Podcasts > The Ben Shapiro Show > I Am America’s #1 Rapper

I Am America’s #1 Rapper

By Ben Shapiro

Dive into the heated discussions of "The Ben Shapiro Show" where host Ben Shapiro alongside influential voices such as James Lankford, Gavin Newsom, and Chris Murphy tackle the pressing issues shaping America today. From the confrontations with Iran to the chaos at the southern border, this episode dissects policies and their implications with an unflinching conservative lens. Witness as Ben Shapiro and former President Donald Trump spotlight weaknesses in President Biden’s Middle East policy, suggesting American diffidence has given Iran the upper hand in regional hegemony, signaled by a recent drone attack in Jordan.

Moreover, the conversation transitions to the domestic concern of unprecedented illegal border crossings in the United States. As Shapiro lays the blame squarely on Biden's policy reversals, contrasting views from Senator Lankford and others unfold on funding and legislative approaches to stem this crisis. Meanwhile, despite an onslaught of legal challenges, Donald Trump's potential return to the presidential race in 2024 remains a focal point, with polls indicating his persistent appeal to voters. This episode of "The Ben Shapiro Show" navigates through the complex narratives surrounding these national issues, offering a deep dive into the currents of American politics.

Listen to the original

I Am America’s #1 Rapper

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Jan 29, 2024 episode of the The Ben Shapiro Show

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.

I Am America’s #1 Rapper

1-Page Summary

Biden’s Middle East Policy Weakness

Critics like Ben Shapiro and Donald Trump assert that President Joe Biden's Middle East policy is excessively conciliatory, especially towards Iran, which they claim has led to increased proxy attacks on US troops and allies. Specifically, they attribute these policies to a recent drone attack in Jordan that killed three American service members. This attack, executed by an Iranian-backed militia, signifies an escalation of conflict in the region. Shapiro and Trump argue that Biden exhibits a hesitance to confront Iran which emboldens the nation to allow more frequent and audacious proxy attacks. Trump criticizes Biden for purportedly giving funds to Iran, potentially aiding in funding terrorism. Both commentators spotlight an urgent need for the US to retaliate to instill deterrence and to counteract Iran's rising aggression, with Trump and Shapiro illustrating a view that Iran perceives American weakness under Biden's leadership.

The Crisis at the Southern Border

Ben Shapiro blames President Biden's policy modifications for the record levels of illegal border crossings at the southern border of the United States. Shapiro contends that by ending the 'Remain in Mexico' policy and halting the border wall construction, Biden has damaged border security, leading to negative impacts such as increased fentanyl trafficking. Texas Governor Abbott has taken independent action to secure the border amid what many see as federal inaction, deploying the National Guard and installing barriers. Biden urges Congress to enact new legislation that includes a $14 billion plan to enhance processing efficiency at the border. This contrasts with Republican perspectives voiced by Shapiro and Senator Lankford, who emphasize the need for policy changes rather than mere funding increases. GOP critics remain skeptical of the proposed legislation, seeking to ensure it adheres to their principles of border security. Despite Newsom's criticisms and Murphy's advocacy for the border reform bill, Republicans are portrayed as resistant, with the implication being that they view Biden as already having the necessary authority to address border issues without new legislation.

Donald Trump is still seen as the leading candidate for the Republican party in the 2024 presidential election despite an array of legal problems. Recent polls show Trump in a favorable position against Biden, leading in states such as Wisconsin and Michigan while demonstrating a closer race in Pennsylvania. New York Attorney General Letitia James is among the Democrats pursuing legal avenues against Trump, aiming to impose substantial financial penalties totaling to $370 million in fines. These legal efforts represent a dual-track of political and legal opposition faced by Trump. Despite these challenges, Trump's standing in the polls suggests that he remains a formidable electoral candidate as the political landscape evolves toward the 2024 elections.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The 'Remain in Mexico' policy, officially known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), required asylum seekers arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border to wait in Mexico for their immigration court hearings. This policy aimed to reduce the number of individuals allowed to remain in the U.S. while their asylum claims were processed, with the goal of deterring fraudulent claims and alleviating strain on the U.S. immigration system. Critics argue that ending this policy under the Biden administration has led to increased challenges in managing the influx of migrants at the southern border, impacting border security and immigration processing.
  • Donald Trump faces legal challenges led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is pursuing investigations into his business dealings. These investigations aim to uncover potential financial misconduct and impose penalties on Trump. The legal efforts include seeking substantial fines against Trump as part of the ongoing probes. Despite these legal battles, Trump remains a prominent figure in the political landscape.
  • The 2024 presidential election landscape is characterized by Donald Trump's continued popularity within the Republican Party despite facing legal challenges. Polls indicate a competitive race between Trump and President Biden in key states like Wisconsin and Michigan. Legal actions against Trump, led by figures like New York Attorney General Letitia James, add a layer of complexity to his potential candidacy. The evolving political environment suggests that Trump remains a significant contender for the presidency in 2024.

Counterarguments

  • Biden's Middle East policy may be aimed at diplomatic engagement rather than confrontation, which could be a strategic choice to avoid further escalation and war.
  • The drone attack in Jordan could be a result of complex regional dynamics rather than a direct consequence of US policy, and a more aggressive stance might not necessarily lead to decreased hostilities.
  • Diplomatic efforts with Iran, such as the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), could be seen as a long-term strategy to curb Iran's nuclear capabilities and reduce proxy attacks through engagement rather than military action.
  • The funds given to Iran might be part of an international agreement or for humanitarian purposes, and not necessarily directly funding terrorism.
  • Retaliation to instill deterrence could lead to further destabilization in the Middle East and might not be the most effective way to deal with Iran's actions.
  • Changes in border policy could be part of a broader humanitarian approach to immigration, focusing on the treatment of asylum seekers and refugees in accordance with international law.
  • The increase in illegal border crossings could be attributed to a range of factors, including underlying issues in migrants' home countries, rather than solely policy changes by the Biden administration.
  • The $14 billion plan to enhance processing efficiency at the border could be a necessary investment to improve the immigration system's capacity and address the humanitarian aspects of border management.
  • The legal challenges faced by Trump could be seen as a necessary part of holding public figures accountable and ensuring the rule of law, rather than purely political opposition.
  • Trump's popularity in polls might not fully reflect the electorate's final decision in the 2024 elections, as voter sentiment can change over time and is influenced by a variety of factors.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
I Am America’s #1 Rapper

Biden’s Middle East Policy Weakness

Ben Shapiro and Donald Trump voice strong criticism of President Joe Biden's Middle East strategy, labeling it as cowardly and focused on appeasement towards Iran.

Iran's emboldened proxy attacks on US troops and allies

Shapiro holds Biden's approach responsible for encouraging Iranian proxy forces to increase attacks, citing the death of American service members and escalating aggression across the region. He points to a recent drone attack on a US military installation in Jordan that killed three US service members as evidence of the consequences of this perceived weakness.

Details of recent attack killing 3 US troops in Jordan

The Wall Street Journal reported the attack by an Iran-backed militia. The use of a one-way attack drone not only resulted in the death of three American soldiers but also wounded others, highlighting a notable escalation in the region's conflicts.

Iran's escalating aggression across the region

Shapiro and Trump accuse Biden of showing more fear of a conflict with Iran than Iran has of the United States. They argue that this has led to more frequent and bold attacks by Iranian proxies, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthi rebels, as well as incidents of aggression such as the targeting of shipping in the Red Sea.

Biden appeasing Iran to secure a nuclear deal

Trump berates Biden on Truth Social for allegedly giving Iran billions of dollars, which he argues were used to fund terrorism. Shapiro compares Biden's diplomacy to Obama's, condemning both for appeasing Iran and targeting the Iranian nuclear deal as a key example of poor policy.

Calls for retaliation to reestablish deterrence

Shapiro insists that the US must retaliate to reestablish deterrence ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Biden’s Middle East Policy Weakness

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Biden's alleged appeasement towards Iran includes criticisms of his approach to diplomacy, particularly regarding the Iranian nuclear deal. Critics like Ben Shapiro and Donald Trump argue that Biden's policies are perceived as weak and accommodating towards Iran, potentially emboldening the country and its proxies to engage in aggressive actions in the Middle East. They claim that Biden's reluctance to take strong retaliatory measures against Iran-backed attacks on US interests and allies further supports the notion of appeasement. The accusations of appeasement stem from the belief that Biden's administration is prioritizing negotiations and concessions with Iran over robustly defending American interests in the region.
  • Biden's policies are criticized for being perceived as showing more fear of conflict with Iran than Iran has of the United States. Critics argue that this perceived fear has emboldened Iran to engage in more frequent and bold attacks through its proxy forces in the region. This dynamic is seen as a result of Biden's approach being viewed as weak and focused on appeasement towards Iran, which is believed to have encouraged Iran's aggressive actions.
  • The Iranian nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was an agreement between Iran and several world powers, including the U.S., aimed at limiting Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Critics argue that by seeking to rejoin the JCPOA, Biden is appeasing Iran by providing economic benefits without addressing other aggressive actions by Iran in the region. The accusation is that this focus on the nuclear deal overlooks Iran's support for proxy forces and its destabilizing activities in the Middle East. Biden's approach is seen as prioritizing the nuclear issue over broader concerns about Iran's behavior in the region.
  • Senator Cruz criticized Biden for not taking action in response to attacks on Am ...

Counterarguments

  • Diplomacy and engagement with Iran can be a strategic approach to prevent nuclear proliferation and stabilize the region, which may reduce the long-term risk of conflict.
  • The Biden administration may be working to address the root causes of regional instability and aggression through multilateral efforts and economic incentives, rather than solely relying on military retaliation.
  • Direct military retaliation can lead to escalation and unintended consequences, potentially putting more American lives and regional stability at risk.
  • The characterization of Biden's Middle East policy as purely appeasement may overlook the complexity of international relations and the multifaceted approach that the administration is taking, which could include both diplomatic and covert actions.
  • The claim that Biden's policy is driven by electoral calculations could be challenged by the argument that his administration is making decisions based on long-term strategic interests rather than short-term political gains.
  • The assertion that Biden's approach betrays US allies in the Middle East may not consider the administration's broader efforts to support and work with allies in a collaborative manner to address regional challenges.
  • The notion that financial relief to Iran directly funds terr ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
I Am America’s #1 Rapper

The Crisis at the Southern Border

The current crisis at the United States' southern border is a complex mix of policy changes, state-level responses, and legislative proposals, as articulated by commentators like Ben Shapiro.

Biden's policy changes causing record illegal crossings

Ending Remain in Mexico policy

Shapiro attributes the situation at the border to President Biden's policy decisions, stating that Biden left the border open, which has diminished morale among Border Patrol agents and led to unprecedented levels of illegal border crossings. This includes Biden’s decision to do away with the 'Remain in Mexico' policy, under which asylum-seekers had to wait in Mexico for their court dates in the United States. Shapiro criticizes Biden for what he describes as "one of the most destructive presidencies in American history" concerning border security.

Halting border wall construction

Shapiro also extends his criticism to Biden's halting of the border wall construction, arguing that this, alongside other policy shifts, has facilitated increased trafficking of fentanyl and illegal crossings. However, there is no explicit reference to the border wall construction being directly halted in the content provided.

Texas attempts to secure border amid federal inaction

Abbott sending National Guard, adding barriers

Reacting to the influx at the border and perceived federal inaction, Texas Governor Abbott has taken steps to secure the state's border with Mexico. This includes installing razor wire, responding to a Supreme Court decision regarding federal authority, and deploying the National Guard. The state has also used shipping containers to create barriers at specific border zones like Eagle Pass.

Proposed legislation to address situation

Analysis of compromise bill's expected provisions

President Biden is pressing Congress for new legislation to address the border crisis, with a proposed $14 billion plan that includes hiring more judges and border agents to process people more efficiently. Chris Murphy mentions a bipartisan bill, deemed the most significant reform of border laws in 40 years, suggesting it would bestow new management powers upon the president for border flow.

Republican opposition to inadequate measures

However, Republican skepticism about the proposed legislation remains, with figures like Shapiro and Lankford indicating hesitation or opposition until concrete details a ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

The Crisis at the Southern Border

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • The 'Remain in Mexico' policy required asylum-seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border to stay in Mexico while awaiting their immigration court hearings in the United States. This policy aimed to manage the flow of asylum-seekers and reduce the strain on U.S. resources. Critics argue that ending this policy has contributed to increased illegal border crossings and challenges in processing asylum claims efficiently.
  • The daily encounter threshold for automatic border closure mentioned by Republicans is a proposed trigger point where if the number of encounters (such as illegal crossings or attempted entries) at the border exceeds a certain daily limit, the border would automatically close to further entries. This threshold is a key aspect of border security discussions, with Republicans advocating for a lower threshold compared to what Democrats might propose. The idea behind this concept is to have a predetermined measure that would prompt immediate action to address surges in unauthorized border activities. The specific numerical value of this threshold and its implications for border management and security are crucial points of contention and negotiation in border policy debates.
  • The deal that Republicans want to review includes provisions related to border security funding, measur ...

Counterarguments

  • The 'Remain in Mexico' policy may have had humanitarian concerns, and ending it could be seen as an effort to uphold asylum seekers' rights and dignity.
  • Halting the border wall construction could be based on evidence suggesting that walls are not the most effective means of border security and that resources could be better allocated to technology and personnel.
  • State-level actions to secure the border, such as those by Governor Abbott, might not address the root causes of migration and could lead to tension between state and federal authorities.
  • The proposed $14 billion plan for border security could be seen as a comprehensive approach to a multifaceted problem, addressing both immediate border security and the efficiency of the immigration system.
  • Some Republicans may support elements of the proposed legislation if it includes measures they believe will effectively secure the border and enforce immigration laws.
  • The ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
I Am America’s #1 Rapper

Trump Still Seen as 2024 Frontrunner Despite Legal Issues

Despite facing several legal challenges, Donald Trump continues to be viewed as the frontrunner for the 2024 presidential election.

Trump beating Biden in recent national polls

Recent state polls indicate a competitive landscape for the upcoming presidential race. In Wisconsin, the latest poll places Donald Trump four points ahead of Joe Biden. Moreover, in Michigan, Trump has consistently led in the last four polls.

State polling shows tight hypothetical race

In Pennsylvania, however, the scenario is different. The last three polls show Trump trailing Biden, indicating a tighter hypothetical race between the two.

Efforts by NY Democrats to undermine Trump

Defamation lawsuit penalty

Amidst the political tug-of-war, Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, has legal actions in motion that could financially burden Trump.

Investigation seeking huge fines

Jame ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Trump Still Seen as 2024 Frontrunner Despite Legal Issues

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Donald Trump is facing legal challenges initiated by the Attorney General of New York, Letitia James. These challenges include defamation lawsuits and investigations targeting Trump and his companies. The legal actions seek significant financial penalties, with efforts to impose fines totaling $370 million on Trump and his businesses. These legal challenges are part of a broader strategy by New York Democrats that could potentially result in Trump facing a cumulative total of $450 million in penalties.
  • Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, is pursuing legal actions against Donald Trump that could result in significant financial penalties. She is seeking fines totaling $370 million as part of various legal challenges faced by Trump. These fines are part of a broader effort that could potentially lead to Trump being burdened with a total of $450 million in penalties. The legal actions by James are part of the political and legal strategies unfolding ahead of the 2024 elections.
  • The legal and political strategies in New York involve the Attorney General, Letitia James, pursuing legal actions against Donald Trump and his companies, seeking significant financial penalties. These actions are part of a broader effort by New York Democrats to hold Trump accountable for alleged wrongdoing, potentially impacting his financial standing and political future. The legal challenges aim to address various issues, including defamation lawsuits and other legal matters, which could collectively amount to substantial financial penalties for Trump. This inter ...

Counterarguments

  • Trump's status as a frontrunner could be overstated, as polls are often volatile and can change significantly before an election.
  • National polls may not accurately reflect the state-by-state dynamics that determine the outcome of the Electoral College.
  • The legal issues facing Trump could erode his support over time, especially if they result in significant financial penalties or criminal charges.
  • The actions of the New York Attorney General could be viewed as legitimate legal proceedings rather than purely political maneuvers, and the outcome of these actions could have a material impact on Trump's candidacy.
  • The financial impact of the legal challenges could be mitigated by Trump's fundraising abilities or might not significantly affect his campaign if his base r ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free

Create Summaries for anything on the web

Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser

Shortform Extension CTA