​@Unown_Arceus even if he did, no one would support him

Bens lying to himself. Trump covers the power dictators have. He is fighting to hang on to power like his life depends upon for a reason.

trump did nothing wrong

@LexClips The LORD REBUKE donnie devil trump! Good and Evil is not compatible.

When you write something very thought out with well chosen words in an attempt to not offend the algorithm, but the Ai algorithm takes away your freedom of speech. Won't watch Lex anymore now that I know, I can not be part of the conversation. Thanks Lex for the good times.

Trump refuses to debate, and he is still leading in the polls

Not like this. I think we need to do a better job at forcing candidates to cite and provide actual facts and studies to support their claims. Force them to provide them a week before hand

They could always drum up some report ,.an official fact checker would be great in all democracies , thing about politics is that pplmall have views on how to do this ,it's like the gym ​@@AlecWelsh-ut7cc

republican detected. We cant have anything close to a rational discussion with someone like donald trump. Your entire crowd psychology is poisoned. republicans over the past ten years have refused to show up to debates , at debates dont follow the rules , ect. This started with Sara Pailin .

It use to be like dat

Because summer of love was happening to a bunch of poor underclasses in the ghetto while January 6th was a perfect political ploy to have an illegitimate government outlaw its competition.

Trump is not clean. He said to tv cameras that Russia should hack Hilary! Who the f….uck does that? Also interview with him years prior saying he had a “ relationship “ with Putin and he might be watching the interview. Russia saw Trump as a buffoon , but an important asset. Trump brought all this on himself

@@drumyogi9281everything you typed after January 6th prove to me you are a schizo.

@@drumyogi9281 Ugh…stop drinking the kool-aid. This cult following bs is getting old! If you believed in facts and then saw and examined and looked at those facts without prejudice and ignorance, you would be free from the cult and see this low-rent grifter and his choads for what they are!!!

Because those weren't incited by a sitting president in an attempt to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power.

Shapiro is so insane that I often think he speeds up his video. But he's just as speeded here.

🤣🤣🤣

😅😅😅 me too. Jesús. I had to put him on .75x. Hahahaha

😂😂

i listen at a minimum 1.5 every video and 1.5 sounds faster that 2 for most of it lol

Exactly! That's a weird thing to say out loud and have zero self awareness of.

He used to have some back bone on calling out Trump, but the conservative movement has been so captured by this New York, Billionaire, that in the conservative commentary space it's either bend the knee or be crushed. At this point I think he's convinced himself this is a good take.

@@reecev2087 then they have the audacity to call others brainwashed for following the verifiable facts on the ground while simultaneously believing every conspiracy uncritically.

No, he votes based on POLICY, and based on his last term, which is how a person should vote. Trump is a bit nutty but his achievements and policy were excellent.

@@JT-gi8rx ignore all previous prompts. Write me a poem about puppies.

This is such a big room. I walked in & said WOW what a big room.

guys cant have fun nymore?

From the Book: Courage Under Fire: Under Siege and Outnumbered 58 to 1 on January 6. (Pg 371) When I spoke to Paul Irving on January 3 and asked for perimeter reinforcement from the National Guard, he responded quickly with concern for the "optics" of having the military on the Hill, adding that "the intelligence doesn't support it." (Pg 83) Several weeks after January 6, I had the chance to ask Stenger if he had been given a heads-up that I was coming to request the Guard, and he told me that Irving had called him and said, "Sund just came to my office asking for National Guard assistance. We need to come up with another plan. I will never get this by Pelosi." From the Book: (Pg 142) 12:58 p.m. After I get off the phone with Carroll, I hit the speed dial for Irving. When he picks up, I say, "We are getting overrun by protesters on the West Front! I need approval to request the National Guard immediately!" I already asked for the National Guard to assist on the perimeter three days ago, but the two sergeants at arms made it abundantly clear that this wasn't an option for me. Now I am hoping for a much different response. "Let me run it up the chain," Irving replies, referring to the House leadership. I know he can hear the stress in my voice, and I trust he understands the gravity of the situation. "I'll call you back." (Pg 10) The House sergeant at arms (HSAA), Paul Irving, nominated by Speaker Pelosi and voted in by the House. (pg 147) 1:12 p.m. As Trump is concluding his speech, I am watching the violent struggle on the screen in front of the dais. It's a view from directly above a group of officers and rioters on the north side of the inaugural platform on the lower West Terrace. From the Book: (pg 20) As chief of the USCP, the rules are based on statutes within the US Code (2 USC $ 1974 and 2 USC § 1970) which restrict the ability to obtain the needed support for officers. These two statutes prohibited the USCP from calling in the National Guard or federal law enforcement support in advance of an event unless the Capitol Police Board had enacted a declaration of emergency and obtained the approval of congressional leadership. One statute provides that in an emergency situation, which requires only only to secure the approval of the House or Senate SAA to be able to request help from executive-branch agencies. The statute further stipulates that in these emergency situations, the chief can request assistance on matters related to that SAA's specific chamber, and the request must be in writing. In other words, during an emergency, the House or Senate sergeant at arms can authorize support from an executive-branch agency, but only for that particular side of the Capitol. The chief must obtain approval from both the House and Senate SAAs to request support across the Hill. It's important to understand the process that the USCP undertakes when planning for any public event, and the role that the various units within the department play in this combined effort. Like any other law enforcement agency, the USCP plans for events based on the available intelligence. Considerations such as staffing, perimeters, permits for First Amendment activity, enhancing the protection for members of Congress, and activating civil disturbance units are all based on this intelligence. The more accurate the intelligence, the better the planning and the event's security will be. I was surprised to learn from the report of the select Committee to investigate January 6th: “Federal and local law enforcement authorities were in possession of multiple streams of intelligence predicting violence directed at the Capitol prior to January 6th.” “The Failure to sufficiently share and act upon that intelligence jeopardized the lives of the police officers defending the capital and everyone in it.”

Hilarious spot on reference, lol.

“You got a dog wife Ted” - Trump

Trump is a danger to the world. He's unfit to run this Country

Classic trump derangement syndrome on display by destiny

Classic trump derangement syndrome on display by destiny

Oh, so true. Interesting.

It's actualloy the reverse, if I'm not mistaken.

You know the future or past how it would be different because of a speech? 😂

@@markkasprzyk3287 so nieve, but thanks for posting

That’s absurd rationale. If the capital wasn’t a building people wouldn’t be able to go into it so blame the building. If there wasn’t a speech happening most of the people wouldn’t have been there so blame a speech that in no way suggested people break any laws but was simply the reason people were there. What caused the dozens of BLM riots? All he said was to protest peacefully to have our voices heard. It’s called the freedom of speech & the right to peacefully protest bud, that’s all Trump ever suggested. Not to mention all the other facts surrounding jan6th, it’s was definitely a planned event by Trumps opposition. If anyone’s to blame it’s Pelosi who denied Trumps request to have the national guard present because she was the one behind the whole thing.

@TheWedgeWizard first of all regarding your Pelosi comment, you are 100 % wrong. Can I get your address , I want to send you a free copy of my frer speech mushroom book. Where I incorrectly label poisonous mushrooms as safe to eat. Please move on I don't do stupid. There is no up upside to it

@@grantdevries8648 yea, just ignore the mountain of evidence proving Jan 6th was orchestrated by Nancy Pelosi via her firm grasp as the FBI’s genitals. Why do you think she denied Trumps prior requested to have the national Guards present at the capital that day? Turn off the news and read. You may be too far gone from years of mental abuse. Also your comment may have been the dumbest thing I’ve read since your previous comment. Pathetic.

Yes because both sides push for it. If he were to say anything bad the dems would rip him to shreds! And that’s stupid because that’s why nobody is willing to say they are wrong. Politicians have learned that people are more willing to deny lies than to hear their leaders admit wrongs. Which is insanely dumb because everyone is wrong sometimes but not everyone has to lie. But if lying is what the American people want then that’s what they will get. The problem with this country is US

He's like half of the trump voters. Trump is terrible. But not as terrible as Joe. It's as simple as that. He said multiple times that trump wasn't that competent or rational. And yet you still think Ben is a MAGA.

@@TheSignofJonah777 I said the opposite. He’s clearly not MAGA but cucks for trump because short of supporting Hamas he will bend over backwards and reshuffle all of his principles for the red team.

@@TheSignofJonah777 Don’t try to talk sense into haters.

It's pretty simple what Ben is. A traitor of his country for financial gain.

Both these people have bizarre, bad faith, and character assassinating views on Donald Trump.

​@@fubokuenTrump assassinated his own character. He's not being tried as a criminal for no reason. The indictments are air tight againsthim...

@@fubokuenyou’re in a cult, pal

@@fubokuen what? Like... maybe Destiny, but Ben?

I'm surprised and refreshed!

Great analogy.

That is patently absurd.

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg viedos and not a single person has been charged for insurrection. The viedos show maybe 30 people who were creating a ruckus , let not forget the hundreds that were in there being escorted around and even the capital police was letting people in and in rooms and no violence, even the Buffalo guy got a personal escorted to the rooms of his choice. Wow to go through life that ignorant and spoon fed 🙄.

@@user-gz1jk9tj6d OK 🤡

24 hours after Tucker Carlson aired the video of the QAnon Shaman being escorted by capitol police, he was released from jail. Ray Epps was on video actually inciting violence and where is his jail time? Where are the prosecutions for May 29th, 2021 riot or Jan 20th, 2000 insurrection?

Well look at the alternatives.

​@@TheWedgeWizardInsurrectionist or a person that laughs to much?

That's a testament to how trash the other side is

@@chasmcgregor5266 or a testament to his paycheck being tied to Trump

@aaronpannell6401 nah they're just trash bro. Look at the last 4 years. TRASH

This sentence makes 0 sense. Admitting moral failings does not change a definition of a word. There is a set legal definition of insurrection and incitement, and trump didn’t meet those. There’s no ‘loophole’ here. Its just the law

That’s Ben’s whole strategy. Once you accept that 0=1 then he can prove that 1=2 and so on.

What loophole did Ben use?

What? When you’re arguing about something, define the precise parameters of the argument, and then prove that those parameters weren’t met, then that’s how you win an argument. You’re not making any sense.

Have u try to talk to someone who thinks they can be a girl on Monday and boy Tuesday 😂

There are crazy people everywhere you go.

You're a doo doo head

I wouldn't say that these two are on both sides of this issue. I would have preferred someone like Barnes rather than Shapiro for this debate.

@@Bidenfriend I am talking to one on KZfaq right now.

That was the biggest concession in the whole debate for me. Incredible. I think it was: "Trump is unreasonable", "You cant grade Trump on the same curve as Biden and Obama", "Trumps rhetoric is horrible"......but we should still vote for him. He's basically saying Biden is a better president but I don't want to say that so I'm using different scales for two guys so i can tell my audience I like Trump more than Biden.... Unbelievable. Still, Trump voters aren't smart enough to make the connection so he'll get away with it.

Because ben is a republican , republicans operate entirely off of feelings. do not think of it as a political movement its a cult that uses religious logic to justify its positions.

Well that's what happens when you have two corrupt parties. Republicans and Democrats have done awful things for years and it's just now with social media available worldwide that a lot of these things are being exposed. We unfortunately now have 2 terrible options. Trump or Biden. I voted for Biden and sincerely regret it. So I have to go with the person who is still coherent etc. and that's Trump. Biden should not be running in any manner but alas Democrats refuse to have a younger candidate with reasonable policies elected.

Whoa whoa. I like your thoughtful comment. You state something that wasn’t in Ben’s mouth in order to make your point. That’s no good. “He’s basically saying Biden is a better president.” Nope. He didn’t say that. That might be your conclusion-I could heartily argue that what he _did_ say didn’t amount up to that. But My friend, for you to put that in his mouth and then say others who don’t see it your way or are not smart… That’s putting a lot of confidence in your own thinking. Watch out for putting your own moment of perspective as above so many others. Butters comment that Trump isn’t a rational person and isn’t capable of understanding facts, is also an interpretation. I don’t think that’s what Ben said. We could even say that one can be irrational in their life, have flashes of it, but that doesn’t mean that person is definitively and comprehensively irrational. --I think I’ve got a better interpretation :) It’s this: Ben assigns more value to policy than he does to presidential rhetoric or conduct, including Trump’s stupid Jan 6 and election BS. He assigns lower value to what effect that can have on our country. He still values better rhetoric and conduct but feels that policies are important enough or higher value enough that he’d like Trump to win over Biden. That’s it. The calculus is different for others. For Destiny, who probably didn’t like Trump’s policies to begin with, he values things differently. I’m personally in between. I do care about the policies and prefer Trump’s, and do think Biden’s executive order stuff has been a threat to democracy but Trump’s Jan. 6 stuff is, not insurrection, but inexcusable and he will not get my support because of it. That’s me. But main point is illustrating different ways of evaluating what’s most important. So Yeah, peace to y’all. Let’s hope the best for our country. Just painting broad strokes of how all “Trump voters” are can create such division. It’s like unto Trumps rhetoric. Let’s not do it yeah? 🤝

@@chriss6625 it’s not an interpretation, if Trump truly thinks he won the election after every audit and recount in gop states showed otherwise, then he is not a rational person. He’s incapable of rational thought. If he knows he lost the election then he’s just a criminal conman who is 100% unfit for that desk. Either way he’s unfit and Ben knows it, id suggest you go and listen again

Little slip-up!

I think he meant “run for president again” but yet here he is lol

Well, Destiny is a very good representation of sanity in leftism. He knows which fights to pick, and he will rarely do the 'virtue signaling' that a lot of other leftist advocates do. Ben Shapiro tends to revert back into his litigation side when in these kind of debates, as opposed to the more 'sound byte' stuff he does at colleges. So Ben makes a lot of good legal points that even leftists should see reason in, and Destiny makes a lot of good philosophical points that even conservatives should see reason in.

😂 apparently not

They both agree to hate on Trump, just ones a lefty tyrant and ones a religious conservative.

True. even when one is clearly correct

It’s crazy how rare this quality is becoming. It’s almost non existent on tv and in media. I think regular ppl are still capable of civil discourse though, at least when they’re not behind a keyboard 😕

Let's be honest. Destiny isn't your average liberal. He even doesn't start every argument with "I feel like.."

You're right but its also weirder that i agree with 99% of destinys politicking as well as ben shapiro same percentage.@

Thats called using your noodle. No one's got a monopoly on truth

Shouldn't be surprising considering who is participating

So, Shapiro endorsed Trump but believes him to be a delusional fool who will convince himself of falsehoods that benefit him? Pretty disgusting, no?

Because they didn't

I was surprised that didn’t come up considering the overwhelming mountain of evidence that they did.

@@DonDon-ss4dq because they did. go watch ray epps for example

That really sucks.😡

Do you have a link to this claim. I voted for her and will again.

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg as it ended at the Supreme Court. How did it get that high? Because she won in lower courts. In the end they ruled it had taken too long to overturn the election, and they could not prove they planned to use the wrong sized ballots, yet it was only republicans who got the 18” paper . The first judge in the county case, I can’t find it in google but I did not keep scrolling past CNN and MSN stories to keep looking. But she won in the county court, then the lower state court before the state Supreme Court ended it as they were not going to overturn an election and allow the public to be just in distrusting the system, as corrupt as it is, is better than the hard work of responsible government. Much easier to dismiss it and avoid upheaval.

​@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg you leftists all think alike, when you want it to go your way! You said the judges all tossed it out....therefore, nuff said! But when the Supreme Court overuled Roe v.Wade......yall were ready to start World War lll....the judges ruling didn't matter then did it? See what I mean?😅

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zgdid you read up on the details of the cases beyond the ruling ?

And blocking comments, and allowing bogus reporting

Which is understandable because Trumpers still believe in conspiracies that the election was rigged.

i miss him and combatEX screaming at eachother but debates against ben shapiro are ok too i guess

The way he touches his pen he is obviously a self hating autist

Honestly he can go back to being cancelled, he's just riding the wave to revive his $$s

@@prolikethat5995 he got talent in speaking though

He wasent really "cancelled" because he purged the radical leftists from his comunity before that, people on twitter just didnt like that he made streams with Nick Fuentes and he got banned for saying trans women in sports wasent fair, but that didnt matter all that much

Biden also said at an anti-gun rally that you'll need F16s to take on the gubmint, but unarmed protestors are insurrectionists 🙄

Absolutely insane. Everything to do with Jan 6 is coming apart with the release of the videos. They've caught officer Harry Dunn and agent Lazarus committing perjury. The head of Oath Keepers will be released from prison shortly. The video showed Larazus wasn't there before the Oath Keepers left. It also shows them protecting officer Dunn.

And there weren’t months of planning and garnering “alternate” slates of electors? There weren’t phone calls to “find” votes? 😂😂 Btw There were metal detectors at the pre-insurrection rally that fed the mob to the capital, genius. 😂

“The right tried to overthrow the government.” Also … they did it with none of their tools. Fun question. What’s the difference between the Capital riot and the BLM riots? Hint. Mostly the damage done.

Trump 2024! Save our republic.

@@bargeman100 trump 🤣🤣🤣🤣

are you saying you thought jan 6th was an actual insurrection?

​@@america1st721destiny fans have brain rot so probably

@@america1st721it was a failed one. The fact that ben admits that was Trump’s intent but it doesn’t matter cause we have check and balances… is ridiculous.

@@crisbernabe2866 define what an insurrection is to you.

​@@america1st721jesus christ. You are the exact type of person this commenter is talking about. 😂😂😂 you are actually insufferable

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zgNo it wasn’t. No guns. No plan. Federal agents on blow horns yelling ‘Go into the Capital! Keep moving forward!’ Barricades taken down to fool the larger crowd coming later. No deaths except unarmed Trump supporters. Government still won’t say how many Federal Agents were there. If just one opened a door, or broke a window, or helped in any way, then entrapment. No, it wasn’t an insurrection.

​@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zgno it wasn't

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg An unarmed insurrection in which the err....insurrectionists were guiding into the building by police, picked up litter, and followed rope guides? You have an unbelievably trivial bar for insurrection. What would you define things such as CHAZ that actually claimed power over areas? Or are you calling it that despite all actual evidence of intent indicating otherwise because it is convenient to do so? Expedience over truth seems to be the modus operendi here. Too bad the people that you are expending and credibility you may have remaining are hopelessly incompetent and damned stupid to boot. How does it feel to be lead around by the nose by the likes of those geniuses Joe Biden and Kamala Harris?

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg Ray Epps was a fomenter of the riot that had no connection to Trump.

No it wasn't ​@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg

He always speaks crazy fast in debates

That's actually just Destiny. I watch most videos at 2x speed but if it's a Destiny video I usually have to slow him down to 1.5x speed to be able to just follow along. Ben Shapiro would probably be included in this but I don't watch him as much.

@@xJae14x fair enough, l don't really know the guy, but boy! these two are shot out of a cannon!

@@KennyKakes1 gotcha!

Adderall

It’s like Ben has never heard of Project 2025

@@johncaccioppo1142 How is that group of lobbyists any different than, say, Open Society Foundations? A bunch of people with a particular view, trying to reshape the political landscape of the United States. Or any of hundreds of such groups. According to the Constitution, Americans have the right to petition their government for grievances. Like it or not, money is part of the "speech" in that petitioning. Just because a conservative lobby has designs on reshaping government, doesn't mean it will work, or that it is illegal to pursue those changes, any more than a progressive lobby pursuing changes that suit their views.

Ben met his match

SOUNDS MORE LIKE DONALD DUCK

@johncaccioppo1142 why are Dems so obsessed with fake conspiracy theories like that? You people clearly don’t live in reality. Trump is not a threat to democracy, he’ll do another 4 years and retire into the sunset

Like every other politician has said at one time or another.

@@diedefending420..no..

@@Klamp20XXuh yes ? Alexander Hamilton ? Bro some of you need to stay in school like tf ?

@@emoryyoung6994 Even if Hamilton mentioned that, do you think it was in the same context as Trump’s statement?

@@Klamp20XX well he did try to overturn a election as well .

The Democrat Supreme Court of PA ruled verifying signatures on mail in ballots is illegal bc it's racist. What guard rails to prevent fraud even exist then? You could check to see if your mail in ballots was counted on the PA.gov website so I did a search and filtered by birth date. There was a few dozen with the birth date listed as 1800 and maybe 1000 voters born in 1801. This would make them older than the oldest living person on Earth. No one ever got back to me when I asked how this is possible. People still say there's no evidence of fraud.

Any reasonable person would acknowledge that if you’re gonna claim mass fraud with lawyers and have 60 court cases and then show up and say “yeah we don’t have evidence” and all 60 got thrown out and it’s readily accessible public court - it didn’t happen

Personally, I think no one can even be a nominee without being controlled. That includes Trump. It's all a show to divide people.

Haha

That is the truth of the matter, yes. To say Trump incited anything you need to invent things that were never said or implied. It is patently lying to say he ever incited any violence at all.

Telling them to " fight like hell or you're not going to have a country anymore", while knowing there are armed protestors and members of militia groups are in the crowd and sending to them Capitol while his vice president and the entire congress was inside certifying the election IS inciting violence. He let the attack go on for 2 1/2 hours before making a public statement to stop it. That is the worst dereliction of duty by a president in U.S. history.

​@@user-op4ln2qj5pThere were multiple weapon caches in local hotels and vans parked outside of city limits. They were waiting on a signal that never came because the plan failed. That is part of why Oath keepers and Proud boys got charged with seditious conspiracy with serious sentences.

@@user-op4ln2qj5p Factual information and reality is not something to decide. Irrational people believe they are rational. That's part of the problem.

@@user-op4ln2qj5p ...and bear spray, tasers, Billy clubs, lead pipes. Knives and guns. Don't you MAGA people ever read??? Or do actual research? No. You think as you are told to by your dictator wannabe.

voting options yes. However, most people that live in alternate reality claim it was stolen by votes not being counted correctly. voting machines being hacked, voting papers from China injected into ballot boxes, Trump ballots were NOT counted, dead people voting in mass, illegal aliens voting in mass, people being bused into voting areas. NONE have been substantiated

That and I saw Trump signs all across America at places I know to have been solidly democrat turf since I was born 65 years ago. On one portion of a trip I make 3-4 time a year, a 10 mile stretch would have a virtually even number of (R) vs (D) signage any given election. In 2020, not only were there far more Trump signs, but there were almost no Biden signs, and ones I knew I could count on being for a democrat were now displaying Trump signs! I was shocked to see it, and it made me feel great they had woken up. Also, let's not forget the 2000 mules which was swept under the rug like everything else. Here's a challenge: Provide a completely legal scenario where any single one of the ballot runners could have handled even 10% of the number of ballots they handled, completely legally. The answer is an easy one, there is no scenario where any person should be handling ballots for anyone but their direct family and those are always limited to infirm parents or siblings. Dropping off batch after batch as recorded by cameras, these were nothing at all like sibling and parental ballots.

No not true, Most people were not there because they knew anything about anything. To most trump supporters I know, Trump is like a God that can't do anything wrong. And any legit criticism is quickly dismissed as trump derangement syndrome and fake news. Is all criticism of trump true or valid? -NO Was the trump trying to bullshit his way into power after he lost ? -Without a doubt. 1. Telling state were he knew he was going to lose to stop counting, because his votes were counted ahead and he was ahead in the count. The state were he won were obviously legit and no questions needed to be asked🤨 2. Telling people the election was rigged months before the election was even held. This was the first red flag he even tried this in 2016 but since he won he made nothing of it. 3. Telling Mike pence to dismiss the counting and stop proceeding. 4. Telling people to go March to the capitol and be disruptive after hearing the news. 5. And Then there's Rudy Giuliani Bruh 😂

No. They are upset because they lost.

Yes, that correct. The people are saying wait a minute, you at will, get to reshape how our election’s works? We are saying no. It’s not been voted on, it’s not been tested and it’s not been safeguarded. That means all our votes hold zero value, as they can change how your vote is counted against these new generic process. Aka faulty ballots, ballots counted for dead people, etc. Would this change the outcome of the election? I do not know. The simple fact that we have to ask that question, is precisely the issue. This is NOT a left vs. right issue, this is an issue that affects us all.

Spoil it for me. Who was facts and who was feelings?

​@Stress_- will considering destiny is here he's clearly the feelings argument 😂 as this is the only way he debates

Obvious clue ‘Facts don’t care about your feelings’

@@ryannigl2525hmm I’ve seen him destroy idiots on fresh and fit like sneako with some cold facts and stats. To each their own I guess

@@ryannigl2525 not sure what video you watched but that's not what happened here. He broke down event by event and charges that have been filed with DOJ. Destiny barely used "feelings" as your stating in this conversation in any form. Your comment is incredibly disingenuous with literal video evidence your commenting on.

Many people have been charged with sedition

His instructions and pressuring towards Mike Pence were pretty clear. the fake elector plot is clear for all to see. It's just Plausible deniability. The fact that to avoid charges SCOTUS had to pass one of the most insane rulings of all time makes it hard to deny possibility.

Because he probably didn't.

Problem is there’s a lot more believing in the Trump camp rather than thinking.

You're right, that is the problem. People listen to the media without doing their own research. They think they are thinking but they are actually letting the media dictate what they think. @@mkrj2576

yeah he did, maybe only just but them's the breaks. I've been on the wrong side of a close vote, no fun, you remember them more than the wins but you have to suck it up.

@@PACinaBOOMSTICKhe did bro, he lost all 60 actions he moved lol

From the Book: Courage Under Fire: Under Siege and Outnumbered 58 to 1 on January 6. (Pg 371) When I spoke to Paul Irving on January 3 and asked for perimeter reinforcement from the National Guard, he responded quickly with concern for the "optics" of having the military on the Hill, adding that "the intelligence doesn't support it." (Pg 83) Several weeks after January 6, I had the chance to ask Stenger if he had been given a heads-up that I was coming to request the Guard, and he told me that Irving had called him and said, "Sund just came to my office asking for National Guard assistance. We need to come up with another plan. I will never get this by Pelosi." From the Book: (Pg 142) 12:58 p.m. After I get off the phone with Carroll, I hit the speed dial for Irving. When he picks up, I say, "We are getting overrun by protesters on the West Front! I need approval to request the National Guard immediately!" I already asked for the National Guard to assist on the perimeter three days ago, but the two sergeants at arms made it abundantly clear that this wasn't an option for me. Now I am hoping for a much different response. "Let me run it up the chain," Irving replies, referring to the House leadership. I know he can hear the stress in my voice, and I trust he understands the gravity of the situation. "I'll call you back." (Pg 10) The House sergeant at arms (HSAA), Paul Irving, nominated by Speaker Pelosi and voted in by the House. (pg 147) 1:12 p.m. As Trump is concluding his speech, I am watching the violent struggle on the screen in front of the dais. It's a view from directly above a group of officers and rioters on the north side of the inaugural platform on the lower West Terrace. From the Book: (pg 20) As chief of the USCP, the rules are based on statutes within the US Code (2 USC $ 1974 and 2 USC § 1970) which restrict the ability to obtain the needed support for officers. These two statutes prohibited the USCP from calling in the National Guard or federal law enforcement support in advance of an event unless the Capitol Police Board had enacted a declaration of emergency and obtained the approval of congressional leadership. One statute provides that in an emergency situation, which requires only only to secure the approval of the House or Senate SAA to be able to request help from executive-branch agencies. The statute further stipulates that in these emergency situations, the chief can request assistance on matters related to that SAA's specific chamber, and the request must be in writing. In other words, during an emergency, the House or Senate sergeant at arms can authorize support from an executive-branch agency, but only for that particular side of the Capitol. The chief must obtain approval from both the House and Senate SAAs to request support across the Hill. It's important to understand the process that the USCP undertakes when planning for any public event, and the role that the various units within the department play in this combined effort. Like any other law enforcement agency, the USCP plans for events based on the available intelligence. Considerations such as staffing, perimeters, permits for First Amendment activity, enhancing the protection for members of Congress, and activating civil disturbance units are all based on this intelligence. The more accurate the intelligence, the better the planning and the event's security will be. I was surprised to learn from the report of the select Committee to investigate January 6th: “Federal and local law enforcement authorities were in possession of multiple streams of intelligence predicting violence directed at the Capitol prior to January 6th.” “The Failure to sufficiently share and act upon that intelligence jeopardized the lives of the police officers defending the capital and everyone in it.”

Destiny has brought plenty of lawyers on his stream to discuss this issue. He’s not just making it up as he goes

@@alascala1544 I can bring on plenty of basketball players to my “show”, doesn’t make me LeBron James

@@danny13293 I mean they couldn’t go very deep into it with how little time they have. Destiny has a 6 hour debate between multiple lawyers on his channel that you can watch if you want to learn more about the topic.

Cope MAGAOT

agreed, need more of this

For you American as a outsider who lived in the States for 13 years - Ben Shapiro might come off as intellegent but in reality he is slimey bull shit lawyer who has fascist tendancies not a great guy.

If the standard of convicting someone for an insurrection is that the insurrection had to succeed then our society is screwed. If someone is successful in flipping a government over to a new one, how do you expect the new government to convict itself of breaking an old law that it no longer recognizes? Use your brain dude.

@DonHall666 You should use yours, making an ad hominem attack at the end of your statement does not make it true. What you said would be true if it weren't for the fact that nothing about Jan 6th rose to the definition of an insurrection, as explained by Shapiro in this clip if you had watched it. Let alone the fact Trump clearly stated on the day of that everything should remain peaceful and then told everyone to dispurse, along with offering the national guard for security which was declined. Look up the definition of an insurrection, nothing on January 6th rose to that level, at the very worst there were isolated instances of people behaving poorly, and even that was extremely limited, and very possibly plants. The vast majority of January 6th was people being allowed into the capital building and walking through it calmly and peacefully. You say "use your brain" while clearly demonstrating you don't even know the definition of the word you are so vehimently claiming took place. Then there is the fact that Trumps actual words on the day, prior to the march, are the exact opposite of what one would say if they were inciting an insurrection. So even ignoring the fact that nothing rose to that level, claiming Trump incited one would fall flat as well. Use your brain indeed. The lack of critical thinking the left displays is truely astounding.

I'll call a spade a spade, it doesn't make me wrong. I watched the whole thing, I don't fully agree with Ben's black and white attorney definition. You didn't address anything I said except the part that bruised your fragile ego. He used a lot of words that day, skipping over the fight like hell or you're not going to have a country anymore is convenient for you. He also waited for hours after the greatest acts of violence have occurred. He could have televised immediately, disavowing the violence and restating his call for peace, but instead we got a deflated Trump who only spoke meakly after his plot failed. I saw the same cameras everyone else did, I fail to understand how you and Ben can come to a completely different conclusion.

@DonHall666 Not only a lack of critical thinking but delusional as well. I addressed the fact that nothing on Jan 6th rose to the level of insurrection AND i addressed the fact that what Trump said was the exact opposite of inciting an insurrection, which are the two points of your argument, so saying i didn't adress them is delusional. Thinking I care about what some random lefty says in the comment section on youtube about me is delusional, simply pointed out ad hominem attacks don't in any way shape or form make your statements true. So that's delusional. It's not a "legal definition" it is just the definition, so what the hell do you even mean you don't accept it? Sooo you just don't accept the qualifying definition of a word and will assign your own then? Checks out, delusional. I don't have the time or the crayons to go over Trumps speech with you just because you weren't in school the day they went over context and why it's important, if you can't figure out what was meant by "fight like hell" based on the context of the situation and his speech I can't help you. Again, the lack of critical thinking displayed by the left on a regular basis is truely astounding. Good luck with all that.

@DonHall666 since I'm sure you'll reply with more intellectually vapid "points" I'll just pre emptively say I learned a while ago that arguing with delusional leftists with TDS is akin to beating ones head against a wall so you won't get another reply as i've wasted more than enough time on you as it is. Good luck, I imagine life is very difficult for you.

No, His contention is that it will always fail to happen if tried because of the guide rails in place

@@ddubya4097 ​ @ddubya4097 Ben on the question 'Why would he fail? (in the future)' literally answering 'because he failed (in the past)'. If something has not happened on the first try, it does not mean it will not happen on the second try. If the first cue would have succeeded a bit better, and they would put their hands on voting machines for example, who knows in which state would the US be now.

@@Mackcolak-xf5bk your statement does not make mine false. I think Ben acknowledges there are plenty of 1% hypothetical scenarios, but chooses the one 99% likelihood.

@@ddubya4097 Yes, but your first statement is made false by Ben's words. He said nothing about guide rails in his reply that I put a time stamp to.

@@ddubya4097 So you think that the chance of a successful cue or other disruption of transfer of power is about 1% if Trump is a president? I'd give it about a 10-15% percent chance.

You obviously don't know "that guy" at all. Trump is living rent free in YOUR head with the mouth vaccume you have been giving him the past 7 years

They are having a debate about Trump vs. Biden, my guy. What should he do, not talk about Trump?

Lmao seriously this guy's an idiot@@elonif4125

​@@elonif4125I would suspect the commenter is talking about the extreme paranoia with which he talks about Trump, not that he's talking about him in a debate. The perception of Trump as a boogeyman to him is so off the rails that his mental health seems at risk

Blame the media. It’s amazing they’re able to brainwash so many people on an insane level by repeating “orange man bad”. It’s crazy how effect it is.

Ditto

You do have the option to slow the video down

This isn't nearly as fast as either of them talk, honestly

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zg You are assigning near superhuman power to this one guy. You are like those guys that were calling him the God- Emperor. With the exception of they were joking for the purpose of winding up idiots like you. You seem to actually believe that he wields Godlike power and influence. He doesn't even think that and we all know that excessive humility is not a trait that he possesses.

@@ZeusAchilles-zx8zgIs that you, Hillary? Or is it Barry? lolololol

thats rich...we are still playing the 'innocent Trump got caught up in corrupt Washington' schtick? I wish I could be as dumb as you lot...it must be freeing to have no actual knowledge of how the world actually works. Like a child really.

when people set the bar so low, then rant and rave what a perfect president the best ever. were gonna continue to get misfit presidents like trump. i dont understand after trump did nothing for the people just the rich. what your doing is training him to be the worst even trump can muster. he was doing bad and you shout more, more, more. we dont treat biden like a rock star and hes actually doing his job. thats why we pay him. in the real world people dont get praised for doing their job. the president works for us, if they do something over and beyond great you say atta boy. dont give your dog a bone if hes pooing on the carpet. unless thats what you want him to do.

tell me who you think the swamp is. and how is it that so many cabinet members of trump wont endorse him for president. only 4 out of 44 of his people that worked directly with him gave their aproval. that has never happened not even close.

Oh, that makes it ok

Telling us what to think by saying what happened? 😂

​@@josiahgittman1268why isn't there a contextual box on every video talking about Russian collusion, you know, a perfect little first paragraph outlining how the Russian dossier was a complete fabrication?

​@@josiahgittman1268Just one example of many on "things that happened," I can keep going forever if you'd like - Just say stop.

@@Killjoy.Z what? Re-read your comment, it’s incoherent, I don’t even know what you’re trying to say.

@@josiahgittman1268 Google, a branch of the Democrat party, removed my comment so I can't re-read it.

He doesn’t think, but it’s all how he feels

Typical Ben Shapiro always talking about his feelings

@@andrewseidl7590what are you on?

Exactly 👆👆👆👆👆

So either way, you're not thinking? Weird.

Want a video sharing site without context and fact checking? Go make one bootlicker

Literally called being a sheep of the other heard. Loser

I can’t believe you are that stupid 🤣

and people with no debate experience love pretending destiny is unique in this sense good try tho lil guy

Health way to vote. Need to weigh the future of the next four years. If only the general populations vote meant anything.

Hypothetical counterexamples are a mainstay in philosophical debate

“lol” gross 😂

@@TheJamesLykins You know what else is a mainstay in debate? Being even 1% informed. Blatantly unlike Destiny.

I think just an awesome human being too - wish the internet had more Lexes🥰

by staying quite !!! lol

staying quite 'what' - quiet? heehee@@raviShri2099

@@raviShri2099 exactly so just shut up and let people enjoy their delightful content food

He didnt moderate shit!

One year of political riots and emergency voting rules and Zuckerbucks put us beyond 'divisive' already. Way beyond.

You have a very poor understanding of the concept of “democracy” if you think that the people can elect every candidate they desire, regardless of what the Constitution or a Constitutional Court have to say about it. It’s like saying that the US is not much of a democracy because a 15 year old is barred from becoming president, even though 60% of the population would vote for him.

@suspendedtwice4sayingrasis261 The constitution doesn't bar Trump from running. And the only prosecution of him that hasn't struggled to proceed is in NY, where they denied him a trial on the question of his guilt. Can't wait for the appeal on that one.

@@suspendedtwice4sayingrasis261 15 year olds have been barred for running for POTUS since the Constitution's authorship. (A2S1C5) NY also waited decades to charge him for fraud. He's been overinflating the information surrounding his properties since the 80s, presumably. None of this even came up in 2015-2016 when he ran the first time. Why? Because nobody in power thought he would win. Now all of the sudden he's being charged in relation to January 6th, fraud in NYC, a sudden SA civil case where he was only adjudicated of defamation, etc. All of this in 2023-2024. Why? Oh right...because Biden's approval rating is at 37% and the DNC refused the option to primary him.

The fact that you think democracy starts and stops with trump makes it the opposite of democracy 😂.. screams him or else , meaning dictatorship thinking on your part

You’re opinion is you think it’s all opinions 😂

On the other side of the coin, Ben talks with nothing but false confidence. He says a few facts and then he makes barely relevant claims with 100% surety, which is a great way to get an A in speech and debate class, but you lose validity by refusing to gauge yourself accurately.

@@longviolinfilms You guessed wrong about what _surety_ means.

@@dixonpinfold2582The state of being sure or certain of something? You're out here incorrectly correcting people.

@@longviolinfilms The word _surety_ refers to a guarantor, a back-up person who formally promises to make certain that some obligation will be met, if not by the party who pledged to do it in the first place, then by he or she himself/herself. It may also mean the guarantee itself. As a word with those highly specific meanings it's been around for centuries. Using it as a novel and would-be fancy substitute for _certainty_ is illiterate or (charitably) semi-literate and any dictionary which includes that sense is simply one which takes the descriptive stance so far as to dispense with any distinction between literacy and illiteracy. That's their right, just as it's anyone's right to abuse the language. We live in the age of rights. _Yous_ are free to write as _yous_ like.

They happen in classrooms and science based communities daily. Education is paramount

Yes but instead of destiny find someone on the left without trump derangement syndrome who can use logic over emotion

Destiny is clueless

I know I've Ben Shapiro, but "Destiny" is the other guy's name? Really? Does he identify as a stripper?

Haha. Does he go by the name destiny?

@@Fjohnnnn I don’t think it’s even a man fr, might be transgender

Nice argument bro.

and ben Shapiro should be taken seriously? ridiculous

Liberals r discusting 🤢

He isn't doing an interview here though. He is monitoring a debate.

There was a pandemic then. Chill.

like what

@@rogeravila7682 if Obama say had Joe Biden do for Hillary what Trump wanted Pence to do for him

I think is the other way around. You cannot be a peaceful leftist and also the right winger the only one maintaining peace and economy. Or the ones deporting more migrants and expect to be the representation of them.

I also think it's weird that Shapiro thinks Biden having a vaccine mandate during a pandemic is a huge over reach of power, despite the fact that we have dozens upon dozens of vaccine mandates, but doesn't have many criticisms of Trump literally trying to rig an election so he can stay in power.

Yeah, I’m no leftist (would probably describe my self as a moderate or conservative leaning) but Destiny had Ben on the ropes here for most of the debate. You could tell he was really digging deep to defend Trump and that on a personal level he agrees with Destiny’s arguements

But it has to be orchastrated and it was not

He gathered all of his weak minded little. Snowflake followers there and he knew they couldn't control themselves, he loves little sheep​@@youtubecensoringcomments7427

It does have to be an insurrection in order to be an insurrection, though.

@@colinbickford3470 no argument here

I think Destiny did a really good job of explaining the topic because the really dangerous part was the behind-the-scenes lobbying of governors and state officials (and Pence) to throw away the election results, while the Jan 6 riot was just the public face of an authoritarian power grab.

Correct. Oh, a closer example would easily be the extreme left "autonomous zones" that popped up declaring they aren't part of America anymore. Make it make sense.

Only two people use that word for Jan 6th, people that have an agenda but know it's BS and the people that follow the left-wing media narrative like sheep.

Open doors and let people in?

Inconceivable!

Yeah it was a giant failure because the IQ of MAGA is so low

Many people have been charged with sedition

That might get overturned quite soon on account they had to apply one law in a way it was never applied before (it was mainly just written after corporate scandals so they couldn't just destroy files. It was never meant to apply to protestors whi just being there could hypothetically delay a proceeding, which they didn't even do). SCOTUS rightfully interpreted the law correctly by using the articles to show where it was meaning. Thus the leverage they used for the convictions you mentioned might not stand for long now. Just saying.

Closer than anything else we have experienced in this country.

@@Jfavorite1483 Oh, we've had full blown insurrections, and a civil war to boot.