Friendly Fire: The JD Vance Debate, Midterm Madness & Return of the Firing Squad

Summary

The Michael Knowles Show (July 2, 2026)

Episode: "Friendly Fire: The JD Vance Debate, Midterm Madness & Return of the Firing Squad"
Host: Michael Knowles (with guests Ben Shapiro, Ben Domenech, Cabot Phillips, Theo Wald)

Overview

This episode of The Michael Knowles Show features a "Friendly Fire" roundtable with Michael Knowles, Ben Shapiro, Ben Domenech, Cabot Phillips, and Theo Wald, covering major political and cultural topics ahead of July 4th, 2026. The group delves into the fallout from the JD Vance-led Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Iran, the impact of midterm election machinations, the specter of a new third party from Tucker Carlson, controversial Supreme Court decisions (including birthright citizenship), the rise of Democratic Socialists, and Idaho rebooting the firing squad for executions. The conversation is lively, sarcastic, and packed with pointed commentary.

---

Main Discussion Points & Insights

1. Soccer, Soft Power, and American Export (01:00–05:30)

• World Cup Discussion: The hosts banter about the US’s growing seriousness about soccer and the recent World Cup drama, including perceptions of anti-American bias from FIFA.

  • Ben Domenech: "I am so black pilled that Americans are taking soccer seriously. I hate it." (01:14)
  • Ben Shapiro: "We're taking it seriously because we're finally good at it." (01:24)

• Soft Power Insight:

  • Ben Shapiro argues the World Cup in America acts as a positive export of American values and standards, potentially influencing visitors to demand better living conditions and capitalist reforms back home.
    • "The World cup here in America has been the biggest soft power export of American values that I've seen in years." (03:05)

---

2. Fourth of July Personal News & Banter (05:30–08:07)

• Baby Watch: Michael Knowles shares he’s on call because his wife could give birth at any time.

  • "I can't stick around for the entire broadcast… my wife's contractions started… so this is exciting." (06:00)

• Founding Father Name Bet: If his child is born between July 2–4, Knowles gets to name it after a Founding Father, optionally "Gouverneur Morris" or "Jefferson Shapiro." (06:48–07:01)

---

3. The JD Vance Debate: Iran, MoU, and ‘Endless War’ (08:07–15:03)

• Vance Interview Review: Domenech just interviewed the VP (JD Vance), stirring debate about Vance’s criticism of MoU detractors.

  • Knowles: "[Vance]'s far more critical of people who are critical of the MOU than people who have been undermining the war and siding with Iran." (08:08)

• Critique of ‘Endless War’ Rhetoric:

  • Shapiro: "It's unfortunate… he’s using that argument… there are a lot of us backing the President… who just don’t like the nature of this deal." (12:59–13:26)
  • Ben and Michael clarify that proposing alternatives to the MoU is not war-mongering.

• Policy Alternatives Discussed:

  • Suggestions range from "walking away from the Strait of Hormuz" to strategic bombing and building regional alliances.

---

4. Economics: Milton Friedman vs. Hamilton, Religion, and Government (15:03–24:48)

• Vice President's Critique of Milton Friedman:

  • Vance claims Friedman’s economics only worked in a more religious America.
  • Shapiro partially agrees: "We thought this was going to change China, but it changed us." (16:08)

• Knowles & Shapiro Push Back:

  • Knowles argues declining church attendance correlates with government overreach, NOT proof government should assume a bigger social role. (17:15–18:58)
  • Shapiro: Social Security replaced church charity functions, which sapped communal bonds.

• Domestic Industry & Hamiltonian Model:

  • Domenech floats a return to Hamiltonian industrial policy, with Knowles warning against slippery slope to overregulation and government expansion. (22:39–24:48)
  • Knowles: "It's precedented. It's just dumb… Unless you're doing it for national security reasons." (24:48)

---

5. Tucker Carlson’s ‘New Political Party’ – Real Threat or Bluff? (25:01–30:11)

• News: Tucker Carlson threatens a new “America First” party.

  • Knowles: "What Tucker is doing here is… blackmailing the Republican Party into embracing his positions." (26:40)

• Buchanan Comparison:

  • Consensus: Carlson’s move mirrors Pat Buchanan’s 2000 Reform Party bid, which ultimately split the right and helped Democrats.
  • Shapiro: "Tucker’s no Pat Buchanan. Pat Buchanan is smarter, more consistent, more disciplined." (27:45)

• Consensus: It’s more a political pressure tactic than a serious bid.

---

6. 2026 Midterm Madness: Outlook, Redistricting, and Socialist Surge (32:15–41:41)

• Midterm Analysis:

  • Despite inflation, war aftermath, and Supreme Court news, Democrats have gained less than 1% in generic ballot polling. (32:15–33:46)
  • Shapiro: "This midterm is gonna be terrible for Republicans… Paxton is losing Hispanics to Talarico…" (33:46)
  • Redistricting blurs past performance comparisons and makes outcomes harder to predict.

• Dem/Socialist Influence:

  • Discussion of how DSA-backed socialist primary wins are forcing Democratic leadership leftward, even if they don't swing broader electorates.
  • Phillips: "I think these candidates… will have an impact on the broader perception of Democrats… force leadership to go further left." (39:27–40:06)

• Supreme Court Rulings Impact:

  • New birthright citizenship and trans sports rulings may change campaign dynamics (i.e. de-fang key wedge issues for Republicans). (36:36–37:24)

---

7. DSA Platform & Socialism’s Appeal (41:41–46:30)

• Polling: Polls show rank-and-file Democrats now view DSA socialists more favorably than congressional Democrats.
• DSA’s Radical Platform Outlined:
  • Cabot Phillips: "The official DSA platform: abolish the Senate, defund the War Department, replace the president and Supreme Court, etc." (45:09)
• Generational Blame:
  • Shapiro highlights AOC’s resonance with young voters—blaming Boomers for locked-out housing and opportunity.

---

8. Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Decision (52:09–64:37)

• Case Summary:

  • The Supreme Court, led by Roberts, refused to end automatic birthright citizenship, citing Anglo common law roots in the 14th Amendment. (53:24)
  • Theo Wald: "[Roberts] misses everything from the Declaration of Independence forward… it's a very narrow reading." (53:24)

• Critiques:

  • Shapiro supports birthright citizenship in principle but notes today’s abuse through birth tourism demands a new approach.
  • Wald notes the executive order approach undermined legal clarity—"most of what Congress can do has been foreclosed… will require a constitutional amendment." (61:50)
  • Knowles: "Maybe we consider what the Brits did after [their reforms]—they ended birthright citizenship." (59:43)

---

9. Idaho’s Firing Squad – Return of Old-School Capital Punishment (64:37–67:08)

• Context: Idaho reinstates firing squad executions due to drug embargoes.
  • Wald: "[The firing squad is] a far more effective and… humane form of execution… death occurs in seconds." (65:12)
• Philosophy: Emphasis on states upholding their legal choices vs. activist roadblocks.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Soccer in America:

  • Ben Domenech: "It sucks. It’s third world, it’s gay, and I don’t like it." (01:35)
  • Ben Shapiro: "All these foreign fans… are going to export American values and capitalism…" (03:09)

• On MoU/Iran:

  • Michael Knowles: "Vance made himself the face of this… and continues to press on behalf of an MoU that is currently falling apart." (09:12)
  • Ben Shapiro: "It's unfortunate that he's using that argument… who just don't want to keep bombing the Iranians forever." (12:59)

• On Economics and Religion:

  • Ben Shapiro: "We thought this was going to change China, but it changed us. … You need that strength of society and family … for a free nation." (16:08)
  • Michael Knowles: "Social Security… replaced church charity functions, which sapped communal bonds." (18:29)
  • Ben Domenech: "It’s precedented, it’s just dumb. Unless you’re doing it for national security reasons." (24:48)

• On Tucker Carlson:

  • Michael Knowles: "What Tucker is doing here is… blackmailing the Republican Party into embracing his positions." (26:40)
  • Ben Shapiro: "Pat Buchanan is smarter than Tucker. He's more consistent…" (27:45)

• On Socialism:

  • Cabot Phillips: "The official DSA platform is do away with the White House. … Do away with cops. Do away with the border." (45:09)
  • Ben Shapiro: "America is a Latin American country now… Communists to kill the rich, then Fascists to kill the Communists…" (42:03)

• On Supreme Court's Birthright Citizenship Decision:

  • Theo Wald: "[Roberts' opinion is] a discursive armchair historian's view… rooted in Anglo common law." (53:24)
  • Wald: "Most of what Congress can do has been foreclosed by this opinion. It will require a constitutional amendment." (61:50)

• On Death Penalty/Firing Squad:

  • Theo Wald: "It's a far more effective and… humane form of execution… trained marksmen … death occurs in seconds as opposed to 8, 9, 10 minutes." (65:12)

---

Important Timestamps

• 01:00–05:30: World Cup, America and soccer, soft power & culture export
• 08:07–15:03: JD Vance interview debrief, Iran policy, the MoU brawl
• 15:03–24:48: Milton Friedman/Hamiltonian economics, government & religion
• 25:01–30:11: Tucker Carlson’s “third party” gambit and Buchanan comparison
• 32:15–41:41: Midterm generic ballot analysis, Dem Socialists impact
• 41:41–46:30: DSA radical platform, root causes of socialist popularity
• 52:09–64:37: Supreme Court/Birthright citizenship, legal and historical arguments
• 64:37–67:08: Idaho and the firing squad: historical context and rationale

---

Tone & Style

The tone throughout is witty, combative, often ironic, and densely packed with political references and sarcasm. The speakers’ camaraderie allows for sharp disagreement with a recurring grim humor—particularly about American culture, the status of politics, and the recursive cycles of left/right populism.

---

In Summary

This episode offers an incisive, sometimes irreverent look at major political stories of early July 2026: fraught debates on US foreign policy, Supreme Court rulings, the inexorable rise of the socialist left, intra-party blackmail, and the surprising return of old-school capital punishment. It’s a primer in abstract-turned-concrete political battles, punctuated by memorable barbs and the hosts’ shared expectation that the culture war is moving into an even fiercer phase—just in time for America’s semiquincentennial.

Transcript

[Michael Knowles]

The grill is shot. The chairs are held together by optimism.

[Ben Domenech]

And what happened to the rug?

[Michael Knowles]

Sounds like your outdoor setup is not

[Ben Domenech]

ready for patio season. Fix it all with Wayfair.

[Michael Knowles]

Shop Wayfair for grills, rugs, furniture, and more. With 20 million 5 star reviews, room

[Ben Domenech]

of choice delivery, and expert setup on

[Michael Knowles]

qualifying orders, it's never been easier to

[Ben Domenech]

do more for less.

[Michael Knowles]

Get 10% off your first eligible purchase.

[Ben Domenech]

Hurry to Wayfair.com or download the app now. Wayfair. Every style, every home. Hey, I just Venmo'd you for rent. Nice.

[Michael Knowles]

Now I can instantly spend it, whether I'm checking out online with Venmo or using a Venmo debit card.

[Theo Wald]

Say more.

[Ben Domenech]

More.

[Cabot Phillips]

Exactly.

[Michael Knowles]

Because the more you do with Venmo, the more you get, like, earning up to 5% cash. Back with Venmo Stash on a bundle of brands.

[Ben Shapiro]

So order more pizza. The math demands it.

[Ben Domenech]

Get the Venmo debit card.

[Michael Knowles]

Venmo stash bundle. Terms and exclusions apply. See terms at venmo me stashterm. Venmo checkout not available at all merchants. Venmo MasterCard is issued by the Bancorp Bank. Na.

[Ben Shapiro]

So what was your reaction when FIFA tried to steal that World cup game away from us?

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, no, I mean, I've been obviously watching the coverage for. You know, I can't even sleep. I'm so. Because Pele, right. Was kicking it with his head. I'll tell you, man, I am so black pilled that Americans are taking soccer seriously. I. I hate it.

[Ben Shapiro]

But we're taking it seriously because we're finally good at it.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah. I hate. I don't want us to be good at it. I don't want us to play.

[Michael Knowles]

This is a good rule. No, this is a good rule. Look, it's your American already.

[Ben Shapiro]

I want us to be great.

[Ben Domenech]

Ben calls it poverty ball. I hate this freaking sport. It sucks. It's third world, it's gay, and I don't like it.

[Michael Knowles]

I mean, but if we get good at it, then it's the most important sport. That's the way I see it.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah.

[Theo Wald]

No, I.

[Ben Shapiro]

Look, I feel the same way. I feel the same way about, like, the. The Olympics. I just want America to be the best at everything. I want us to kick everyone's ass.

[Ben Domenech]

Do you want us to be the best at transgender ballet? USAID was funding that in the Philippines. Should we. Let's say they start a transgender ballet league and America joins. Do we want to be the best or the worst? I want to be the worst at that.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah. I mean, now we get to the question whether soccer is inherently immoral. Michael.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, it's inherently immoral. I'm not going down. I'm not quite there though.

[Michael Knowles]

I'm close.

[Ben Domenech]

It's that I find it inherently.

[Ben Shapiro]

Well, it is the most corrupt sport. I mean, by far.

[Ben Domenech]

Is it that I actually.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, well, I mean, I mean they're literally out of the tournament right now. I mean that's, that's what's happening.

[Ben Shapiro]

100% the most corrupt sport.

[Michael Knowles]

Our best, our best scorer was just red carded for legitimately no reason, because FIFA decided that it's impossible for the United States to essentially make the quarter. So that's, that's. Am I getting this right, Ben?

[Ben Domenech]

This is the other thing is it's like it does seem anti American. I'm not even just intrinsically in the sport. I mean like the people who play it and FIFA and whatever, they don't seem to be super pro America. And also if we're gonna have a world championship, I want it to be like baseball where we just declare what the world is like. We do the World Series.

[Ben Shapiro]

But see, this is, this is. As someone who should be a big fan of soft power, the World cup here in America has been the biggest soft power export of American values that I've seen in years, in decades. All these people are going to go back home and demand of their politicians. Why don't we have air conditioning? Why don't we have showers that work? Why, why don't we have all these things? This World cup has gone so well and all of these foreign fans who came over have been so impressed by all the different aspects of it that they're going to go back home and export American values and capitalism and say, what are we doing? Like living the way that we currently live when we've seen the way that people live in in America, we've seen bugs. That's something. That's great. Yeah. And it doesn't require any more money for the Pentagon.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, no, look, actually that's the best argument to watch soccer that I've ever heard in my entire life and ever will hear. The fear. Of course, with all of this cross cultural pollination, is that, is it us exporting our soft power or are we just importing third worldism and this kind of lame sport? But to your point, yes, people are talking about BUC EE's, they're talking about Waffle House, they're about talking talk about ranch dressing. And did you see the guy Freddie is apparently Going to the White House.

[Ben Shapiro]

Well, so he was invited. Here's the thing with Freddie, and I don't know if you followed this. We've been paying attention to it on the opinion side. The backlash against him on the Internet has been insane because basically people dug up some vaguely right of center things that he might have tweeted out in the past. Um, and. And things that, you know, they've gone after him basically as being someone who clearly is. It. Wants to stay sort of, you know, he hasn't shown his face. He wants to stay, have some degree of anonymity and like, be normal when he gets back from this.

[Michael Knowles]

Right.

[Ben Shapiro]

Probably never had any expectation of going viral. But I also think it's. It's phenomenal in the sense that, like, all these different people, he's. He is one of many. And there are so many people who are going to go back and I think, you know, import the values that we still have here in this country that are good and are valuable back. I think that this has been one of the best things that we could possibly do in America's two 50th. And I did not expect that. I honestly thought it could be a complete crap show, but it turns out to be great.

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah.

[Ben Domenech]

Okay, look, you have done more to convince me to like soccer than anyone has ever done.

[Ben Shapiro]

You don't have to watch it. I'm not saying you have to watch it.

[Ben Domenech]

You know what I wanted. Oh. First of all, I guess I should say it's friendly fire. The Fourth of July is coming up, so we're all getting ready to celebrate Somali Independence Day in Columbus, Ohio. I don't know if anyone's going to make the trek out there, but do you guys. Do you have any big Fourth of July plans?

[Michael Knowles]

Might have a big.

[Ben Shapiro]

Yes, that's an actual thing.

[Michael Knowles]

Ben.

[Ben Shapiro]

Ben, we are right on the verge.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, no, we are right on the verge of baby time. I thought, like, one of the reasons that I can't stick around for the entire broadcast is you can hear my voice is totally gone. The reason my voice is totally gone is because, like, two nights ago, my wife started having contractions about 20 minutes apart. And we thought for sure it was time to go to the hospital. And that lasted until about 2 o' clock in the morning, at which point it abated. So I was so short on sleep that it totally wrecked my voice. But, yeah, I mean, any moment. And I've had a deal for 20 years with my wife, which is that if the baby is born between July 2nd and July 4th any year, but particularly in 250 year, then I get to use a founding father name. So this is like. So this is exciting.

[Ben Domenech]

So, Governor, I assume, or are you gonna flow what the options are?

[Michael Knowles]

Gouverneur Morris. Yeah, Gouverneur Morris is gonna be. Yeah, exactly. But there's some good ones to choose from. Jefferson Shapiro sounds kind of wild, but there's some possibilities.

[Ben Domenech]

Charles Carroll Shapiro. That could be a good dude. If your kid is born on the 4th of July in the 250th, that would be. It's like Providence, you know, Providence has its ways. God has its way in history. Has his way, rather. Okay, now, well, then, if I only have you for, like, five seconds, what I am told on this schedule that we have to talk about, and I actually do want to talk to you about is I was just in D.C. i'm not totally on baby watch yet, but the reason I look terrible and sound only slightly better is because I've been traveling all over. We were in D.C. i was already going for the unveiling of this statue of my great, great, great, great, great grandpa, Simon Knowles, part of the American Revolution displays. And then I was stopping by the Great American State Fair Play, the yes or no game. But then at the last minute, the vice President was able to make some time. He actually gave us a whole hour to interview him at his book and Iran and 2028 and the Democrats and all this stuff. And so did you, Ben, I don't want to presume. Did you catch any of the interview.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, I did. I caught much of the interview, actually. I thought you did a good job. It was a really interesting interview.

[Ben Domenech]

Thank you.

[Michael Knowles]

Obviously, I have significant disagreements with the vice President on a wide variety of issues, as we've discussed on the program. I thought that, to me, the kind of bizarre fixation that the vice President has on criticizing people who are mad at the MOU is, I think, unbecoming for him. He's far more critical of people who are critical of the MOU than he is of people who have been legitimately undermining the war and siding with Iran the entire time, which I find bizarre. But obviously, listen, he's really well spoken. He's very smooth. Yeah. And I thought you did a good job with the interview.

[Ben Domenech]

No, thank you. I appreciate it. You know, it's funny that you mentioned that the criticism of criticizing the people who are criticizing the mou, because I did. Even when he was talking about that, I wanted to clarify. I said, hold on, you're talking about the people who are upset about the war not continuing versus, you know, it's unclear which critics he was talking about, but he made that clear. My take on it is that the media at least, I don't know if it's really the admin as much, but the media at least have made him kind of the face of the mou. And so criticism of the MOU is often seen as criticism of him. Even though obviously, look, it's oh, I

[Michael Knowles]

mean, listen, I've criticized him directly for the mou. I mean, I'm not gonna put it on the media. I've criticized the President for signing it. But J.D. vance made himself the face of this. He personally negotiated it. He continues to personal press on behalf of an MoU that is currently falling apart, not just in the Strait of Hormuz, but also because an actual good peace plan has been put forward in Lebanon which runs directly against the mou. You know, Vance's approach, which has been to essentially take sort of an Obama esque tack with regard to opponents of the mou. All they want is endless war. They just want endless bombing. That's what they're promoting. And we've discussed this on the show multiple times on Friendly Fire. Like what would alternatives be? I mean, one alternative would be just to walk away from the straight and not hand them things. Another alternative would be to bomb Harg island and provide as much aerial defense for the Saudis, Bahrain and UAE as possible and basically destroy the Iranian economic capacity from this point forward. Another possibility would be to essentially arm up all of our allies and then attempt to actually project into the Strait of Hormuz. And if the Saudis don't like it, tell the Saudis to stick it. Right. Project Freedom is something that the President wanted to do and the Saudis apparently said no. I have never and will never understand the idea of that. If we are funding and paying for a base in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia gets to tell us what to do with that base. That's insane to me. I think that we should tell the Saudis, listen, we're paying for your defense. All your F35s belong to us, right? Like now we're trying to protect you from your moral nemesis in Iran. If we feel like opening the strait using bases that we are supplying, staffing and running, then we're just going to do that. But in any case, those are all, I think, fair critiques of the MoU without reference to eternal war, forever war. And I don't like the dumbed down version of this politics that sounds Very much like Barack Obama's defense of the jcpoa, where Obama would say, if you oppose the jcpoa, it's because you want a forever war with Iran, or you want a nuclear war with Iran or you want to obliterate Iranian civilization or anything like that.

[Ben Domenech]

I get the criticism. Isn't it in the context of not just the gop, but in the context of Trump? A criticism of endless War is not just Obama. You know Obama, Ian. It's also Trumpian Trump in 2016. One of his big breaks with the rest of the GOP is he criticized George Bush for endless wars and specifically Iraq. So when the vice president comes out and uses that language, that seems to me to be very much in line with Trump.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, the Trump's version of the endless war.

[Ben Shapiro]

Sorry, go ahead, Michael.

[Ben Domenech]

Hold on.

[Ben Shapiro]

Michael, you talk. I actually have not had the time to watch the interview yet. I have to ask you, did you ask the vice president about his criticism?

[Ben Domenech]

Me personally, did he criticize you when

[Ben Shapiro]

he went on Megyn Kelly? Megyn Kelly read him a list of things that had been said about the MOU by some people, by Mark Levin, by others, but then one of them was from me. And that was what led into him saying, all these people just want to keep the war going on forever. They want to keep bombing until all the Iranians really.

[Ben Domenech]

Oh, man. As someone to get the ratings, someone

[Ben Shapiro]

who opposed the Iraq war. The Iraq war that, by the way, tons of people supported, including his old boss, David Frum, who was calling people like me unpatriotic conservatives at the time that we opposed the Iraq war. I think it's really. I think it's unfortunate, and I think it's beneath him to suggest that people like me who do not, in fact, I have been, you know, really do want to just walk away from this thing, think this deal is bad, don't want to hand the Iranians any money, want to keep bombing until all the Iranians are dead.

[Ben Domenech]

I didn't realize. I think, Ben, I think you might have frozen up a little bit. I don't think that the, you know, it wouldn't have been great to bring up that question had I known about it. In fact, I think to get the real ratings up, I should have had you walk out from the back like, well, we have him here. Ben Domenech, you are the father. That's. Wow, that's amazing.

[Ben Shapiro]

Can you have the grass glass shattering sound before I walk out? I just think. I just think that I have to agree with Ben. I think that it's unfortunate that he's using that argument because there's a lot of us who back the President who think that he did something that was bold here, who just don't like the nature of this deal and who certainly don't want to keep bombing the Iranians forever. Are you kidding?

[Ben Domenech]

Hold on. Our other pal Ben on here just said he did want to keep bombing the Iranians.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, I actually didn't actually, nothing, nothing that I just implied actually said bomb Kharg Islands. None of which, none of which bombing

[Ben Shapiro]

Kharg island until every Iranian is dead.

[Michael Knowles]

I'm confused. Well, hold on. Kharg island is a small island off the coast of Iran with a. With a completely military population. It would take presumably about three B2 sorties to finish Kharga island and then you would never have to go there again. That's not sound like an endless bombing

[Ben Domenech]

of Iran resulting in the death of

[Michael Knowles]

90 million citizens to me. I might be getting that wrong, but I'm not sure that's how bombs work.

[Ben Domenech]

No, no, I'm not saying. Look, I don't know. I actually didn't even hear the Vice President's comments about destroying all this. I guess President Trump did say he was gonna destroy the whole civilization, but I didn't hear that he's the only

[Michael Knowles]

one who's threatened to do it. I didn't threaten it. Neither did Ben Domenech, but, yeah, there you go.

[Ben Domenech]

No, I just mean the issue here with the mou. I think everybody can agree, and I predicted this from the beginning, that if we did end this with a deal, the deal would be deeply dissatisfying. So I don't think anybo, nobody disagrees on that, but it just seems like right now we have a couple of options, which is either Maybe there's a third, but you get some version of the MoU, or you get some version of continuing to bomb them and fire missiles at them. Or you could walk away, but now you're walking away with Iran in control of the Strait of Hormuz. So now you're in a much worse

[Michael Knowles]

position and they're effectively in control of the Strait anyway. Honestly, I'm of the opinion that we'd be better off walking away from the Strait of Hormuz, completely retaining the sanctions, making them float the ghost ship. That's right.

[Ben Shapiro]

Replace the MOU with a hammer, a cheese sandwich.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, exactly. I agree with this. And so that was one issue that I had with what the Vice President was saying. The other one was, of course, the Vice President's bizarre attack on Milton Friedman's economics, as though Milton Friedman's economics stopped applying in the 1980s for some unspecified reason because the vice president of Arum, which means that now Milton Friedman is irrelevant, which is a strange timeline since it turns out that he wrote that after Ririm Navarre. But, you know, hold on, here's the

[Ben Domenech]

clip for those who didn't see it. Part of why Milton Friedman's ideas made more sense in the 1980s is because they were being advocated in a country that still had a very rich and powerful institutional Christianity. And so, like being laissez faire in a world where there are Christian guardrails on everything is a much different proposition than being laissez faire in a world where globalized liberalism has become the sort of status quo of American elites.

[Ben Shapiro]

Okay, so I'm not sure I disagree with that.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, there we go.

[Ben Shapiro]

I mean, I, I, I, I, I don't, I don't think he's wrong there. I think, I think that one of the problems that we've known about when it comes to American capitalism is that we didn't just import cheap televisions for people to watch. We didn't just import, you know, these different goods from around the world that people enjoy here in America. We also imported a lot of their values with it unintentionally. We thought that this was going to change China, but it changed us. And it's one of these things that I think is sort of an underestimated aspect of it. You need kind of both of these things to have a really strong nation. That doesn't make Milton Friedman's approach wrong. It means that we need a religious revival in America, which is what I have argued consistently with my atheist libertarian friends. You guys should be the biggest fans of, like Rick Santorum or, you know, pick your, pick your Mike Huckabee, what have you. Religious revivalism, because you need that strength of society and family and everything else that goes with it in order to have the type of laissez faire free nation that we've enjoyed for centuries.

[Ben Domenech]

Ben, other Ben, you totally disagree?

[Michael Knowles]

Well, so, so I agree, obviously, that church is very, very important. I mean, I've spent my entire life preaching in favor of the idea that people need to go to church. And obviously church membership was higher in the 1980s than it is now. I mean, if we're going factual about this, the reality is the church attendance in America really started to decline around the year 2000. That's really when things started to drop fairly precipitously as late as 1999, 70% of people, adults were members of a church, synagogue, a church or a synagogue in the United States. But the idea that the fundamental basis of economics changes because of church attendance and therefore what you need is government to somehow come in as the centralizing force that's going to reinculcate a common good. So welfare programs or redistributionism or government regulation are going to re inculcate virtue in the American population. It seems to me that if we are going to look at a correlation, the growth of government since the 1960s has been exponential. The attendance in church has dropped radically in that same exact period. In fact, I think you can make the very strong case that actually one of the reasons for attendance declining in church and church membership declining is government actually replacing the functionality of church in everyday life for people like this.

[Ben Shapiro]

Totally.

[Michael Knowles]

And the other thing is a Social Security is that, you know, if the government, I know Social Security, you don't take care of grandma and she doesn't live in your house if you don't. I don't have to give as much charity to my church or be a member of my church or engage in the values of my church in order to gain access to all of the institutional support of the church in order to just go pick up a check from the government. And so this bizarre attempt to sort of reverse engineer virtue via government fiat government redistributionism and centralization of economic resources, it's completely backward to me.

[Ben Shapiro]

Well, just one, you have that dollar sign as like the primary motivation in your life too, that also allows for the type of lies to emerge that build off of that Social Security experience that all of these socialists who I know we're going to talk about later, you know, can, can exploit. Because everything becomes just a monetary issue. It's all about, you know, who gets the money, who's scrabbling over this, this piece of, the piece of. And there is no kind of shared communitarian value that brings people together and that says, I mean, just think about something as simple as the cost of childcare in America. When we have gone from an era in which, you know, relatives and friends and you could have trust teenagers that you could trust to watch your kids and not just have their nose in their phones. Like that's something that, that definitely we have lost here in the recent decades. And it's a major problem. And I think that it's one of the reasons why all these people are able to exploit a message of anti capitalism to a bunch of dumb people who don't Understand that it's what made the country as powerful as it was in the first place.

[Ben Domenech]

Sure. But also when we talk about the growth of government, I agree with a lot of those observations, but we can't only think about it from a quantitative perspective. There is also a qualitative perspective in some ways. In the earlier parts of our country, we had a much bigger government role than we do today when we were prosecuting blasphemy, when we, at the very least when we had blue laws that said you couldn't sell goods on Sundays, restricted the sale of liquor or what have you. So in some ways we had a much bigger government then. Since the 60s, obviously you've had this massive growth in the welfare state, but you've also had court rulings that have said the government has to pull back on certain moral matters. So I think there's a qualitative aspect there too.

[Michael Knowles]

So, Michael, I agree with a lot of that actually. But that's not what the Vice President's suggesting. He's not suggesting a return of blue laws and blasphemy laws. He's suggesting massive governmental intervention in the economy and that reverses the arrow of causality. So I think that you can make a very solid historical case that church arrow capitalism, because that's actually true. I mean, the reality is that market capitalism in the west was actually an outgrowth originally of property rights, rooted in sort of Catholic perceptions of property, and then later adumbrated by Protestant perceptions of the value of free markets, capitalism, innovation and work ethic. Right. I mean, that's Max Faber. And so you can say these institutions precede capitalism, which clearly is true. But I don't think that you can then say the Marxist thing, and it actually is a Marxist idea that economics precedes social institutions. And so what if we just change our economic system and then people go back to church? That's actually not.

[Ben Domenech]

I think we can say that political communities precede some social institutions or are coincidental with them. And so, you know, in the way. And you can't really firmly separate politics from economics, though maybe the Marxists would like to focus much more on the material and the economic. But the juxtaposition that the vice President is making here is not between Milton Friedman and Karl Marx. It's between Milton Friedman and the economics of Alexander Hamilton. Last I checked, Hamilton precedes Milton Friedman. I don't mean to dis Friedman. I like a lot about Friedman. But you know, there are some things that seem to be important for the government to take on. Namely, you Know, under a totally laissez faire system, which, you know, developed under the name of neoliberalism, in the last 40, 50 years, we've outsourced a lot of our manufacturers, manufacturing or supply change to a degree that means that we are now very, very vulnerable to China. If we ever were to go to a serious war with China, we would be really up the creek without a paddle. We saw a preview of that during COVID So that might suggest that maybe the government could focus in a Hamiltonian way on the development of industry in the United States so that we're not

[Michael Knowles]

in a dangerous Hamiltonian argument on a national security level is something that I've actually agreed with and it makes sense to me. I think that he's using what we would call in law school an argument that proves too much. He's basically saying that because you're taking key industries and outsourcing them, therefore the government should be in control of an enormous swath of American industry that has nothing to do with national security or just call it national security and stuff it under that rubric. And I think that that's totally wrong. And when he talks about Alexander Hamilton, I can guarantee you this. The idea that Alexander Hamilton would have been in favor of the kinds of nationalization schemes, full scale that are being contemplated, or the gigantic welfare state that has been built, or the gigantic administrative and regulatory state is totally insane. What Alexander Hamilton was stumping for in a national bank was the idea that America ought to be able to pay its collective debt. That is, that is the thing that he was attempting to craft an institution to do.

[Theo Wald]

Right.

[Michael Knowles]

The entire purpose of the national bank was basically to uphold the solvency of the United States because the United States kept blowing out a bunch of meaningless paper notes. And so now if you're talking about consolidation under a single institution, you may notice that the main concern of Alexander Hamilton, which was that our good faith and credit be good, is being undermined by the very institutions that JD Vance is calling to expand. Because the full faith and credit of the United States is not being put at risk by paper speculators in South Carolina.

[Ben Domenech]

It's being put at risk. Full faith and credit.

[Michael Knowles]

United States being put at risk by. Yes. By Congress and by the Federal Reserve and by the. And by the Secretary of the treasury and by blowing out money at an exorbitant rate, unsupportable and unprecedented in all of human history.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, listen, I'm all for reining back Congress. I think that long precedes the Trump administration, certainly. But Even to the one last point of Friedman. And then, I know I have to let you go, but I do want to talk about Tucker's new political party. But one last point on Friedman. Let's not forget, during the very height of Milton Friedman's influence, which is a relatively recent innovation in American history, you also had no less a free trader than Ronald Reagan protecting U.S. steel. Was he really doing that for national security purposes? Harley Davidson's agriculture. You had George W. Bush, for example, protecting industries. So you can trace protectionism back to Alexander Hamilton to George Washington.

[Michael Knowles]

It's precedented. It's just dumb. It's precedented. It's just dumb. It was not a good idea in the 80s. It wasn't a good idea when George W. Bush did. It's a dumb idea now. Unless you're doing it for national security reasons.

[Ben Domenech]

Okay, now before I let you go, big news, maybe. I actually don't think it's that big news. But Tucker.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, I agree.

[Ben Domenech]

Tucker left the gop. He's starting a new political party. It's gonna be a non interventionist America first reform political party. Where have I heard of that before? It's not easy.

[Ben Shapiro]

Can I just ask, which version of Tucker is this party like? I mean, he contains multitudes, you know, he is legion.

[Ben Domenech]

But it does.

[Ben Shapiro]

I mean, you look back at it,

[Ben Domenech]

it's a funny question, but there's a real answer to it. I think the real answer is Pat Buchanan.

[Michael Knowles]

Right?

[Ben Domenech]

Am I misreading that?

[Theo Wald]

Yes.

[Michael Knowles]

No, that's right. That's right. It's like the Pat Buchanan version of the Reform party in 2000 where Pat Buchanan won 0.4% of the vote, but just enough in Florida to cast the presidency to George W. Bush. That's his only role in history. Pat Buchanan. But the, the, the idea, first of all, it's not true. Okay? Tucker saying he's launching a third party. He's not doing any of this shit. But let's explain exactly what Tucker is doing here. What Tucker is doing here is he is blackmailing the Republican Party into embracing his positions by claiming that he's going to posit a threat to the Republican Party from the outside. So what you actually have right now is Tucker trying to run a quasi DSA play. Essentially, he's looking at 2026. 2026 is going to be a disaster area for Republicans. Right now. Republicans are running dead even or behind in all six of the. Of the various states in which up to and including Iowa, Texas and Alaska. Yeah, yeah, Tucker is looking at that. He is hoping he wants the Republicans to get their asses kicked because then what he's going to say is the reason that they got destroyed is because they didn't cater to people like me and me sitting outside here with my non existent third party. If only they'd engaged with me, if only they'd come back to me, then they would have won. And so it's basically a blackmail play. And it's smart.

[Ben Domenech]

It's smart.

[Michael Knowles]

But the idea that Tucker Carlson, who again says in that same interview that he has no attention span and is widely known in the media as one of the lazier members of the media, that the Tucker is going to sit there with the actual nuts and bolts of building a ground up political party based on the pretensions of Thomas Massie, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Joe Kent. Good luck. I mean, listen, my dream is that he starts a third party. I would love for Tucker Carlson to start a third party because then we could have a clear referendum on the stupidity of his ideas. But instead what he's going to do is not that what he's going to do is he's going to falsely claim that 2026 happened not because it was an off year election, not because Trump was unpopular on a wide variety of issues, but because, because Tucker Carlson personally was displeased with Donald Trump's policy on Iran and Epstein and all the rest. And therefore the only way to assure Republican victory going forward is to put Tucker Carlson in the driver's seat of the party. And obviously Tucker is very much aligned with J.D. vance. So I think that's the political move he's making here.

[Ben Domenech]

You know, it did. I could sense that this was just a replay of the Reform party, especially the 2000 Pat Buchanan version. Tucker himself.

[Ben Shapiro]

Can I disagree for a second? I've met Pat Buchanan. I know Pat Buchanan. Tucker's no Pat Buchanan. Pat Buchanan is smarter than Tucker. He's more consistent than Tucker. He is a more disciplined speaker than Tucker. I still think that his 1992 convention speech was one of was something that pre sage. It is essential viewing for anyone to understand American politics. And by the way, while being referred to as a culture war speech, it is mostly about economics. It is about crime economics and, and working class issues. And then they did this whole revisionist history where it was like, oh no, he came in and destroyed HW's chances for reelection by turning it into this, you know, election that was going to be about abortion and gays and stuff like that. The truth is that I think that you have to understand. You need to understand Pat Buchanan in order to understand politics. I'm not sure you need to understand Tucker, and I'm not sure it's possible to understand him just given how crazy he. He's been in the last couple of years.

[Ben Domenech]

No, it's an interesting point. And I guess, I mean, if the roadmap for the new Tucker party, or in Ben's view, not like kind of fake out party, is just okay, I'm gonna do what Pat Buchanan tried to do in 2000, then, I mean, even to your point, Ben, where you say, I don't compare Tucker to Pat Buchanan, you say, well, if you're just gonna replay the same script, then you know, one, it can only happen first one time. And to your point, other Ben, this is very annoying, you know, having the only other two guys in the show. To your point, it didn't work out. He got point.

[Ben Shapiro]

We'll figure this out eventually.

[Ben Domenech]

Yes, but it actually had not occurred to me. I can't read Tucker when he does these things that are really out there, and I can't. Some people in politics, I can read them like an open book. Tucker, I couldn't figure out exactly what he was getting at here.

[Michael Knowles]

Sociopathy is very, very difficult to understand.

[Ben Domenech]

I think your read on that is probably right. I don't. I don't. Tucker's too smart to want to start another political party, and he doesn't.

[Ben Shapiro]

And just by the way, there is a. There is. Our sponsors at Kalshee have a market on Tucker running for president in 2028 himself. And I guess it's currently around 25%, something like that.

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah.

[Ben Domenech]

And I would short that. No way.

[Ben Shapiro]

I would short that. Absolutely. He does not have the discipline. He does not have the discipline to start a political party. He does not. Definitely doesn't have the discipline to run for president.

[Ben Domenech]

That's not gonna on that. I guess no one here is joining the Tucker party. Neither of you are signing up. Okay, that's fine. But Ben, you are signing out. You're on baby watch. That's awesome. Everybody keep Ben and more in your prayers. If your kid is born on 4th of July, I'm gonna have severe birthday envy, but it would be very cool and I look forward to Governor Shapiro coming out. Good to see you, sir.

[Michael Knowles]

Thanks so much, guys.

[Ben Domenech]

Now, all of you folks, the Declaration of Independence named three Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Notice that order. Life comes first because without it, the other two mean nothing. The founders understood this, and yet every day in America, unborn babies are denied that first and most basic right. Preborn exists to change that. I love preborn. It is a wonderful ministry. It is one of my very favorite non profit organizations. I personally support it. I encourage you to give whatever you can. They're so good they even fundraise for their administrative costs elsewhere. So every dollar you give is going towards saving babies. You give 28 bucks that buys an ultrasound. A mother who sees her baby on ultrasound for the first time is 80% more likely to choose life. It is one of the best ROIs you're going to get. In honor of America's 250th birthday, we're asking our friends to prayerfully consider a special gift of $250 to multiply your impact and help save even more lives. Right now. Donate £250 say keyword baby that's £250 keyword baby or go to preborn.comknowles preborn.comknowles Every gift is tax deductible. Preborn.comknowles do we have Cabot? Oh, we do, we do. Hey Cabot, what's up?

[Ben Shapiro]

And now it's less confusing because there's only one.

[Ben Domenech]

Thank goodness. It was driving me nuts, man. I've only worked in media for like 10 or 15 years.

[Michael Knowles]

I couldn't figure out how to do it.

[Ben Shapiro]

We gotta be thing one and thing two or something like that,

[Ben Domenech]

so. All right, Cavett, we already covered my interview with the Vice President and Iran and Tucker's new political party, which I heard you just joined. But now I wanna talk about the Dems. Where do the midterms stand?

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah, it's been really interesting. I think given the last three or four months, you would've expected Republicans to have lost a ton of ground on the generic ballot with regard to the midterms. But if you actually look back, the week before the war in Iran started, Democrats were at like 47 and a half percent, Republicans in the high 40 threes. Despite the last three or four months of, of, you know, inflation going back up and the war getting worse and people not being happy with the war once it ended, Democrats have only gained about half a percent in the generic ballot. And so I'm still maybe delusionally optimistic that given the, given the, the lack of momentum for the Democrats, given the apparent ceiling that we're seeing, given these new socialist candidates that are gonna give the Republicans people to point to and make this race about that things maybe won't be as bad as a lot of Republicans are bracing for. I'm always the delusional optimist, though. But, yeah, that's what the big thing is. Just what these socialist races are going to do to the midterms more broadly. And we talk about that a lot on my new show, Wired, in which we film right on the set, which Ben Domenech has been on about half a dozen times, and Michael Knowles. What do we gotta do to get you back?

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, I did it. No, I did it once and I got. I don't know, I felt too intimidated. You on that nice big set. I kind of felt like you were set and suit mogging me. So I don't know, maybe I'd like to come back now that we're in the heat of midterm season and you point out you got all these socialists, but you're too rosy about it. Ben, can you please bring us down to earth?

[Ben Shapiro]

Yeah. So I actually think that this midterm is gonna be terrible for Republicans, and I think that they are likely to still hold the Senate, but that's still, I think, something that is a lot closer than anyone expected it to be. Just given the map. Some of the decisions that they've made have made this a lot riskier. We saw that New York Times poll, for instance, that has Ken Paxton tied with James Talarico, something along the lines of these Supreme Court cases that just came down. They, they benefit Talarico because Paxton is going to have to lean hard on the birthright citizenship question. He's going to have to support whatever the Republicans coalesce around in response to that. Talarico gets to punt on the transgender sports question because he can basically say Texas decided not to have men in girls sports. And I agree with them, and that's going to be fine. And I have nothing to do with that as a senator. And the problem that really shows in that poll is, and it's been apparent across multiple polls actually, is that Paxton is losing Hispanics to Talarico dramatically. So you don't have the same type of situation that you had with Ted Cruz, for instance, and just two years ago now, that doesn't mean that I don't think Paxton's going to win. I actually do think he's going to win. But the amount of time that's going to be spent backing someone like him, the amount of money that's going to have to go into a state that should have been safe, that's stuff that comes away from other states that are much riskier. Democrats are also trying to play fast and loose in a bunch of these situations. We've Seen them do it before, you know, backing independent candidates in certain sentences. In Alaska they actually put a guy with the same name as Dan Sullivan on the ballot, which is pretty ridiculous. The one thing that I do think though that we should keep in mind is the Democrats lost this redistricting war. And so in a lot of these situations these people are running in completely new districts and the candidates, therefore you can't rely on a one to one comparison compared to how they performed before because they have a different electorate that may not know them, that has, you know, a new response to them. I think the real question here is if the Democratic Party is able to basically pull the wool over the eyes of the independent voter, say that these socialists that are confined to just these little spots in the country don't care about that, don't look at that. You know, there is no man behind the curtain who believes in Marx and Engels. You know, we are instead going to, you know, try to, you know, turn this into a situation where, where we are the party that's about affordability, that's about anti corruption, that is anti war, that is, you know, going to make your gas prices come down, et cetera, et cetera. They're gonna try to run in that direction. And I think Republicans are gonna run on crime and calling Democrats crazy. That doesn't tend to be the kind of message that gets people out who aren't already going to vote for you.

[Ben Domenech]

Wow. Yeah. And so it makes me even more upset about the Supreme Court decisions cuz the birthright citizenship one ultimately is much, much more important I think, than decision, which seemed actually in contradiction to Gorsuch's view from the Title VII decision. And I don't know, it seemed a little bit like they were kind of just following the headlines and the opinion polls. But regardless, birthright citizenship, that is a nation shaping like demos shaping event. And so that's obviously terrible for Republicans, but at least we got the trans win, right? No, to your point Ben, that takes the killer issue for the Dems, especially in places like Texas. I mean that's Ted Cruz really wrecked Colin Allred when that race looked like it might be a little tight. He destroyed him on the trans sports issue. Now it's totally off the table.

[Ben Shapiro]

Yeah, it bails them out. And the last thing I would just say about this is I think Republicans always miscalculate how much voters are actually paying attention to the craziest things that congressmen and in some cases Senate candidates in Michigan and in Maine Senate candidates, or I'm assuming The craziest guy is going to win in Michigan, that they always kind of count on that to help them across the country. And I don't think that that's actually the way it works in midterms. It can help you when you're doing a national election in a presidential year, but it helps you less when it comes to these midterm elections because it's. It is more localized and it's more about people's immediate concerns. I think, unfortunately, Republicans have been, you know, they've been throwing rocks at each other here in Washington. They can't get on the same page. White House and the Senate are split, you know, in all these different, you know, House things are. Shenanigans are going on. I just do not see a lot of signs that, you know, this is going to be a good situation, you know, for Republicans. I know that there's a. There's a Kalshee market on this, of course. Which party will win the U.S. senate that you can check out. They're one of our sponsors, of course. And I think that this is a situation where everything has tightened. People are a lot more concerned about this than they were six months ago when Republicans were confident they were going to hold that body. It could end up being 50, 50, in which case, JD Vance, clear your schedule. You're going to be voting a lot.

[Cabot Phillips]

Ben, I agree with you that I think the average primary or the average midterm voter maybe isn't super aware of what Chevalier is doing or what Kiros in Colorado is doing. But I do think that Democrat leadership is very aware of those people and they're very scared of them. And we've started to see Democratic leadership be forced to embrace them. We saw Kamala Harris this week come out and call Mamdani personally. She called a number of pro Palestinian groups.

[Ben Shapiro]

Please, please do it, please.

[Cabot Phillips]

And we saw JB Pritzker try to

[Ben Shapiro]

run as a socialist.

[Cabot Phillips]

But we saw J.B. pritzker.

[Ben Shapiro]

I beg you. Pritzker went on America Do It.

[Cabot Phillips]

Pritzker went on cnn and he said, yeah, the strategy of these socialist candidates, he didn't fully endorse them. He said their strategy is one that's going to win in 20, 26 and beyond. And so he's a billionaire.

[Ben Shapiro]

He has to say that so they don't kill him.

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah. But my point is that I think that these candidates, while they might not have a huge impact on Senate voters in Texas, they will have an impact on the broader perception of Democrats in that they're going to force Democratic leadership to go further left for fear of being eaten. As you point out, usually Pritzker is the one doing the eating, but in this case he's the one getting it.

[Ben Domenech]

I wasn't gonna say it a lot

[Cabot Phillips]

for people to feed on that, but I think that's gonna have an impact.

[Ben Shapiro]

I'm sure he lost all that weight naturally.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah. What I wanna know about the DSA stuff. There was that poll that just came out that showed that rank and file Dems have a higher opinion of the Democratic Socialists than they do of Democrats in Congress. You think, well, all right, that's a low bar. Democrats in Congress aren't polling that well. But it's pretty scary that they, the Democrat voter would today prefer the socialists who used to be this kind of fringe, weird young element of the party, even six, eight years ago to now they're polling higher than the Democrats in Congress. What does that tell you about the state of the party? To me, when I got that news, it reminded me of what we saw after Charlie was killed, which is that itself was obviously a major personal trauma for a lot of people and political trauma. And then there was this additional political trauma which is that you found out 28% of young leftists agreed that it was okay and it could be justified. And huge swaths throughout the mainstream left, on television, in office, they would all minimize or dismiss that killing. You say, okay, well that's now a major political scandal. You're seeing, I don't know, you're just seeing a lot of evidence coming out that the Democrat Party, you look at the California state senators, they just voted to allow child molesters to run for office. They voted down a measure that would keep them out of office.

[Ben Shapiro]

That wasn't just they needed more representation.

[Ben Domenech]

They do now. They do. I mean, the headlines weren't even as

[Ben Shapiro]

bad as the realities speak for Epstein's Island.

[Ben Domenech]

No, the original thing that we were seeing in the headlines is Scott Wiener was the one who did this. And Scott Wiener is a total freak and a pervert, a deviant. But it wasn't just him. I wish it were just him. It's the mainstream Dem, most of the Dems on this panel. So what does that say about the party?

[Ben Shapiro]

So can I just. I'm going to quote a random guy on X who I think had a great explanation for this shout out to Roman helmet guy. America is a Latin American country now. So let me explain politics. We elect communists to kill the rich. Communism brings poverty and crime. So we elect fascists to kill the communists. But Then the fascists hand the economy to oligarchs. So he liked communists to kill the rich. And unfortunately, as someone who has been saying for a long time that I thought that American politics was starting to look more and more like Latin America, including by the way, with Donald Trump, you know, you must, you know, elect the strong man, elect the man who's going to solve the problems, you know, kind of thing. I think that that is unfortunately dangerously what we are setting up in this situation, which is, is a takeover of a decrepit octogenarian Democratic Party that is out of touch with its most engaged activist voters. And it's going to, I think, completely reorient them. We saw this happen to a degree with the Tea Party, but the Tea Party, basically what happened was their ideas were subsumed into the Republican Party and the fundamental Republican kind of framework that that three legged stool that we have talked about to the nth degree that remained intact. It just was sort of a change in priorities. But I don't think this is just a change in priorities. I think this is a change in one of the American parties. And I think that unfortunately, capitalism may end up being a monopartisan affair faster than we could even imagine.

[Cabot Phillips]

We've had this huge movement of rehabbing Richard Nixon's image and we've been Nixon maxing this summer. I think we might have to start Pinochet maxing. We might have to print me with a good time. We might have to start Pusheth did nothing wrong.

[Ben Shapiro]

Exactly.

[Cabot Phillips]

But on the topic of socialism, that poll of the number of Democrats that view socialism favorably, I just can't help but think that that's more a reflection of their despair over the situation in America, their feeling that neither party is speaking for them. And to that point, I do think that a lot of people who are embracing socialism, while the ideas obviously are abhorrent, they're not all wrong in saying that they have reason to be angry with the way that they've been treated in the country. But I don't think that actually means what they necessarily think it means. I don't think most of them would actually support the Democratic Socialist of America agenda. And to that point, if you actually look at the agenda, we know that the DSA supports universal health care, universal child care and student loan forgiveness and amnesty. That's, that's child's play compared to where the DSA platform actually is. So this month they published their new, what they call it, the the Workers Deserve More plan. The official plan from the DSA includes abolishing The Senate defunding the entire War Department, quote, replacing the president and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress. The official DSA platform is do away with the White House. Do away with the presidency. Do away with the War Department. Do away with the Senate.

[Ben Domenech]

Establish the Third International.

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah. Do away with the cops. Do away with the border. I don't think that the average Democrat who says, yeah, socialism, I do it favorably. I don't think they're supporting that. But that is what QTSA members are supporting.

[Ben Shapiro]

But Cabot, can I ask you, I assume you probably saw that viral clip of AOC responding to the question about, you know, JD Vance says you would be a really competitive candidate, you know, if you ran for president. And one of the things she says in that, in that clip is about how people in her generation feel like they've been handed, you know, a bad situation by the people who came before. To me, that argument is the most powerful one that they have, because it's true. Because the simple fact is that the boomers are the greatest generation in terms of distribution to themselves. And there's a reason why we have the kind of resentment for a situation where they are still, by far, even though they have continually shrunk, obviously, as a generation, they own the most houses in America. They own the most property in America. They don't want to sell it. They don't want to give it up. And so you have people who are trying to form families who have to. To listen in apartments. And that's the kind of thing where that resentment. There's a core truth to it that I think Republicans have unfortunately failed to address.

[Ben Domenech]

You know what I find unfortunate? The Cabot's still on this show. So get out of here, you. No, listen, I know you all want more Cabot, so whatever you do, make sure right now to go and subscribe to Cabot's new show, Wired in, on Spotify or Apple Podcasts. That is the only way you will be sure to see Cabot's return to this program. Cabot, any parting words?

[Cabot Phillips]

Yes, please go watch Wired In. If nothing else, just so that you can stick it to Michael Knowles. Yeah, he just had his big 2000th episode. We're on episode 50, and that's something worth celebrating. So go. Come join us live on Daily Wire, 4pm Eastern every Monday through Thursday. It's a lot of fun, and we'll get Michael Knowles back on.

[Ben Shapiro]

For the people.

[Ben Domenech]

I'll do it, especially if you guys go over there en masse. Then I'M gonna have to go over there and say, hey, I'm still here. Go. Come on. Hey. Watch me. That's wonderful, Cabot. Thank you as always. Good to see you. Now that we've just returned, it's just me and Mr. Domenech. I feel like I can rest easy. And if you want to rest easy, you need to go check out helix. America turns 250 this week, which means it's been 250 years since anyone in this country got a good night's sleep. The founders ran a revolution on no rest at all. George Washington crossed the Delaware in the middle of the night. Those men had no choice. You do. Between the kids, the show, and everything happening in the country, a good night's rest is about the most patriotic thing I can think of. And for that, I thank our sponsor, Helix. I'm such a good. I'm such a good dad. I'm such a good father. I'm not a founding father, but I'm a father that I got both of my kids who are out of the crib. Helix mattresses. And you know what? I just. For anyone who's gonna be a house guest of mine, I just ordered another Helix mattress for our guest room. Ben, have you gotten a beautiful Helix yet? Yet?

[Ben Shapiro]

I do. I actually already had one before I joined the Daily Wire. I like it very much. In fact, it's my favorite mattress to sleep on. Especially when my kid is trying to wake me up at about 3:30 in the morning and I'm trying to get my wife, unsuccessfully, to change his diaper instead of me.

[Ben Domenech]

That's very fair. When you said it's my favorite mattress to sleep on, I think. How many? Maybe I need to start Mattress Maxi. Maybe I need to get another one. Well, with Helix, the prices are so good, you could get many. They have over 20 mattress models. Whether you run hot, sleep on your side or need extra support, there's one built for you. They even offer cooling upgrades, which in July is not a luxury. It's a necessity, especially if you live in Mamdani's New York. It is the most wanted mattress brand. 78 degrees.

[Ben Shapiro]

You saw that? 78 degrees.

[Ben Domenech]

78 degrees. Cool. A nice balmy night in New York. Go there right now. Helixleep.com do it. You're going to love it. Helixsleep.com Dailywire 20% off site wide. 25% off luxe mattresses. 30% off elite mattresses. Helixleak.com Dailywire 20% off the regular ones. 25% off the luxe 30% off. The elite. Make sure you enter Daily Wire at checkout so they know we sent [e-mail] DailyWire there's one more thing I gotta sell. You gotta sell it, Ben. Sell it for me.

[Ben Shapiro]

Yeah. So you mentioned Washington crossing the Delaware. When Washington was crossing the Delaware, he understood the power of truth and the power of stories. And so he had literally being read to the troops in their boats when they were crossing the Delaware river in the middle of the night to do their famous raid that changed the course of history 250 years ago. He had them reading the opening passage to Thomas Paine's American Crisis, which decries the Summer Soldier and the Sunshine Patriot. We need more people than Summer Soldiers and Sunshine Patriots. We need people who are engaged at this moment in our country and understand the crisis that we're in. And the way to understand that crisis is to subscribe to the Daily Wire. Plus, we are so proud to bring you a new deal on the 250th anniversary of this country that is going to be a three month deal for $17.76. Sorry. That is going to offer you everything that the Daily Wire empire has to offer. It is everything. It's all of the documentaries. It is a. You know, it's all of the different historical truths. It's all of the different articles and pieces and things and content that we're rolling out the documentaries, the whole entertainment library, and we're going to be putting out a bunch of stuff this summer. So you definitely need to sign up for this. If you've been on the fence about joining, there's no better moment than on the nation's 250th birthday. Daily Wire plus, go sign up and Happy Independence Day.

[Theo Wald]

Okay.

[Ben Domenech]

Can I actually be totally sincere and earnest, which I almost never am. Certainly not on this show. That was an inspiring ad. Read the Summer Soldier and Sunshine Patriot Washington. That was a good man. That was good. I want to sign up. That was great. I really liked it.

[Ben Shapiro]

Okay, before I let you go, hey, you gotta look. I'm not sure Tom Payne would approve of me using his words to sell things, but I think it's actually true. Think that what the Daily Wire offers is the truth about history, the truth about who we are. That's what Paine was offering those soldiers. They knew in that night how desperate they were, that they were really down to the end. And this was the kind of desperate, brave, heroic act. And they could never have appreciated that they were in the midst of founding the greatest nation in the history of the world. And I think that that's something that we should appreciate now. And subscribing to Daily Wire is. Is the way I think that you can help appreciate it and understand it now.

[Ben Domenech]

And you know what else? You know, what we now know, thanks to historians, is that Thomas Paine slept on a Helix mattress. So head on over to. No, no, he didn't. I don't think he actually did that.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay.

[Ben Domenech]

We are now bringing on Theo Wald to talk about, before we let all of you guys go, the Supreme Court decisions. I wanna go through them. We talked about the political implications a little bit, but I wanna know about the decisions themselves. And then also Idaho becoming the first US State to use firing squad for executions. That the first US State ever, or just we're bringing it back? I don't know.

[Michael Knowles]

I don't know.

[Ben Domenech]

I'm not expert on that.

[Ben Shapiro]

I think that's a question for Theo.

[Ben Domenech]

Do we have Theo? Theo?

[Ben Shapiro]

There we go.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah.

[Theo Wald]

It's good to be with you guys. And I just wanna say, Ben, you know, Thomas Paine was a pamphleteer and a hustler. I think he would actually appreciate the sales pitch there. Always trying to make a buck.

[Michael Knowles]

Right.

[Ben Shapiro]

It literally was the original. You know, I'm interested in your ideas, and I was. I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[Theo Wald]

That's right.

[Ben Domenech]

So on the big case, on the one that really matters the most, on the birthright citizenship case, I never thought the Court was gonna go along with us out of cowardice. I thought there were good legal arguments and good historical arguments for the courts to go along with us. But I think the Court is just institutionally cowardly for good reason. The Democrats keep threatening to destroy them for almost a century now. But in terms of the actual legal matters, what happened?

[Theo Wald]

Yeah, I think all of that as preparatory comment. That's correct. I think anyone who listened to oral argument knew that both Justices Kavanaugh and ACB Amy Coney Barrett were skeptical. That's probably the best way of putting it. Skeptical, at best, of John Sauer, the Solicitor General, his arguments before the Court. I think the Roberts opinion, one way of sort of distilling this down is to say essentially a discursive armchair historian's view of the 14th Amendment, but really rooted in Anglo common law. What is the notion of citizenship or subjecthood, more likely that was imported from Britain into the United States. And that's where he kind of hinges his entire argument. And I think Alito is right to say in his dissent, and Thomas does the Same that Roberts really misses everything from the Declaration of Independence forward. And so you've got a very narrow reading of what citizenship requires. Hadley Arkes, you know, the famous natural rights theorist, he really pinpoints this line from Robert's opinion where Robert says, really, what this is about is citizenship is the right to have rights, which really would have struck the Framers, obviously, as bizarre, but also the framers of the 14th Amendment as bizarre. So I think the majority opinion is trying to do a lot. And what it's really trying to do to your point, Michael, is to satisfy this question of what is the meaning of the 14th amendment? What is the meaning of citizenship once and for all? And as we've seen over the last 40 years, anytime the Court tries to settle definitively what is really at root, something of a small p. Political question, the Court ends up regretting it. You know, just think of Planned Parenthood v. Casey or some of these other sort of seminal cases where the Court tried to say, no, this is the definitive answer for all time. And I think the dissents from Thomas and Alito both get at this. Not only is it a wrong reading of the 14th amendment, but it's also a political mistake the Court's making.

[Ben Shapiro]

So, Theo, I have a couple of questions about this, and I want to preface this by saying that I am someone who has for a very long time, along with including hardline immigration people like my friend Mark Kakorian, support birthright citizenship. And the reason that we support it is because we don't believe in having stateless children, and we believe that it's chaotic, and we believe in border control, immigration enforcement, the kind of things that prevent this from being exploited. But the situation that we face today is obviously dramatically different than everything that we've seen even just a few decades ago, when it comes to the level of birth tourism, when it comes to the level of people, people who are aligned to come here for a brief amount of time just in order to have a baby, who can claim dual citizenship, who are exploiting generous Medicaid and other welfare programs in blue states like this is a completely different scenario than we were in even 15, 20 years ago. And obviously that includes the importation of untold millions during the Biden era. The decision, though, to go with an EO that I know that you were obviously a key component of that is from you. I actually don't know how much of it you worked on or if you drafted the whole thing, but that EO was always something that seemed to put in people's minds this thing is going to get kicked out because it's not Congress. It's not something that has the backing of a partisan or potentially even a bipartisan. I think you might have gotten some Democrat randoms in the House, House that might have gone along with some kind of solution on immigration just based on where they are that tried to deal with this birthright question which has loomed over us forever with all of these random disparate decisions and no definitive answer. I think Robert's opinion is crap. I think it's just like ridiculous. But I also think that this outcome is one that most Americans are just kind of going to kind of shrug at, unfortunately. Do you think that it was a wrong decision to do this via executive order?

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah.

[Theo Wald]

I mean, so the executive order project that I worked on in 45, you could probably say it was much more about nipping and tucking and really getting at those four categorical exemptions that Roberts kind of dismisses out of hand and says that's a closed universe.

[Cabot Phillips]

Right.

[Theo Wald]

Native Americans, envoys or ambassadors. Yes, right, exactly. So really trying to hone in on is that the, is that the defined space here or is there more sort of elasticity in the joints, if you will, because of the new situation we face with the millions of birth tourists in Miami or Southern California, you know, the false society claimants, etc. So I think the idea of tackling this through executive order, and I'll note executive order alone, right. This could have always been dual tracked with a statutory effort in Congress from the word go back in January of 25. I think the idea of pushing this solely through executive order. It wasn't just Roberts and ACB who were uncomfortable with that. Obviously Kavanaugh notes that in his opinion with the existing statute from the 1950s. And I think both Alito. Yeah, and I think both Alito and Thomas both are kind of, you know, the idea that you could do this exclusively through unilateral executive power makes them uncomfortable. So I think that was also a mistake here and especially a mistake in that I don't think it teed up to your point, Ben. I don't think it teed up in a neat way. The larger political discussion we need to have. What was missing was exactly what Alito said in his dissent, which is, you know, how of this very weird scenario where legal immigrants coming to the country applying for citizenship have to engage in kind of like this reason based Thomas Paine, if you will, based naturalization process. They've got to prove their loyalty, their understanding, civics, education. But Then a whole host of people who come near as birth tourists or illegal aliens can just have the magic of birth and automatically give birth to an American citizen. That's a weird, a very weird scenario, and that's open. That would have been very promising ground for Republicans in Congress or elected Republicans in the state houses across the country to make that argument. We require this of naturalization. Why wouldn't we require something more domicile and allegiance for any citizen who's coming here and giving birth? A missed opportunity again.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah. And even so, beyond the question of executive order versus legislation, or even the Supreme Court precedent, which obviously comes from Wong Kim Ark or the public meaning from the framing of the 14th Amendment, you make this very good point, Ben, which is that Roberts is leaning on, or sorry, Theo, you might have made this point. Well, one of you did, and probably the other one agrees with it. Theo, that Roberts is leaning on the Anglo tradition, which is where we get our law from, the English common law. And the English common law had birthright citizenship, so we are told jus soli versus jus sanguinis, the right of the blood. But this, I think, misses a really important point, which is that you had a birthright as a subject of the king, not in any modern sense of citizenship. And so if we're gonna make the parallel and we're gonna cite the United Kingdom, we should look at what after the Second World War, when the United Kingdom begins to change its previous sense of the relation of subject to king into a more modern national kind of citizenship, what does the UK do? The UK gets rid of birthright citizenship and they vote for this in 1981. It goes into effect in 1983, precisely because of these problems of mass migration. And so you say, look, Wong Kim Arc does not decide this definitively in 1898. The Congress hasn't really weighed in on it. Obviously, the framers of the 14th Amendment didn't think that what they were doing was just giving a free ride to every Chinese spy that wanted to fly to Guam. You know, it's totally absurd. And if you're gonna look to the English common law, maybe we consider what the Brits did after that. Because the court ruled on the substance of the matter, because the court came in 5, 4. Kavanaugh would not join them for the substantive point. And they say, sorry, 14th amendment gives every Nicaraguan peasant birthright citizenship immediately. Is there anything that we can do, the executive or the legislature, to fight back? Or do we need to fight another 49 year Roe v. Wade like battle to get this case overturned.

[Theo Wald]

Yeah, I think that's an excellent distillation, Michael. And funnily enough, I was just in London a week ago giving a presentation on exactly what you just laid out, both the 48, 49 citizenship bill that obviously Enoch Powell essentially made his career on the early part of his parliamentary career fighting that, and then the 1981 and then the subsequent mid-90s Citizenship Act. So the British have changed their notion of citizenship three times in a fundamental massive way, and yet we have a chief justice who's saying, well, we got to go back to the 15th century to look at the way the British understand subjecthood. It makes no sense at all. So in answer to your question, unfortunately, because of the expansive opinion here that this is resting on a constitutional interpretation, and I'd also add to Ben's point, point, because of the flaw in presenting this as an executive order assertion of power, I think in large part, most of what Congress can do has been foreclosed by this opinion. It will require a constitutional amendment. And I think the white pill, as I've shared elsewhere, is to say that might be a good thing to get people thinking again about the form of citizenship, what's required in a small r republic, and having a fulsome discussion discussion about what we want in terms of the rights and duties and obligations that citizenship imposes. Part of the problem here is for 50 years, we essentially neglected this entire conversation and left it to abstract legal theory or judges in robes to determine who is and who is not a citizen.

[Ben Shapiro]

And this is. Can I just. Theo, can I just make the point that the politics of immigration also played into this in the sense that. That for a long time, Republicans saw immigration as kind of a second, you know, third rail of politics, other than like, you know, kind of Medicare or something like that. They didn't want to touch it because they were worried they were going to piss everybody off by doing it. And the truth is that in that window where you could have probably moved something on something like this, I'm thinking the late 90s, early 2000s, that didn't happen. And because that didn't happen, we're left with this situation, as you said, you know, left with legal academic comment and judges in robes making this decision. I think that we need to have a real considered moment here about what it means to be a citizen, about what kind of citizens we want and want to welcome. And look, Calvin Coolidge said that the Founders, you know, fought the war in 17 following 1776 because they wanted to be citizens, not subjects and that's what we want. There are a lot of people, I think today politically who would be perfectly happy to just be subjects and we should not be those people.

[Ben Domenech]

Very, very good point. Before I let you go, Theo, we have to talk about speaking of the dignity of the person and, you know, living on our own terms. I've long thought if, God forbid, I'm ever convicted of a capital offense. I'm not joking. This is not just a setup. What I would want to do is go out standing up, blindfolded, probably a cigarette in my teeth by the firing squad. That actually seems to me to be the most dignified way to go. Idaho has this. I believe you were rather involved in that. I actually don't get what the big deal is.

[Theo Wald]

Yeah, great question, Michael. The Guardian and a couple of other international publications have lost their mind in the last 24 hours about this. You know, the archaic, barbaric, gun obsessed Americans are bringing back firing squads is essentially how the op ed from the Garden read yesterday. Look, I mean, really at issue here is something, a very basic premise. It's tied to our previous conversation which was, you know, the people of Idaho reflective in numerous red states and some blue states across the country elected to have capital punishment for a certain class of offenses. And not, you know, abolitionist activists and a number of their sort of institutional backers have campaigned to restrict the ability of states like Idaho to import the drugs that are necessary to create the three drug compound for lethal injection. This is essentially their way of short circuiting the preferred choice of the people and the establishment of the law. And Idaho's answer wasn't like some other red states. Well, I guess they got us. We don't have access to the drugs. We can't use compounding pharmacies anymore. So I guess we'll have no more capital punishment. Instead, what Idaho said was, okay, then we will revert back to a form of execution that is still recognized under the eighth Amendment. And to your point, Michael, it turns out actually there are lots of criminal defendants across the country who prefer the firing squad because it is a far more effective and humiliated main form of execution. The average firing squad, formalized medical death occurs in seconds as opposed to 8, 9, 10 minutes in the few lethal injections that actually occur correctly. And I think that you're using trained professionals, marksmen who are former retired military or police officers. And there's no violation of the Hippocratic oath that you require with health professionals using the lethal injection form of execution. So it makes sense for Idaho. And really, again, at root here is just a way of saying. Saying you're not gonna use your embargo and your activism to short circuit the legal choices that the people of our state have made.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah, I say kill them all, you know? No, no, kill them all. But you know, if you're gonna have capital punishment, that seems like the humane and right way to do it. Totally, totally agree with you. Gentlemen, I have to run, but not before Ben gives his final thought.

[Ben Shapiro]

Great work, Theo.

[Theo Wald]

Thanks, guys.

[Ben Domenech]

Thanks for having me. Good to see you, Mr. Dominick. Mitch, I'm leaving. I'm leaving on a jet plane. I'm getting out of here, man. I wanna go hang out for the fourth of July. And if anything happens to me, I just. God forbid, I want you to make sure that my family cashes in my life insurance policy. Everyone knows summer is upon us. We are now deep into it. And by some miracle, we are all still on speaking terms. Okay, with all. You know, somehow at least. I mean, even though most of the hosts left us for today's show, maybe we're not on speaking terms anyway. Look, one thing we all agree on is Policy Genius. Whatever your plans are, I can tell you what they should not include. Squinting at some labyrinthine insurance website trying to divine whether you're getting a good deal or not. That's what policy Genius is for. Most people know they need life insurance. They just keep putting it off. If process feels complicated, you don't want to think about how you're going to die, even though you're going to die. So policy Genius may makes it super easy. It's an online marketplace and for once, the word means what it says. You compare quotes from America's top insurers side by side for free. Free really means free coverage, prices, terms all laid out plainly. Their license team handles the paperwork and advocates for you the whole way. No upselling, just the best policy at the best price. So right now, go to policygenius.com protect your family. See if you can get a 20 year life insurance policy starting at just $276 a year for $1 million in coverage. Policygenius.com fire F I R E which can be the cause of you needing to cash in your life insurance policy. Fire. Compare the quotes right now. Policygenius.com Fire Mr. Dominic, good to see you, sir. Happy 4th of July. Who knows if we do a friendly fire during the octave of independence, but if not, I will see you afterward.

[Ben Shapiro]

Happy 4th of July to you, Michael. And great to be with you today.

[Ben Domenech]

All right, see you all.