people versus barack obama that's the name of an explosive new book by commentator and best selling author ben shapiro has the obama administration acted like a criminal cobol as shapiro alleges and if so is criminal prosecution of a sitting president the answer in lieu of impeachment benjy barrow is here to make the case on this edition of politicking.

taking on larry king he's editor in chief bright brought news and new york times best selling author his latest book the people versus barack obama but criminal case against the obama administration is out right now and ben shapiro is my guest joining us here in studio thanks ben for coming days rally. he's two years into his second term you're not going to impeach him are you bringing criminal to proposing criminal charges against the administration or specific who well i mean there are certain specific layers within the administration lois lerner at the i.r.s. the attorney general for one who would be subject to criminal charges the problem is that of course that the department of justice is the only body that is that is capable of bringing criminal charges this point under federal law but actually make the case for in in the people versus barack obama as i make the case that the rico act the rackets are influencing corrupt organizations act of one hundred seventy which allows for civil charges to be brought people can file. that we broaden to

allow people to sue members of the executive branch so the people themselves essentially would become the guardians of the criminal law because sorry but i just don't trust any executive branch to prosecute its own guys are you bringing this road to the president so if we could share i mean the question of sovereign immunity would he do hands on that's criminal mostly this is the problem this is why you have to use the rico act so no president is ever going to have to do things almost a richard nixon presumably know and there are tapes is going to have to do things that are there particularly hands on the government is run much more like a mafia ask organization in which you have somebody at the top who makes a basic demand that certain things be done and then somebody at the low level says ok well you know i want to up my career when i do this right this is henry the second with thomas back at great when will no one riddle me a read me of this meddlesome priest and then somebody goes and read some of the metal some priests it is odd that all of the scandals all of the criminal activity in the obama administration has already founded to the benefit of president obama could we make this case against any places around boston which are against reagan

weapons of mass destruction against bush every administration has had people under them who have lied or done things we've given by washington well i'm not sure you can cite washington read think that certainly i'm sure something was done that washington is relatively clean but it but it but if you look at you know george w. bush or if you look at bill clinton or if you look at ronald reagan sure i mean the answer would be that you could and people should be wary i mean this is this is sort of the case that i'm making is that we've become so comfortable with the executive branch of the government abusing its citizens and violating our rights and violating what they're structured to do under the law that we've just become used to it and if we start treating them as criminals maybe they'll think twice before they act so criminally in the future or we mix and we had tapes and there was a possibility of them driving if you remember the right we did impeach but he would have had to be impeached this is the problem under american law and right because the way that it works is that under american law barack obama could literally strangle somebody on camera today and he would have to be impeached and then he would have to be tried in the senate and can be. did and only then could you

actually bring a criminal indictment against a president you can't bring a criminal indictment against sitting president so you appoint of the book due to my good statement rather than to bring your case right cases to be filed i would be shocked if there were cases to be found there have to be actual alterations to law which i suggest that would make such things possible briggs and. what's the crime in benghazi the crime in benghazi that there are two crimes in benghazi the first is probably the violation of the arms export control act the shipping of guns into libya in the first place right that is actually illegal under the arms export control act any time the president of the united states or anybody in the executive branch if i were to ship weapons into libya to a terrorist group i'd be prosecuted the president of the united states has the ability to waive the arms export control act in order to ship weapons or money to terrorist groups he didn't do that in the arms export control act he didn't do that in libya and he shipped the weapons in anyway and with regard to benghazi the solid information is that the annex in benghazi the cia annex in benghazi was actually a weapons grounds is being used as a as

a shipping point for weapons into turkey and then into syria that's number one in terms of hillary clinton's culpability in benghazi involuntary manslaughter be a pretty easy charge to bring involuntary manslaughter requires three basic elements the first element is that someone is killed the second is that something reckless resulted in the death and the third is that somebody should have known that it was reckless that could have been that could have resulted in death in this case you have chris stevens and you have the entire staff in benghazi repeatedly letting the state department over and over and over we need security anybody who read the newspapers knew they needed security in benghazi it was not provided that's the real crime in that of course there are issues of obstruction of justice afterward and which witnesses in benghazi were talked to by the state department and basically were leverage not to speak openly if this is not just political we could make a case on nine eleven against congolese are right you got a warning from the f.b.i. and show that while the warning from connally's right before nine eleven was certainly less specific then please provide security in benghazi at this particular embassy right with. it's going to be on third element if you're drunk only surprise

for example the third element would be was something reckless done that they should have known about right i'm not sure that the same case exist with not a lot there's certainly plenty that we could talk about nine eleven but i don't think the same case exist for involuntary manslaughter in benghazi is with nine eleven with a large super of arms this administration israel any of that a crime that is not a crime because there is no terrorist groups in israel that are being supplied with the weapons we are currently however providing four hundred million dollars in funding so unity government that includes hamas right which is a state department terrorist group let me just this week the president of the united states did nothing is as hamas kidnapped three people including an american citizen and the state department continues to say that we will continue funding that unity government which it is in and of itself a crime nets a crime if i wish if our ship weapons hamas that's fifteen years in prison the guy or a scandal what was the crime of the crime they arrest analysts violation of law anybody who leverage is i.r.s. officials in order to politically target anybody that's a crime under i.r.s.

law that comes with penalties obviously that happened with regard to the i.r.s. itself which was according to its own statements violating the law and in targeting particular political groups and like any other scandal this one became phony according to the president shortly after he said this is the most important thing ever and he was going to get to the bottom of it within weeks it had become phony it was no big deal and now it's old news of course are you a right winger making a statement against the law if we get administration or are you a lawyer making a criminal charge that you would be making here against george bush or ronald reagan or any of the other previous presidents of washington both i mean i think that there's no question i'm a conservative and i'm open about that i mean anybody who's watched my career would be hard pressed to call me anything but but by the same token the case that i'm making is really want to executive overage because we have a choice as a country here and the choice of the country is pretty simple the executive branch has grown so much there are two million people who work for the executive branch all the branches of government are now armed i mean literally every branch of the of the executive branch every regulatory. agency has its own swat team because of

that we have to make a choice is someone ever going to be held accountable in the executive branch or are they not and so we have really we have to decide through one executive branch this large number one and number two if we do an executive branch this large how exactly are we going to be helping them accountable no matter who's running the show because the truth is that half the stuff that i and president obama for in this in this case against obama is impeachable or indict a blunder under bush i mean what what was done with regard to the n.s.a. obviously started under george w. bush it was double down under under president obama snowden would be a chief witness for you absolutely right what about the obstruction of justice against the submission oh it was always of obstructed justice money that they've done that multiple ways i mean that that the obstruction of justice charge basically applies to not only jury tampering but witness tampering trying to stop federal officials or state officials from engaging in in. the execution of the law one of the easiest ways to cite that would be for example the president's

immigration policy you know simply saying we're not going to prosecute anybody between the ages of sixteen and thirty who's in the country illegally that's not a prosecutorial discretion issue that's a blanket statement that's a blanket political statement that the president is not empowered to make under the constitution if in fact i were to say if i were to go to the eye and sore eyes and i were to stop them from deporting anybody i'd be carted off to prison if the president of the united states gives that order then he's champion is a champion of the people so the. blanket statement against the structure of government all against the words right out of it were not a democracy right or not at this point i mean what we have is an executive tyranny essential way that the president can do whatever he wants and you know what he's out of and it wasn't any and this is something i think that the left and right should unite on honest to god because when it was bush then i think the media did a much better job of covering bush than they have covering obama mainly because they're motivated against bush justin in the same way that i've probably done a better job of covering president obama covering president bush hopefully we can all i think at this point. learned that all presidents should be covered with it

with a certain fair level of skepticism but the executive branch itself a matter who runs it he grabs this much power to any one body of government and you've got a problem and i think we should avoid being our first lesson juror who when it was richard nixon was writing the imperial presidency and then when it was jimmy carter was talking about how the executive didn't have enough authority i think we should recognize this point the executive has plenty of authority and no matter who is in charge we are all going to feel the brunt of that and there's no answerability why on the right is there so much hostility in the series. toward this president because he's the most extreme president we've ever had most liberals think he's too conservative paul krugman didn't article today in the new york times all possible music music with his and he had a certain way or a group going to say ben shapiro you know i'm sure he does. and what he made a gays. to kick him in more insurance companies on board more you said people wouldn't sign up there so i mean up we're getting at the core of it why is such us

though is it racist absolutely not absolutely not why in the world would it why why in the world would it be racist well what exactly is racist about calling out his policies there's no there is well what was done was such for example there's a part of the right as some in the tea party that make him think that he's sitting there deliberately against the united states' life ok i'm opposed to my own country as idiotic so i think that he has interests that are opposed to certain aspects of america just like any with the television or use any present know that i know i think that he's different in this way i think that his ideology motivates him to to scale back on america's role in the world by the way i say i think the same thing about hillary clinton i think there are plenty of people on the left who feel that america has had a much too muscular role in the world and would like to see america cut down to size and whittle down to size and they would like to see it as one member of the family of nations as opposed to the leading member on the world stage so in that way president obama is significantly more extreme even than bill clinton when obama made his statement we have a big. hammer and every problem isn't the nail i have if you agree with that and i

don't think i don't think there's i don't think there's anything alan has anybody on earth who would suggest that every problem isn't always what president obama so great at he's a terrific politician what he's really and truly great at is creating false dichotomies and then saying well my way is the middle way there's no there's no there's nobody in the world two things that we should use the military to solve every problem on earth just like i don't think there's anybody in the world who believes that we should never use the military president obama likes to create these kind of straw men and then he has a field day burning them but it seems there's someone give an example john mccain which allies a lot one day he's never met. the troop again to iraq then the struggle happens in iraq why don't we send troops in other words you know complaints don't have solutions well there's no matter what he does he can't do anything right i don't remember anybody on the right suggesting that the president of the united states had done the right thing by precipitously withdrawing troops from iraq i really don't remember anybody on the right saying maybe there were i don't remember that in two thousand and eleven as we were pulling troops out of

iraq virtually everybody on the right was unanimously saying that we are now pulling out of a winning situation and that is going to go you know as the saying there were weapons of mass destruction and they were all wrong for that was also a member of the left i mean there was those bill clinton hillary clinton a.c.r. information given to them by the right and given that's not true good based on information given them by bill clinton oakland was giving the exact same information when he was bombing iraq in the late ninety's exact same information when obama does things like this so more arms to israel than any other all presidents combined why don't you applaud him because he's not the one who's making that is you know he's not the congress passed the bill he's executive he sees sold more than anybody he just he's also said he's also given more aid to the palestinian authority is also getting more aid to various countries around the region he's contrary he has made a deal with iran a country that is openly developing nuclear weapons and that deal is going to result in them going nuclear he's basically now talking about handing over iraq to iran he has turned syria into a hot mess. some republican senators said yesterday we should talk to iran well

those republican senators are wrong to have he's the president he makes foreign policy is that anything you like about president obama i think is a beautiful speaker i think is a beautiful speaker the book is the people versus barack obama i knew but when he was twelve years old he was a grew up by a list and when we come back we'll take out we'll get the latest from iraq and how involved the united states should be in what's happening bad post on the about the growing humanitarian crisis all of them are just some of them all to stay tuned. for your friend posts a photo from a vacation you can't afford. to for. your boss repeats the same old joke of course you like. your ex-girlfriend still pens tear jerking poetry keep. norris. post only what really matters. to your facebook news feed.

it was a. very hard to take a. long look at that are back with their lives. and. the people.

the politicking the bestselling author and editor at large of broad broad tommies ben shapiro he remains with us and by the way he's also the author of the new book the people versus barack obama which is right now joining us now is richard followed political commentator host of the online news program the richard farleigh show rigid you've heard what dennis had to say on the on the legal questions to your response to his critique of the whole obama administration. thanks larry i

appreciate being here and good to see you you know where i got to tell you i think this this criticism of the president is a little far reaching for me because i think if you're going to criticize president obama the question i have is where were they when george w. bush was having ridiculous government overreach. and that's fair and i think that's totally fair i think they did but now's the time when why don't we all get together and figure out ok how do we prevent this in the future because we can all do this retain it why why are people who do who didn't back george w. bush back then when president bush was going into afghanistan back in president obama's plans for a troop surge in afghanistan now turns out there's two sides to the political debate i'm what i'm calling for at this point whether we're wrong or wrong let's get together and figure out exactly how we fix the problem of executive overreach of bush's overreaching so as obama and i say that in the book i absolutely do. well i mean listen i hear that if we're going to come together i think that what needs to happen is that folks on the right you know who part of the city and run half the

united states congress should want to come together to deal with the government overreach and we haven't seen that yet republicans have sat on their hands on most issues because i've having a multiple multiple which trial kiri means or kabuki theater like i like to call it you know i'd rather see them say let's find a way to solve immigration the president doesn't have to act or let's find a way to reform our tax code so the president have to act or let's find a way to fix it give more money funding to our embassy so the president have to act all what seems to be happening here miro larry is kind of duty when it comes to the right and so now they're playing the blame game when they really haven't put forth any solutions so richard when it comes to the solutions i think the bigger problem here is not the question of particular issues honestly i think the question is the one that you've stated which is you're using the president's action as a threat why don't why doesn't congress do x. or the president doesn't have to do it why doesn't congress do why the president doesn't have to do it the problem is the president is not given the power to do these things when the president goes ahead and does it wait a minute no i think the president does have the power to stop deportation and i think what we saw just

a couple days right in violation as it has the power to the president also has the power to make sure that federal contractors don't fire l.g.b. t.q. folks these are all part of the present executive power being that he's the administer of the executive branch i'm not sure what it what what is administrative about ignoring basic facts of american law such as that is a crime to cross the border illegally and believe me i'm somebody who actually is for immigration reform but this is not a question of whether immigration reform is a good idea or a bad one it's do you really want to give the president this ability because richard if you really want to give the president this much power then you can't be surprised if the president turns around here we'll let somebody on the other side he turns right says ok let's deport everyone i'm going to get in this much discretion i don't know wait a second let's be very clear that i think you're mixing apples and oranges here and let's be very clear about the president's brother has deported more individuals than any other president in history it's not true but what is true that is not. you can't change the importations change the sixty six it's used to be measured that if you came to the border and you were rejected that's not counted as a deportation he's now been changed that or stations and both my doctorate and what

he what he has done now the folks who are being deported are those individual came to the country at no fault of their own who played who's into our flag they go to our schools and they want to pursue the american dream so i'm going to serve in our military and the president has the power to instruct his secretaries to do whatever he chooses to see for them to do and there and that is that of federal law they he can he can instruct his secretaries to do whatever he sees fit to do and this is the problem on every issue there is a lot of the sunday that i had is not having a lesion a federal law let me interrupt guys use i'm not more or less well but there is a very pressing issue going on now in iraq what are your thoughts on it richard. well listen i think this is the president lose any on any situation here and i think people like our friend there from breitbart will attack this president matter what he does the truth of the matter is this we should have gone the war in iraq to begin with and now it is time for the people of iraq and the government of iraq to finally stand up and do with their own mess and i think with the we're going to provide support as

a country that the poor can only come after iraq figures out exactly what it's going to do then well ok here there are really three separate questions when it comes to iraq should we've gotten in should we've gotten out and what do we do now right and the first two questions are actually sort of irrelevant to the third meaning i can actually i can i hear the arc notion of god in the first place certainly getting out looks like a mistake now that there's a massive chaotic situation over there in terms of the third solution doing nothing and saying that oh well throwing up our hands well i guess what happens there happens there that's a pretty nine eleven mentality that suggests the whatever happens there is a regional problem it will never have any blowback what should you do what we should do is we should put military advisors on the ground particularly in kurdistan where we help out some of the folks who actually want to defend the country and look if we actually care about the status of the country the last thing we should be doing is helping the iranians invade the southern half of the country and then helping the sunni's invade the northern half of the country this is exactly what the left wanted with regard to iraq way back in the middle of last decade they wanted this to turn into vietnam and vietnam was a war that was once without funding and to hold down a terrorist was also a way that we wanted to we cut funding and pulled out good. larry that's utterly

utterly utterly completely not true and if you listen to folks like john mccain who always believes we should arm the rebels which is his solution to everything and putting our men and women in harm's way once again to solve a quagmire of a situation that we've created let's be very clear about this that was created under george w. bush this president what are our men and women back home in the safety of america and now we've got to figure out a solution and to be honest with you this government the iraqi government has got to stand up this cannot always be america's nightmare the iraqi government has to stand up and say we're going to take control what this president what the president of iraq need to do is reach out to the sunni's reach of the shias make concessions and find a way to run his government we do it here in america they do it in india they do it in pakistan they do it all across the world people come together different factions come together to rule a country equally and this president the president iraq of them able to do that and we have held accountable for his acts and if we put our men and women back in our lives that it was it's our problem because to

a certain it was we invaded them well yes because we invaded them but also beyond that because once you're there and you make promises to people who are now being mowed down in the streets by the way if you feel no obligation about that but you feel a moral obligation that two hundred seventy girls get kidnapped by boko haram in nigeria then i question where exactly your moral feelings lie because the fact is tens of thousands of people are going to get killed there possibly certainly hundreds of thousands have already been moved into exile essentially you want to send advisors and i certainly want to do on their advise and airstrikes on isis airstrikes and we can i can air strike khadafi forces in libya and a country we have nothing to do with but we won't air strike isis what's wrong with the original one of the list i think i would like for him to define what military advisors mean won because we've already trained the iraqi military and it's not our fault the iraqi military surrendering as fast as possible that's not our issue that's not our problem now where i do agree with them is i think that's i don't i have no problem i think this president problem with some sort of drone warfare setting some drones over there to strike isis but with that being said we need. a

solution where all the parties are at the table and. fortunately that can only happen when the iraqi government stands up here know that that also happens actually and was happening when the american military was there i mean if you read the pieces in the new yorker by the great reporter who's it was actually on the left he was talking in detail about the fact that when the u.s. military was there they were speaking every day every day with that with with maliki they were telling him want the u.s. military to be there is the question if the u.s. military there is for it is there for decades we call a problem do you want our men sit with holland you want our men and women be put in harm's way let me ask you this how many american men or women were you willing to let die for no reason now because now that now the country is gone right so you got forty five hundred american men and women who died there and their blood is worth nothing because the country is gone and veterans are saying this isn't a movie where it will first what we should a bit of the first place tomorrow you can argue that but the bottom line is once the war was won why give it reality how much more american blood do you want to shed for a cause for a conflict that is not our not our conflict government that is the literally irresponsible. the american public support troops on the ground i think i think at

this point you're probably right the american public will not what is on the ground by a wide margin because this is a this is become a country that is now slipped into a pretty nine eleven mentality which is why we are now going to surrender afghanistan back to the taliban in iraq to a combined force of al qaeda slash isis in the north and iran in the in the south but some of the political blogs your reaction to the defeat of mr cantor is very interesting i think that it has a couple of ramifications that it once again shows kind of the difference between the establishment republican party and the grassroots that election really had nothing to do with the tea party the tea party and spend any money and in the tea party really didn't do much in that race was much more about cantor not being in his district a lot and being a little bit out of touch as far as the immigration issue i think it's a great thing for democrats because now you're going to see president obama do what he's wanted to do all along he's going to claim he has no partners on the republican side of the aisle and immigration reform and then he's going to move toward executive action he's going to threaten the american people if they don't like democrats who are allies of sort of the for november he's going to he's going to have a seal of the will go down for us absolutely to help him do you think richard why.

no immigration reform was a threat but hey who is that who the ask the questions here what larry listen i think where you where i do agree is i think the reason why your cantor lost his race is because once again that we all know the truth of the line that all politics are local and eric cantor just didn't play the local ground game this guy outspent this guy on ads also other stuff but when it came to talking to people of his district he just didn't get it done now but what i think this does say for the broader republican party on immigration and on other issues on reason minimum wage is that what you're going to find is a more divided government in washington if eric cantor who is as conservative as conservative can be who sort of took his foot in the water on immigration reform could lose his seat but all republicans feel as though they're vulnerable they're going go all the way to the right and we're going to have a dysfunctional government because republicans refuse to come to the table and work with this president why can't we have immigration reform and the reason we george bush to lead the parade i mean listen i would be fine with immigration reform i think most americans actually agree on immigration reform on the always agree and

on this exactly on this basic count right you can't have this at a very basic level you can't have a welfare state with open borders right because people come across the border and take advantage of the welfare state so what you have to do first is you have to secure the border and then you figure out what to do with the people here whether that means pathway to citizenship or that means just legal residency and i think that pretty much everybody agrees on that the problem is that the president has been so lax on border security the people don't trust his unfortunate of border security so this is been the sticking doing. wait a second here now first i don't think that border security and a pathway to the super mutually exclusive those two things can happen simultaneously at the same time and that is the compromise that is a place of compromise for democrats and republicans larry they can happen at the same time we can build a fence we can build a wall we can build electric fence of that's what they want but at the same time we need to provide a pathway to citizenship for those eleven million that are in the shadows the republican party's problem is if they cannot get a pathway to citizenship out of the united states house of representatives whether they like it or not whether we beefed up the border or not whether we put. six on

the border they would still not be able to pass a pathway to citizenship that's simply not true if you secured the border people it is traveling sex and the vote i promise you i know the republican party pretty well and if you if you were to secure the border then you would be able to pass a pathway to citizenship you would have those happen we why are those two things we should explain why are they connected. because we're dealing with immigration we're dealing with immigration is a total issue they're not separate issues of course they're separate issues because the fact is that you know it's not ok final about you're right one of our border and have immigration controls so so so so you're right let's assume you're right and we'll completely will completely connect them ok but they will connect them as well but we don't have any border security amnesty for everybody is their problem or no that's not what we see there with this is this is this were this is exactly where they go to larry every time we have this is what are we going to what do we do exist anyway and why they have to be that is not what wait a second wait a second that is not what's in the senate bill in the senate bill which is the democratic solution which been endorsed by the president and all the democrats in the united states senate that bill strengthens our border it increases border

security and at the same time vies a very very very long pathway to citizenship it takes almost ten years it is completely and totally bipartisan yet still republicans in the house won't even bring the bill to the floor for a vote richard i just told you i care larry that they don't agree with the pathway to citizenship and i have honestly i have one question and all of this seriously just one question why not just secure the border and then put a pathway to citizenship if i can those happen at the same time why don't you answer my question instead of asking me to just explain why they here's why they can't happen at the same time as you secure the border the border remains somewhat open people cross the border because they feel that if they get in before the deadline if they get in before the border is secure then they are somehow included the pathway to citizenship of course i've read the bill and not only if i read the bill i've been watching what's happening on the border tens of thousands of children on how often with organic misinformation we're going to see because we have many things happening a lot right now but just as you know the all right you talk about we talking about the law against crossing the line legally.