of it. And frankly, to go get it, we're going to go get it. But to go get it is a big deal because they say only China and US have the equipment where you can even get. The whole mountain has collapsed on top. We have cameras on it. You could make the case. Why are you even bothering? Because it's not really valuable. It's, you know, it's probably half a million dollars worth. It's not very valuable.
- [32:20]
Ben Shapiro
It's not very, very valuable. Well, that's a different thing than he was saying like a week and a half ago. Okay, point number two. Ballistic missiles. Will Iran be developing new ballistic missiles? There are in the text of the MoU as released by Bloomberg and Mears Agency, which is an Iranian outlet. Zero, count them, zero. Provisions in this memorandum of understanding by anyone's account dealing with ballistic missiles. Zero. The President isn't talking about ballistic missiles. The Vice President is not talking about ballistic missiles. Remember, what drove the action originally was the idea that Iran had developed an umbrella of ballistic missiles that would soon be overwhelming to whatever defense capacities were capable in the Middle east. And that would have provided them with an umbrella that would have shielded their nuclear program. No one could take an offensive action because Iran would have had too many ballistic missiles. So that's why we did this is because the ballistic missile facilities were churning out missiles. There are zero provisions in the MoU. Not even a commitment to discuss this in the future. Like with the nuclear program for ballistic missiles. Okay, how about terrorism now? Again, the United States has a large scale interest in all these things. In Iran, a terrorist state that hates America and the west, not developing a nuke, not developing ballistic missiles to threaten us, our allies and say, vital waterways like the Strait of Hormuz. And in preventing terrorism, because it turns out if you wish to touch off a regional war, the easiest way to do it in the Middle east is to activate a terror group, typically an Iranian terror group like Hamas or Hezbollah or the Houthis or Iranian backed militias in Iraq. There are zero provisions in this document that touch support for terrorism. None. Zero. In fact, the only provision that theoretically touches on anything terrorism related is being interpreted by the Iranians to bar the Israelis from taking on a terrorist group. So in other words, that would be a concession from the United States to the terror group Hezbollah, according to the Iranians, to tell its own ally again, the allies that were flying in the skies with us bombing Tehran like weeks ago. It is a concession to a group of people who are firing explosive laden drones at American helicopters last week that no one should touch their terror friends. According to Article 1, this is literally the first thing in the agreement. Quote, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States together with their allies in the current war, that would include Saudi Arabia, UAE, and of course Israel, none of whom are signatories to this deal, by the way, declare upon the signing of this memorandum of understanding an immediate and permanent end to the war on all fronts, including Lebanon, and undertake that from now on they will not launch any hostile action against each other and will refrain from the threat or use of force against each other. The final agreement will confirm the provisions of this article and the remaining articles. The Iranians are claiming that what this means is that essentially Hezbollah wins, Hezbollah gets to control Lebanon and Hezbollah gets to fire on Israel without any sort of actual retaliation. That is what Iran is claiming. Hey now, Mike Huckabee, the ambassador to Israel, says that's not true. Israel does get to actually protect itself. The President of the United States, however, has been convinced by some of his advisors that the problem in Lebanon is apparently not Hezbollah per se. The problem is Israel. And again, this is the game. Understand? It's an opinion. It's a knob. The Iranians are playing the President or appear to be attempting to do so, which is not a shock. This is what they do. Their goal is to sign a meaningless MOU that commits them to no serious action, that protects their terror wing that by the way, has murdered Americans, Hezbollah. And then when Hezbollah attacks Israel and Israel retaliates by hitting Tahiya, which is a section of Beirut. Iran will then claim that Israel violated the ceasefire and hope that the President blames Israel for a violation of a ceasefire started by Hezbollah in the first place. That is the goal. And the President is now making the bizarre case that Israel is randomly knocking down apartment houses in, in Lebanon, which is not true in the slightest, like at all. And also this proposition that the Syrian Sunni terror army should cross the border into Lebanon and that this somehow will be a better solution for Lebanon and Israel defending itself. I'm gonna need, I'm gonna need an explainer on this one. This is clip 22.
- [36:44]
Joe Biden
You know, I consider that the minor war, Iran's a big one, but we have that little pinprick out there that constantly rears its head, and that's Hezbollah. And, you know, I was very responsible for Syria. And the man that's running Syria now is a person that I put there along with President Erdogan and some others. He's done an amazing job of pulling it together. He's not a boy scout, but he's done an amazing job of pulling it together. And he is very good with Hezbollah, does not like them. And I'll tell you what, Israel is fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed. And you don't have to knock down an apartment house every time you're looking for somebody, because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses. And they're not all Hezbollah, that I can tell you. And I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hezbollah, because to be honest with you, I think they do a better job of doing it.
- [37:46]
Ben Shapiro
The Syrian army under Al Jelani, a terror group, is going to do a better job. And a more humane job is the case that's being made. Sunni Muslims invading a Shia state. A Shia and Christian state. Hmm, interesting. Okay, so suffice it to say reiteration point number one. On nukes, is there anything? The answer is no. On ballistics, is there anything? Ballistic missiles, the answer is no. On terrorism, is there anything, except for perhaps restrictions on our allies, the answer is no. How about the Strait of Hormules? Right? That's the big thing we're doing this for, after all, is a Strait of Hormuz, right? So according to the agreement, the Strait of Hormuz is supposed to theoretically reopen, kind of, sort of. So according to the agreement, quote, immediately upon the signing of this memorandum of Understanding, the United States will lift the naval blockade and prevent any interference or obstruction against the Islamic Republic of Iran and restore traffic within a maximum of 30 days to its full capacity. The traffic of ships shall be proportional to the pre war volume of traffic on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States also undertakes to withdraw its forces from the surrounding areas within 30 days after the final agreement. Okay, so that is wild. That means that immediately on the signing of the like as of Sunday, the United States was going to lift the naval blockade and allow Iran to ship oil at will. That is what the United States committed to do. And then theoretically, within 30 days, we would undertake to withdraw forces from surrounding areas. That is undefined. Unclear whether that means Iraq, Iran, uae, Qatar, Bahrain, we don't know. Provision five of the agreement, Quote, upon signing this memorandum of Understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will immediately take Steps to ensure the movement of merchant ships from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Aman and vice versa is resumed within 30 days to the pre war volume taking into the account the need for the removal of technical obstacles and the neutralization of mines by Iran. So the idea would be that the Islamic Republic would ensure that they would essentially allow traffic to happen through the Strait of Hormuz. That is not a permanent matter. That is something that will have to be settled within 60 days. Okay. That is all that says. It doesn't say this is a permanent opening of the Strait of Hormuz. It doesn't say anything remotely like that. In fact, according to United States intelligence agencies at CNN, as CNN reports, U.S. intelligence agencies have recently assessed Iran can effectively shut down access to the Strait of Hormuz at will from now on. So basically we are bribing them as we will see when we get to the monetary flow, which is going to happen to a regime that has not changed its behavior, will not change its behavior. The money is going to start happening like immediately and has already started happening. We committed to immediately allowing oil to flow in and out of Iran and they committed that they will allow traffic to happen within the next 30 days. But no final settlement has been reached. The President essentially admitted as much, by the way, at the G7 here. He was suggesting that if we had not done this deal, there would have been a worldwide depression which is an admission that Iran controls the strait.
- [40:59]
Joe Biden
The alternative would be a worldwide depression. You know, the stupid people want to have a worldwide depression and they're stupid people. So you can only go so far, drive somebody into the ground and a lot of bad things happen. Number one, the strait would never open because they don't like floating billion dollar ships up and down a strait when their rockets fly, flying over them and mines all over the place. So the strait would never be open. It wouldn't be open for a long time. So we have, we have a very hot stock market and we have a very, starting to be a very low oil price and that's going to have a huge impact on affordability caused by the Democrats.
- [41:41]
Ben Shapiro
All right, finally, most importantly, most importantly, because again, all these other things, you could theoretically kick the can down the road on all these other things because let's say that the United States basically just pulled out and said, listen, we've done what we've done on the nukes. We're done. Our allies have oversight. Okay, let's say that we had said that about the ballistics. We've done what we wanted to do. We destroyed their ballistic missile facilities. It's not a permanent thing, but our allies have overwatch. Okay, let's say that the United States has said, listen, we are going to maintain these sanctions on Iran. There won't be enough money for them to flow that money over to their terror proxies. Status quo. Ok. And let's say that the United States had basically said with regard to the strait, we're just going to pull out and whether Iran tolls or whether Iran doesn't, you know, not great, but we're going to maintain our sanctions on companies that do business with Iranian ships also. Okay, so again, a bad deal is significantly worse than no deal. Why? Because of the final issue, funding. It turns out that the funding of Iran is not in fact contingent on Iran becoming a wonderful reasonable actor in the region. Not in the slightest. One thing we should remember here is that even if they were to be reasonable for the next three years so that we stuff money in their pockets, unfrozen money into their pockets, they could year four just take all that money and do what they want with it. This is one of the big problems with Obama's jcpoa. If you toss money at a terror regime, they can wait and they can watch and then they can activate. This is what the world tried to do with Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Hey, they're not doing anything that bad right now. Sure, they fire rockets every so often, but if we stuff some billions in their pockets, probably it'll be fine. But it's worse than that because according to the text, and again, if the administration wishes to rebut the text, they can just release a wildly different version that would quiet all the concerns. But it is totally inappropriate to tell the American people that their concerns are nonsense while not releasing the text and then say that even when the text is released, you can't take it seriously. That is nonsensical. So on funding, there are basically two issues. One is sanctions, waivers and frozen assets. According to provision 13, quote, following the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding and upon receipt of assurances regarding the commencement of implementation of articles 4, 5, 10 and 11 of this memo of Understanding and the continued implementation of these steps, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States will enter into negotiations for a final agreement. So basically, immediately following the signing of the memorandum, there is a requirement that the United States lift the blockade. That is immediate. That Iranian shipping be restored to pre war volume. That's immediate. That means $3 billion a month floating into Iran. And further, that the United States, according to provision 10, undertakes that immediately after the signing of this memorandum of understanding, until the date of the lifting of sanctions, the United States Treasury Department will issue waivers for exports of Iranian crude oil, petrochemical products and their derivatives, and all related services, including banking, insurance, transportation and the like. To understand how bad that is, by the way, that is not just that we unlock them shipping oil in and out. They could ship oil in and out before the war, but we had sanctions on companies that did business. They'd use a ghost fleet. This would remove all of that. It would put them in a better position than they were before the war with regard to their shipping of oil. Beyond that, if you dismantle related services like banking, insurance, transportation, and the like, you are cracking a system that took years to build in terms of sanctions. Furthermore, under provision 11 of this agreement, the United States undertakes that in light of the progress of negotiations toward a final agreement, frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran will be released and made fully available. Okay, do you understand that sentence? In light of the progress of negotiations? In light of it, meaning it's already happened, there's been progress in negotiations. So we will unlock frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States undertakes to issue all necessary permits and licenses on this basis. It is for this reason that the Wall Street Journal reported that the Trump Iran deal, as currently constituted, allows Iran to immediately sell oil. A senior U.S. official said Tuesday that Iran would get upfront sanction relief for oil sales. Also, the bulk of the frozen money sits abroad, most notably in China from oil revenues generated over many years that can't be transferred to Tehran's sanctioned banking system. Will that end? Unclear. So that is point number one. You're cracking the sanctions regime. You're cracking it. You're allowing them to sell oil not via ghost fleets, but you are restructuring the banking system to allow them to do so in return for literally nothing other than a temporary opening of the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before the war. And then you have this much ballyhooed reconstruction fund. According to provision 6 of the agreement, the United States undertakes, together with its regional partners, to create a comprehensive plan agreed upon by both parties for the rehabilitation and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran, while ensuring financing of at least $300 billion. The Vice President says even if Iran doesn't get the $300 billion, we still will have transformed the Middle east in some way. Well, that's probably true. If we reopen the sanctions against them, then undoubtedly they will strengthen themselves.
- [47:22]
JD Vance
They don't get anything unless the total. Unless there's been a complete transformation of how Iran interacts with the world. That would be a huge win for America. And to Jesse's point, if they don't do any of these things, we don't give them anything, they don't receive anything. Their nuclear program is still destroyed. Their military is still destroyed. Their missile program and industrial base is still destroyed. We fundamentally have transformed the Middle east, whether they comply or not. Just icing on the cake, assuming they do all the right things.
- [47:51]
Ben Shapiro
Okay, so what you are now making the case for, Mr. Vice President is that the war was good, but you are not making the case that the end of the war is good as well. According to Reuters, a $300 billion private fund designed to trigger investment into Iran is outlined in the US Iran Framework Agreement. More than half that sum has already been committed, a source with direct knowledge of the deal told Reuters. Now let us be extremely clear about what is happening here. The people who are going to be putting the money in must have a guarantee from the United States that this won't go to war again, because otherwise you're not committing money. Do you tend to commit money to places that may be under the attack of the United States for long periods of time? Like large sums of money? What this fund most likely. And if you are UAE or Saudi and you can put your money anywhere, you can put it in the west, you can put it in the United States, your Qatar, and you can invest trillions of dollars in the United States and buy up sports teams and buy up ports and all the rest of the. Are you really going to prefer to put that money in Iran run by the IRGC who are going to funnel that money to terrorists? Is that where you can put your money? Or is this just a giant bribery fund to the Iranians, to quote, unquote, keep the strait open? Is that what this really is? And if that's what it really is, why are you paying a terrorist regime hundreds of billions of dollars? And again, the notion that because this is not taxpayer money, somehow we bear no responsibility for unfreezing it. That is a case that was originally made by one Barack Hussein Obama. So all of this is supposed to culminate with a photo op on Friday. That photo op will be between the Vice President of the United States, who for some reason thinks this is going to be a big PR win for him, and this dude in this video from like last year burning an American flag. And chanting, death to America, by the way. Like, I, I don't know. I'm not sure the American people are going to go for this. That is in the Iranian Parliament, by the way. Remember, these are the moderates, the reasonable people. Supposedly these are the people that we want to create an investment fund for $300 billion. How could it go wrong? How could it go wrong? Hey, now, there is something that's sort of fascinating. Okay. The President of the United States, again, assuming that this text is accurate, which I have no reason to believe it is not, at this point, the President of the United States is saying things about the agreement that don't appear to be in the agreement. In my opinion, this means that he's being fed bad information by his negotiators. Here's the President of the United States saying that there is no immediate sanctions relief, which is not true. There are sanctions on Iranian export of oil. The agreement text commits to immediately allowing them to ship in and out oil without sanction.
- [50:42]
Joe Biden
Mr. President, does this, does the deal
- [50:44]
Ben Shapiro
involve any sanctions relief for Iran? When would that go into?
- [50:48]
Joe Biden
Well, they have to. It's really a behavioral thing. If they do what they're supposed to do, that starts taking effect.
- [51:00]
Ben Shapiro
The President also says that the $300 billion fund is false, that people can invest if they want to, but they're not going to be investing for quite a while. Okay, Well, I mean, we are the ones who have been preventing people from investing in Iran with the sanctions. That's what they're there for. $300 billion funded by Gulf allies that
- [51:24]
Joe Biden
people, people you can invest if you want. I mean, what am I going to do? Say nobody's ever allowed to invest? No, we're not investing. We're not putting up 10 cents. And people can decide to do that, but that's up to them. I mean, do you want me to say nobody's ever allowed to invest in, in a country. I'll say it. With Egypt. Yes, nobody's allowed to invest in Egypt. Am I supposed to say that? I'm asking whether we are not investing in it and we do not have a fund.
- [51:48]
Ben Shapiro
Are you asking gold?
- [51:50]
Joe Biden
No, I'm not. I'm not. If they do it, fine. But I would say they won't be doing it for a while until they find out the behavior. It's a behavior thing. But we are not in. That's a false story that got picked up incorrectly.
- [52:06]
Ben Shapiro
Again, just going to point out, quote, the United States undertakes, together with its regional partners, to create a comprehensive plan agreed upon by both parties, the rehabilitation and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran while ensuring financing of at least $300 billion. So I don't think that President Trump is fibbing here. I think he's saying what he believes is in the agreement. I just don't believe that his negotiators are telling him what's actually in the agreement. Okay. The president then says, listen, if I don't like what's going on, we'll go back to dropping bombs. The problem is that once you have said that the alternative to the agreement is full scale war, and you have also said full scale war leads to a global depression, the Iranians are surmising, correctly or incorrectly, that there will be no going back to the dropping of the bombs. And they have the upper hand when it comes to these negotiations. Here was the president yesterday.
- [52:57]
Joe Biden
If I don't like it, if they don't behave, we'll go right back to dropping bombs right smack in the middle of their head. Okay? Because they've misbehaved for 47 years.
- [53:09]
Ben Shapiro
All right, does it include.
- [53:11]
Joe Biden
But nobody could have made this deal.
- [53:14]
Ben Shapiro
Okay? Now, again, we will see if that is true or not. I suspect the Iranians will put the President to the test on that. Well, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, he correctly points out that no one ought to be confident that Iran will do anything useful here.
- [53:31]
Whoopi Goldberg
Unless you were homeschooled by a day drinker. No one's confident that Iran's going to do anything. And it's unfair to hold anyone to that standard.
- [53:46]
Ben Shapiro
Okay, well, I mean, that is correct. And a good indicator that a deal is not great is that Chenk Uyghur is in favor of it. I mean, come on. Come on. If the text of the leaked 14 point MoU is correct, it's a good deal. First of all, it isn't even a deal. It's an MOU. All of the major provisions are kicked 60 days down the road. And the best case scenario here for the United States is that Iran reveals its hand. The United States realizes that this 14 point MOU is a bunch of trash and that the United States actually holds Iran to account for lying. That would be the best case scenario. And then we take all the actions we should have taken months ago. But Chenk Uyghur says we get a firm commitment, they can never have a nuclear weapon. Ah. Oh, well, you know, if Cheng says so and they open the Strait of Hormuz and we give them back their money that we froze and the Gulf countries give them some too. Let's come home. Chenk Uyghur. If he loves the deal, pretty good indication it's not a great deal. All right, so in distantly connected news, there was a UFC drone terror plot that was foiled by the FBI. A five people, according to Fox News were in custody as of Monday. Investigators identified 23 people as part of a potential network of plotters. The alleged plan involved using explosive laden drones to hit buildings near the event, force a mass evacuation and steer crowds toward a pre stage sniper team. A second wave was then allegedly planning to storm the White House gate, according to officials. This was evil obviously, and the people in custody are American citizens. So what do we know about the people who planned this? And again, you're talking about apparently up to 20 people who are in group chat and five people who are in custody as of Monday and they had maps of the site and they were openly planning this sort of stuff. What do we actually know about the belief system of the people who are pursuing this particular terror assault? It turns out they are in fact right wing conspiracy theorists. That is what they were. They were going after allegedly quote. This is a quote from one of the people arrested. I got a possible target, Marsha Blackburn. She's a Republican senator for Tennessee. She's taken money from the Israel pro Israel lobby and supports them. Also, the people involved in these chats were convinced that a group of Epstein elites manipulated by the Israelis, that somehow this was what was in charge of the American government. Joining us online is Cabot Phillips. He of course is the host of Wired in Live, which airs Monday through Thursday, 5pm Eastern on Daily Wire, Spotify and Apple. Cabot, thanks so much for taking the time. Really appreciate it.
- [56:24]
Cabot Phillips
Absolutely, Ben.
- [56:27]
Ben Shapiro
So can you give me some details on this apparent gigantic terror plot, a drone plot against people who are attending the UFC fight on the White House lawn on Sunday that was uncovered by the FBI.
- [56:39]
Cabot Phillips
Yeah, it's worth pointing out a lot of times people hear about these plots or these alleged plots and they think, oh, was this thing actually going to happen? Was this actually serious? Or were these just a few guys sitting around a campfire spewing out stupid ideas and getting caught? This one seems very, very serious and very credible. So what we have here is about 20 plus individuals in a series of signal chats plotting out a plan to attack the UFC event this past Sunday at the White House. One of those individuals, his mother, became so concerned by what she was seeing from her son that she contacted federal authorities and they immediately came in and began investigating. So it Looks like there was not like an informant or a, or a federal agent of some kind in these chats spreading this plan. This was actually something where the, the suspect's mother turned him in. The plot itself, a number of individuals said that they were going to have explosive laden drones that they were going to set off above the UFC event. They then were going to have snipers posted with long rifles in elevated areas around the event. They were going to try and herd the crowd, create evacuation, mass panic and begin shooting people as they came out. They had very specific plans. The affidavit that we were just reading through the daily wire obtained yesterday, it shows clear maps that they had. They had direct routes and evacuation routes that they had. They had all sorts of very specific ideas of what they wanted to do here. Also worth pointing out, these individuals had a plan allegedly to meet up in Fredericksburg, Virginia to begin recon and training for this alleged operation in the days before the event. And so there's all sorts of probable calls here, all sorts of evidence that this was a very real plot. We now have five individuals who've been arrested. Charges include conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to attack federal officials, all sorts of other things, conspiracy against the United States. So very serious case here.
- [58:31]
Ben Shapiro
Now, as always, the first place that people go is what are the politics of the people who are attempting to carry out this plot? What do we know at this point about why they wanted to do this, who they were targeting, what was the goal?
- [58:44]
Cabot Phillips
Yeah, there's a kind of a weird smorgasbord right here. As far as what their motives are. It does appear from a number of the social media accounts of some of the individuals. Again, there are 20 plus people in these chats. All of them are being investigated. Only five have been arrested. But a number of the five have been arrested. Their social media accounts in the past would be considered conservative. They were sharing things in support of Donald Trump, sharing things on the traditional conservative side. But it appears over the last few years they became radicalized. They began espousing all sorts of beliefs about the US Government being controlled by Jeffrey Epstein associates. They said that the elites were going to eat young children. And there was a clearer string of antisemitism within this plot. The co conspirator or the, one of the head masterminds. According to federal officials, his parents said that in recent months he began spreading supportive messages of Adolf Hitler. They said that he had been talking about how the Jews control the government. And that appears to be a huge element of this case. In these group Chats. You can read through them. Within the affidavit, the suspects were talking to each other about how do we pick who we're targeting? They talked first about the elites and billionaires and kind of the corporate overlords. And then they started specifically sending photos of lawmakers, including Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn. And they said, why? One of the people chimed in and said, why are we targeting these specific lawmakers, these senators, these congressmen? And the alleged ringleader said, they're the ones that are accepting money from AIPAC in the Israel lobby. And he started including photos and saying, here's how we know who to target. And the photos of the lawmakers that he was uploading to this chat allegedly were pulled directly from a website that was trackapac.com and so you can get an idea here where it does appear that their hatred of Jews, their hatred of anyone who supports Israel, played a clear role in motivating this alleged attack.
- [60:42]
Ben Shapiro
So, unsurprisingly, it turns out the conspiratorial nonsense surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and Israel and the Trump administration may have some pretty dire consequences for people who didn't used to be crazy and then went crazy because there are people who are spoon feeding them this garbage. So. So, Cabot, what are the charges? What would the expected sentences be, and how fast does this thing move toward trial?
- [61:03]
Cabot Phillips
Yeah, it's still in the very early phases, actually. So for three of the five men who've been arrested, we have charges that have been listed for two. We're still waiting to hear if they even. We don't even know if they have legal representation yet. So it's very early on. This plot was only even discovered about a week ago, I believe it was. June 10th was the first day that this main suspect's mother contacted law enforcement. So we're still in the very early days. These charges are very serious, though. If there's a clear way for law enforcement to prove that they were going to carry out these acts, there's up to lifetime sentence for some of these charges. Conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy against the United States to murder federal law enforcement officials. All sorts of very hefty charges here. But I also do want to point out that the mother talked to law enforcement officials about how she felt her son had been radicalized. And the direct quote was really haunting given what we're seeing in our culture right now. The direct quote was she believed the individuals were using religion to manipulate and influence her son. And this woman appeared to do everything right. She raised her son in a Christian household. There's all sorts of social media posts throughout history, the last few years showing their relationship, showing him wearing, you know, traditional, you know, Christian shirts and things of that nature, being involved in church. And this mom said that her son's love of God had been manipulated and twisted into something evil. And that is just what we're seeing from the radical left. And as you've pointed out, that's what we're seeing from the woke reich of these people who are claiming to, you know, be taking action in support of the gospel and they're actually twisting it into a hatred of Jews into a hatred of all sorts of people. And that part just jumped out to me in the affidavit. And it was so just a reminder of how important this topic is.
- [62:49]
Ben Shapiro
Very disturbing stuff. Cabot Phillips, thanks for your reporting. Check out the show Wired in live every day over at Daily Wire, Spotify and Apple. Cabot, thanks so much for the time.
- [62:58]
Cabot Phillips
Absolutely, Ben.
- [63:00]
Ben Shapiro
All righty, folks. The show continues for our members. Right now we have some very serious news and then some more annoying news. So if that's a pitch for you, we well, we have a horrible story out of the UK involving those grooming gangs. New details, plus a case of fake violence, fake hate crime in Chicago and MLB cracking down on people who just quote the Bible. Remember, in order to watch, you have to be a member. If you're not a member, become a member. Use code Shapiro. Check out for two months free on all annual plans. Click that link in the description and join us.
- [63:32]
Joe Biden
It.