Podcasts > The Ben Shapiro Show > Will Israel STRIKE Iran?

Will Israel STRIKE Iran?

By Ben Shapiro

The Ben Shapiro Show examines Iran's recent missile attack on Israel. Shapiro contends the Biden administration's perceived lack of credible deterrence against Iran could embolden further aggression, including Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities. The episode also scrutinizes a criminal case against former President Donald Trump over payments to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.

The discussion centers on Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's charges alleging Trump misrepresented the payments as non-campaign expenses, despite previous federal prosecutors declining the case. Shapiro critiques the prosecution's potential use of internal campaign emails to prove intent to suppress damaging stories.

Listen to the original

Will Israel STRIKE Iran?

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Apr 16, 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.

Will Israel STRIKE Iran?

1-Page Summary

Iran's Attack on Israel and Trump in Court

Iran's Missile Attack on Israel

Ben Shapiro criticizes President Biden for a perceived lack of credibility in deterring aggression from Iran, like its recent missile attack on Israel. According to Shapiro, Biden's calls for de-escalation while pressuring Israel not to retaliate could embolden Iran and its pursuit of nuclear capabilities. He suggests a stronger response backing Israel's self-defense would be more effective. Vali Nassr from the State Department implies Iran has achieved deterrence against the U.S. under Biden.

Donald Trump's Contempt Case in New York

Shapiro denounces the case against Trump over payments to Stormy Daniels as "bullcrap." He notes federal prosecutors previously declined the case, but Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg has brought 34 counts alleging Trump mislabeled the payments as non-campaign expenses.

Certain testimony may be restricted, but prosecutors aim to argue Trump intended to suppress damaging stories before the 2016 election, using internal emails to show the campaign's concern over the "Access Hollywood" tape. Trump's relationship with the National Enquirer, allegedly used to "pay and kill" stories, is also under review.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, is an American adult film actress and director. She became known for her legal dispute with former U.S. President Donald Trump in 2018, involving hush money paid to her to keep quiet about an alleged affair with Trump in 2006. This legal case has led to Trump facing multiple felony charges in the State of New York related to these payments.
  • Alvin Bragg is the current New York County District Attorney, overseeing legal matters in Manhattan. He is notable for being the first African American elected to this position in 2021. Bragg previously held roles as Chief Deputy Attorney General of New York and as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York.
  • The "Access Hollywood" tape is a recording from 2005 where Donald Trump, before his presidency, made lewd and derogatory comments about women during a conversation with Billy Bush. The tape surfaced during the 2016 presidential campaign and caused significant controversy. Trump faced backlash for his remarks, which included boasting about groping women without their consent.
  • The National Enquirer is an American tabloid newspaper known for its sensationalist coverage and practice of paying sources for tips. It has faced controversies related to its catch and kill practices, where it buys exclusive rights to stories to prevent their publication, and allegations of blackmail. The publication has been involved in high-profile cases, including its role in hush money payments to protect public figures and its coverage of scandals. The National Enquirer has a history of shifting ownership and facing financial challenges due to declining readership and competition from other tabloid publications.

Counterarguments

  • President Biden's approach to Iran might be based on a strategic assessment that direct confrontation could escalate into a broader conflict, which could be detrimental to regional stability and global security.
  • A stronger response backing Israel's self-defense could potentially escalate tensions and lead to a cycle of retaliation, which might not be in the best interest of regional peace or align with broader international diplomatic efforts.
  • Vali Nassr's implication that Iran has achieved deterrence might be contested by pointing out that the U.S. maintains a strong military presence in the region and continues to support its allies, which could be seen as a form of deterrence.
  • The legal system operates on the principle that no individual is above the law, and the case against Trump over payments to Stormy Daniels may be seen as an example of this principle in action, regardless of the decision by federal prosecutors.
  • The decision by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg to bring 34 counts against Trump could be based on new evidence or a different interpretation of the law, which is a normal part of the judicial process.
  • The argument that Trump intended to suppress damaging stories before the 2016 election could be seen as a legitimate legal strategy if prosecutors believe they have evidence to support such a claim.
  • The use of internal emails to show the campaign's concern over the "Access Hollywood" tape could be a standard prosecutorial technique to establish motive or context for the jury.
  • The review of Trump's relationship with the National Enquirer is part of the legal process where all relevant evidence and associations are typically examined to establish the facts of the case.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Will Israel STRIKE Iran?

Iran's Attack on Israel and Trump in Court

Ben Shapiro criticizes President Joe Biden and his administration's approach to recent international events, including Iran's missile attack on Israel, and also discusses the courtroom challenges faced by former president, Donald Trump.

Iran's Missile Attack on Israel

Shapiro attacks Biden for a perceived lack of credibility, suggesting that Biden's calls for foreign nations not to engage in aggressive actions ring hollow without the backing of a credible threat of force.

Biden shows weakness towards Iran by deterring Israel from counterattack

Shapiro asserts that America is seen as the weaker party when it deters allies like Israel from responding to aggression, such as Iran's recent attacks. He characterizes the Biden administration's foreign policy as morally cowardly and too wary of engagement, potentially viewing support for allies' self-defense as escalating tensions. According to Shapiro, a strong response to Iranian aggression, rather than Biden's call for de-escalation, would be a more effective deterrent.

Moreover, he argues that the current administration's pressure on Israel not to retaliate, in an attempt to prevent escalation, may embolden Iran—especially concerning its pursuit of nuclear capabilities. Vali Nasser, a former State Department spokesperson, is quoted saying that Iran has achieved deterrence against both the U.S. and Israel, suggesting a perceived U.S. cowardice under Biden.

Shapiro criticizes Biden for being intimidated by Iran, which he describes as a third-rate power, and suggests this intimidation is due to fear of alienating his left-wing base, as evidenced by the Biden administration's actions at the prospects of protests at the Democratic National Convention. Israeli government spokesperson Avi Hyman implies that Israel may have been advised by the U.S. to not rush into a counterattack against Iran.

Donald Trump's Contempt Case in New York

Allegations of hush money paid to porn star Stormy Daniels

Shapiro denounces the legal action against former President Donald Trump as "bullcrap." He notes that Trump faces 34 counts related to checks he wrote to reimburse his lawyer, Michael Cohen, who paid off Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about her alleged encounter with Trump.

Shapiro points out that federal prosecutors previously decided not to pursue a trial, deeming the case insufficient for legal action. How ...

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

Iran's Attack on Israel and Trump in Court

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Avi Hyman is a spokesperson for the Israeli government who is mentioned in the context of discussions about potential Israeli responses to Iran's actions and the influence of the U.S. government's advice on Israel's decision-making process.
  • The Stormy Daniels case involves allegations that former President Donald Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid hush money to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about an alleged affair with Trump. The case centers on whether Trump's involvement in these payments violated campaign finance laws. Manhattan prosecutors are pursuing a trial against Trump for financial fraud related to these payments, alleging that they were mislabeled as non-campaign expenses. The trial includes discussions on Trump's efforts to suppress damaging information during the 2016 election.
  • The legal proceedings against former President Donald Trump involve allegations of financial fraud related to hush money payments made to Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about an alleged encounter with Trump. The Manhattan District Attorney has pursued a felony trial, accusing Trump of mislabeling the payments as non-campaign expenses. The trial includes discussions on Trump's efforts to suppress damaging information during the 2016 election, with prosecutors aiming to demonstrate a pattern of behavior through various testimonies and evidence. Certain details, like Trump's interactions with other individuals, are restricted from being presented to t ...

Counterarguments

  • Biden's approach to Iran might be seen as an attempt to prioritize diplomacy and avoid further escalation in a volatile region.
  • The characterization of Biden's foreign policy as "morally cowardly" is subjective; others might argue that restraint and a focus on diplomatic solutions demonstrate moral courage.
  • A strong military response to Iranian aggression could risk a larger conflict and potential loss of life, which some would argue is not a more effective deterrent.
  • The pressure on Israel not to retaliate could be part of a broader strategy to maintain regional stability and prevent a cycle of retaliation that could lead to war.
  • The description of Iran as a "third-rate power" may underestimate its regional influence and the complexity of the geopolitical situation in the Middle East.
  • The advice to Israel regarding a counterattack might be based on intelligence assessments and strategic considerations rather than perceived weakness.
  • The legal action against Trump could be viewed as a legitimate exercise of the judicial system holding individuals accountable, regardless of their status.
  • The decision by federal prosecutors not to pursue a trial initially does not preclude other jurisdictions from finding sufficient grounds to proceed with legal action.
  • The trial's location in Manhattan does not inherently bias the outcome, as the judicial system is designed ...

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