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

Summary

---

Wired In – “Friendly Fire: The JD Vance Debate, Midterm Madness & Return of the Firing Squad”

The Daily Wire — July 2, 2026
Host: Cabot Phillips
Panelists: Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Ben Domenech, Theo Wald

---

Overview

In this extended, rapid-fire episode of "Wired In," the panel dives into the biggest national debates shaping politics and culture ahead of America's 250th birthday. Major discussion threads include the political fallout from the Iran war and JD Vance’s controversial role in the peace deal, Tucker Carlson's new political party gambit, the Dems’ midterm prospects amid a surging Democratic Socialist flank, and US legal developments ranging from Supreme Court rulings on birthright citizenship to the return of the firing squad in Idaho. The episode is rich with frank disagreements, biting humor, and big-picture analysis, giving listeners a front-row seat to the arguments framing the 2026 midterms and America's ideological future.

---

Main Themes & Episode Structure

1. America, Soccer, and Soft Power ([01:06]–[05:19])
2. Fourth of July, Life Updates & Founding Father Names ([05:30]–[07:01])
3. The JD Vance Debate: Iran, the MOU, and “Endless War” ([07:01]–[15:03])
4. Economics: Friedman's Legacy, the Role of Religion, and Protectionism ([15:03]–[25:01])
5. Tucker Carlson’s New Political Party – Real or Ploy? ([25:01]–[30:11])
6. Midterm Madness: Dems, Socialists, and GOP Prospects ([32:02]–[42:03])
7. The Democratic Socialists Surge & American Populism ([42:03]–[46:30])
8. Supreme Court's Birthright Citizenship Decision ([52:08]–[63:21])
9. Idaho’s Firing Squad Law & Death Penalty Debate ([64:37]–[67:08])

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. America, Soccer, and Soft Power

• Panelists banter about the U.S. soccer team's World Cup run, with Shapiro expressing distaste for the sport ("I hate this freaking sport. It sucks. It’s third world, it’s gay, and I don’t like it." — Ben Shapiro, [01:35]) but others argue the success is an effective soft power tool.
• Ben Domenech highlights how hosting the World Cup exposes foreigners to American lifestyle standards, suggesting this is a net gain for "exporting American values" ([03:05]).
• Consensus: Even cultural exports with mixed feelings at home (like soccer) can bolster America's global standing.

2. Fourth of July, Life Updates & Founding Father Names

• Michael Knowles explains why he’s losing his voice—his wife is about to give birth, which segues into possible “Founding Father” baby names if the child arrives around July 4th ([06:00]–[07:01]).
  • "If the baby is born between July 2nd and July 4th... then I get to use a founding father name." — Michael Knowles ([06:19])

3. JD Vance Debate: Iran, the MOU, and “Endless War” ([07:01]–[15:03])

• Recap of Phillips' Interview with VP JD Vance:
  • Knowles pushes back against Vance's criticism of those who critique the peace MOU (memorandum of understanding), arguing Vance is tougher on hawks at home than on adversaries abroad ([08:08]).
  • Open debate: Is "criticism of the MOU" valid, or is it just a pretext for advocating endless war?
• Shapiro notes the "endless war" critique now comes from both anti-Bush Trumpians and Obama-era doves, complicating party lines ([11:03]).
• Domenech objects to being called a warmonger: "It's unfortunate... there's a lot of us who back the president ... 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?" ([12:59])
• Policy Alternatives Debated:
  • Walk away from the Strait of Hormuz ([14:48])
  • Target military installations only, not “endless bombing”
• Quote:
  • "I think that we should tell the Saudis, listen, we’re paying for your defense. All your F-35s belong to us." — Michael Knowles ([10:51])

4. Economics: Friedman’s Legacy, Religion, Protectionism ([15:03]–[25:01])

• Clip/Discussion: Is Milton Friedman's economics obsolete without a strong Christian social fabric?
  • Domenech: "You need that strength of society and family ... to have the type of laissez faire, free nation that we've enjoyed for centuries." ([16:08])
  • Knowles/Shapiro: Increased government intervention undermines religious and civic institutions that support free markets.
• Shapiro & Knowles spar over whether Hamiltonian protectionism justifies expanded government control in modern times ([21:33]–[23:57]).
  • Quote: "What Alexander Hamilton was stumping for in a national bank was the idea that America ought to be able to pay its collective debt." — Michael Knowles ([23:28])
• Consensus: Some protectionism is justifiable for national security, but panel is generally skeptical of large-scale intervention.

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

• Tucker's "Third Party": Panel (esp. Knowles and Shapiro) see Carlson’s move as a bluff to pressure the GOP, not a genuine founding of a new party.
• Historical parallel: Comparison to Pat Buchanan’s 2000 Reform Party bid, which “won 0.4% of the vote, but just enough in Florida to cast the presidency to George W. Bush” ([25:31]).
• Domenech: "Tucker's no Pat Buchanan. Pat Buchanan is smarter ... more consistent ... a more disciplined speaker than Tucker." ([27:45])

6. Midterm Madness: Dems, Socialists, and GOP Prospects ([32:02]–[42:03])

• Cabot Phillips: Despite Democrats gaining only ~0.5% on the generic ballot after the Iran war, the real wildcard is the rise of high-profile Democratic Socialist candidates, particularly in traditionally moderate or swing areas ([32:15]).
• Ben Domenech: Predicts a tough midterm for the GOP, citing lost ground in Texas and the impact of Supreme Court cases on “killer issues” like trans sports ([33:46]).
  • Dems’ strategy: Position as “anti-corruption, anti-war, affordability,” deflect attention from radical socialist candidates ([36:36])
  • GOP: Leaning on crime and calling Democrats crazy may not drive turnout ([36:36])
• Shapiro: Concerned about the real demo-shaping implications of the Court's birthright citizenship ruling ([36:36]–[37:18])

7. Democratic Socialists Surge & American Populism ([42:03]–[46:30])

• Major Insight:
  • The DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) now rates higher among Dem voters than Congressional Democrats ([41:41]).
• Domenech: Warns "America is a Latin American country now"—predicting cycles of electing socialists to “kill the rich,” leading to chaos and reactionary strongmen ([42:03]).
  • “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...I think that that is unfortunately dangerously what we are setting up in this situation.” — Ben Domenech ([42:03])
• Phillips: Most Dem voters favor “socialism” out of despair and frustration, not because they genuinely support the DSA’s radical platform of abolishing the Senate, eliminating the War Department, etc. ([45:08])
• Domenech: Boomers have hoarded property; younger generations have reason for resentment, which GOP has failed to address ([46:30])

8. Supreme Court Birthright Citizenship Ruling ([52:08]–[63:21])

• Theo Wald explains the Supreme Court’s decision to retain birthright citizenship, narrowing the 14th Amendment to an “Anglo common law” reading ([53:24]).
  • “Roberts really misses everything from the Declaration of Independence forward.” — Theo Wald ([53:24])
  • Decision criticized for institutional cowardice, ignoring modern abuses like “birth tourism.”
• Domenech: Expresses regret that Republicans failed for decades to legislate a solution, leaving it to courts.
• Wald: Only remedy now is a constitutional amendment; statute or executive order alone foreclosed by the ruling ([61:50]).
• Historical Note: The UK abandoned birthright citizenship in the 1980s—panel questions why the US can’t do the same ([59:43])

9. Idaho’s Firing Squad Law ([64:37]–[67:22])

• Idaho brings back the firing squad as its method of capital punishment, defaulting to it after lethal injection drugs became unavailable due to activist pressure ([64:37]).
• Wald: Defends the move as more humane—execution is “medical death in seconds, as opposed to 8, 9, 10 minutes in ... lethal injections” ([65:13]).
• Shapiro: “If you’re gonna have capital punishment, that seems like the humane and right way to do it.” ([67:08])

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Humor/Brutal Honesty:

  • “The grill is shot. The chairs are held together by optimism.” — Michael Knowles ([00:00])
  • “I hate this freaking sport. It sucks. It’s third world, it’s gay, and I don’t like it.” — Ben Shapiro ([01:35])
  • “Tucker’s no Pat Buchanan. Pat Buchanan’s smarter than Tucker.” — Ben Domenech ([27:45])

• Major Critiques:

  • "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." — Michael Knowles, on JD Vance ([08:08])
  • "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 ([63:21])

• Big Picture:

  • “America is a Latin American country now...” — Ben Domenech ([42:03])
  • "Capitalism may end up being a monopartisan affair faster than we could even imagine." — Ben Domenech ([43:41])
  • "If the baby is born between July 2nd and July 4th... then I get to use a founding father name." — Michael Knowles ([06:19])

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Soccer, US Soft Power: [01:06]–[05:19]
• JD Vance, Iran/WAR Debate: [07:01]–[15:03]
• Milton Friedman vs. Religion/Economic Policy: [15:03]–[25:01]
• Tucker’s Party, Buchanan Parallel: [25:01]–[30:11]
• Midterm Polling & Dems’ Socialist Surge: [32:15]–[42:03]
• Democratic Socialists & Generational Resentment: [42:03]–[46:30]
• SCOTUS Birthright Citizenship Analysis: [52:08]–[63:21]
• Idaho’s Firing Squad Law: [64:37]–[67:08]

---

Final Thoughts

This episode captures both the comic and the consequential: a panel unafraid to spar over ideology, policy nuance, and the cultural moment. They critique leaders on both sides, explore threats to free market orthodoxy, and analyze the realignment of political parties and public sentiment on the eve of a historic anniversary. With off-the-cuff honesty and pointed debate, it’s a quintessential “front-row” episode for anyone trying to understand — or just enjoy — the chaos and contention at the heart of American politics in 2026.

Transcript

[Michael Knowles]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

And what happened to the rug? Sounds like your outdoor setup is not ready for patio season. Fix it all with Wayfair.

[Michael Knowles]

Shop Wayfair for grills, rugs, furniture, and more.

[Ben Domenech]

With 20 million 5 star reviews, Room

[Ben Shapiro]

of choice delivery, and expert setup on qualifying orders, it's never been easier to do more for less.

[Michael Knowles]

Get 10% off your first eligible purchase.

[Ben Shapiro]

Hurry to Wayfair.com or download the app now. Wayfair. Every style, Every home.

[Ben Domenech]

You're in your apartment alone. Then you hear something. You think, was it just the storm? You realize you're not alone. Your living room is not safe with Unhinged, the new immersive game experience brought

[Cabot Phillips]

to you by Netflix.

[Ben Domenech]

To make it out alive, you must answer the phone. The question is, when your phone rings, will you answer? Tap the banner to play Unhinged now only on Netflix. So what was your reaction when FIFA tried to steal that World cup game away from us?

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

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

[Michael Knowles]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

Yeah.

[Theo Wald]

No, I.

[Ben Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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

[Michael Knowles]

I'm close.

[Ben Shapiro]

It's that I find it inherently.

[Ben Domenech]

Well, it is the most corrupt Sport. I mean by far 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 Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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.

[Cabot Phillips]

Yeah.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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.

[Ben Shapiro]

Right.

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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

[Ben Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

Yes, that's an actual thing.

[Michael Knowles]

Ben.

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 mean,

[Michael Knowles]

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 Kharga 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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

Sorry, go ahead, Michael.

[Ben Shapiro]

Hold on.

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

Me personally, did he criticize you when

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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.

[Ben Domenech]

Could you have the glass shattering sound before I walk out? I just think, I just think that I have to agree with, with Ben. I think that he's, 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 Shapiro]

Hold on, Ben, 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. None of which. None of us,

[Ben Domenech]

every Iranian is dead.

[Michael Knowles]

No, I'm not saying every Iranian island. 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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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 clip.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

Yeah, there we go.

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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, 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 Domenech]

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 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 Shapiro]

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 or 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 Shapiro]

There are. I think we can say that political communities precede some social institutions or are coincidental with them. And so 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 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. He's using what we would call in law school an argument that proves too much. He's basically saying that because you're manual, 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 talked 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 Shapiro]

It's being put at risk by Congress.

[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 Shapiro]

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 right before. 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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

But it does.

[Ben Domenech]

I mean, you look back at it,

[Ben Shapiro]

it's a funny question, but there's a real answer to it. I think the real answer is Pat Buchanan, right? Am I misreading that?

[Michael Knowles]

Yes. 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 had 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 Shapiro]

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, 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 your 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 JD Van so I think that's the political move he's making here.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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 and 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 is into the last couple of years.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 you could. 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.

[Ben Domenech]

We'll figure this out eventually.

[Ben Shapiro]

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]

Yeah. Sociopathy is very, very difficult to understand.

[Ben Shapiro]

I think your read on that is probably right. I don't think.

[Michael Knowles]

I don't.

[Ben Shapiro]

Tucker's too smart to want to start another political party, and he doesn't.

[Ben Domenech]

And just by the way, there is a. There is. Our sponsors at Kalshi 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 Shapiro]

And I would short that. No way.

[Ben Domenech]

I would short that.

[Michael Knowles]

Absolutely.

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

All right, 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 Shapiro]

Now, all of you folks, the Declaration of Independence names you. Thank 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 nonprofit 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

[Michael Knowles]

you're going to get.

[Ben Shapiro]

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?

[Cabot Phillips]

Oh, we do.

[Ben Shapiro]

We do. Hey, Cabot, what's up?

[Ben Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

Thank goodness. That 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 Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

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 43s, 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 Shapiro]

Yeah, I did it. No, I did it once.

[Michael Knowles]

And I got.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

Yeah. So I actually think that this midterm is gonna be terrible for Republicans. And I think that. 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 benefit Talarico because Paxton is going to have to lean hard on the birthright citizenship question. He's gonna 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, backing independent candidates in certain sentences. In Alaska, they actually put a guy with the same name as Dan Sullivan 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 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. There is no man behind the curtain who believes in Marx and Engels. We are instead going to try to turn this into a situation 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 going to try to run in that direction. And I think Republicans are going to 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 Shapiro]

Wow. Yeah. And so it makes me even more upset about the Supreme Court decisions because the birthright citizenship one ultimately is much, much more important, I think, than the Title 9 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.

[Ben Domenech]

Totally.

[Ben Shapiro]

He destroyed him on the trans sports issue. Now it's totally off the table.

[Ben Domenech]

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 the, 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 Domenech]

Please, please, please do it, please.

[Cabot Phillips]

And we saw JB Pritzker try to run as a socialist, but we saw J.B. pritzker.

[Ben Domenech]

I beg you. Pritzker went to 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, but he said their strategy is one that's going to win in 20, 26 and beyond. And so even if he's a billionaire,

[Ben Domenech]

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 eating.

[Ben Shapiro]

I wasn't gonna say it a lot

[Cabot Phillips]

for people to feed on now, but I Think that's gonna have an impact?

[Ben Domenech]

I'm sure he lost all that weight naturally.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 that wasn't,

[Ben Domenech]

you know, they needed more representation.

[Ben Shapiro]

They do. No, they do. I mean, the headlines weren't even as

[Ben Domenech]

bad as the realities speak for Epstein's Island.

[Ben Shapiro]

No, the original thing that we were seeing in the headlines is Scott Weiner was the one who did this. And Scott Weiner is a total freak and a pervert 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 Domenech]

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 we elect 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.

[Ben Shapiro]

Don't train me with a good time.

[Cabot Phillips]

We might have to start Pinochet did nothing wrong. Exactly. 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.

[Ben Shapiro]

Do away with the Senate, 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 the GSA members are supporting.

[Ben Domenech]

But, Kava, 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 live 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 Shapiro]

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, 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. Watch me. That's wonderful, Cabot. Thank you as always. Good to see you. Now. Now that we've just returned, it's just me and Mr. Domenech, I feel like I can rest easy. And if you wanna 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 going to be a house guest of mine, I just ordered another Helix mattress us for our guest room. Ben, have you gotten a beautiful Helix yet?

[Ben Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

That's very fair. When you said it's my favorite mattress to sleep on, I think think maybe I need to start mattress maxing. 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 Domenech]

You saw that? 78 degrees.

[Ben Shapiro]

78 degrees.

[Michael Knowles]

Cool.

[Ben Shapiro]

A nice balmy night in New York. Go there right now. Helixsleep.com do it. You're gonna love it. Helixleep.com Dailywire 20% off sitewide 25% off luxe mattresses. 30% off elite mattresses. Helixsleep.com Dailywire 20% off the regular ones. 25% off the lux, 30% off the elite. Make sure you enter Daily Wire at checkout so they know we sent you at. Helixleep.com dailywire there's one more thing I gotta sell. You gotta sell it, Ben. Sell it for me.

[Ben Domenech]

Yeah. So you mentioned Washington crossing the Delaware. When Washington was crossing the Delaware, he understood the power of truth and the power 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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

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 Shapiro]

I'm not expert on that.

[Ben Domenech]

I think that's a question for Theo.

[Ben Shapiro]

Do we have Theo? Theo?

[Ben Domenech]

There we go.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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

[Theo Wald]

That's right.

[Ben Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

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 draft 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?

[Theo Wald]

Yeah, 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 allegiant for any citizen who's coming here and giving birth? A missed opportunity again.

[Ben Shapiro]

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. 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, 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 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 ropes to determine determine who is and who is not a citizen.

[Ben Domenech]

And this is. Can I just. Leo, can I just make the point that the politics of immigration also played into this in the sense 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, 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 system citizens we want and want to welcome. And look, Calvin Coolidge said that the founders fought the war 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 Shapiro]

Very, very good point. Before I let you go, Theo, we have to talk about speaking of the dignity of the person and living on our own. 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. I mean, you know, 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 Guardian 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, states and some blue states across the country elected to have capital punishment for a certain class of offenses. And 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 humane 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 Shapiro]

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 Domenech]

Great work, Theo.

[Theo Wald]

Thanks, guys.

[Ben Shapiro]

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. This 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 afterwards.

[Ben Domenech]

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

[Ben Shapiro]

All right, see you all later.

[Cabot Phillips]

Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. Now I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of

[Ben Domenech]

unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun

[Ben Shapiro]

if we made $15 bills, but it

[Ben Domenech]

turns out that's very illegal. So there goes.

[Michael Knowles]

My big idea for the commercial.

[Theo Wald]

Give it a try@mint mintmobile.com Switch upfront

[Michael Knowles]

payment of $45 for three months, $90

[Ben Shapiro]

for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan required $15 per month

[Michael Knowles]

equivalent taxes and fees.

[Ben Domenech]

Extra initial plan term only greater than 50gb.

[Michael Knowles]

Me slow when network is busy.

[Ben Shapiro]

See terms.

[Ben Domenech]

Queen Carvania stood haloed by the morning sun. An army hung on her every word.

[Ben Shapiro]

My champions, I have sold my chariot on Carvana. Twas a lovely escape suv, an inexplicably queenly offer. They're even coming to the castle to collect it.

[Cabot Phillips]

Tonight we feast.

[Ben Shapiro]

An offer you can feast on. Sell your car today on Carvana. Pickup fees may apply.