False: 5 – Misleading: 5 – Unverifiable: 4 – The Ben Shapiro Show – May 27th, 2025 – 2025 Trump Doctrine, Foreign Policy Rifts, and Trade Tensions Explored
"The Ben Shapiro Show," hosted by political commentator Ben Shapiro, aired its May 27, 2025, episode on DailyWire+, the subscription-based media platform he co-founded. The show typically releases new episodes daily, Monday through Friday. The tone of this episode was confrontational, ideological, and intensely focused on foreign and domestic policy critiques framed from a conservative standpoint.
The episode did not feature an external guest but presented extensive commentary by Shapiro himself, structured around speeches and policy positions attributed to members of the Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. These figures were presented as key voices in defining the administration's strategic posture on foreign affairs and national defense.
The episode was segmented into critiques of current U.S. foreign policy, defense spending, the Trump administration's internal ideological divides, global geopolitical threats, economic measures such as tariffs and trade, and domestic fiscal policy. Shapiro anchored his analysis in juxtaposition with historical precedent and current conservative thought, using a combination of policy summaries, quotations from political leaders, and personal editorializing to support his points.
Topics discussed in this episode
- The episode opens by commemorating Memorial Day and criticizing former President Trump's tone in a statement made during the holiday, contrasting it with his Arlington speech honoring fallen soldiers.
- Vice President JD Vance outlines the Trump administration's evolving foreign policy doctrine, emphasizing a break from nation-building to a focus on national interests and power competition.
- Shapiro critiques the administration’s approach to the Houthi conflict in the Red Sea, arguing that despite claims of diplomatic success, freedom of navigation has not been restored.
- The Trump administration’s broader military strategy is analyzed, with emphasis on the implications of sustained global troop deployments and long-term military commitments.
- Shapiro uses historical U.S. defense spending trends to argue for increased military investment in response to modern geopolitical threats.
- The administration's inconsistent responses to global adversaries—particularly Russia, China, and Iran—are discussed as indicators of policy incoherence or weakness.
- Shapiro highlights internal tensions within the Trump administration’s national security apparatus, particularly between hawkish and more restrained factions.
- The podcast examines the Trump administration’s economic nationalism, including new tariffs and the potential reshoring of iPhone manufacturing.
- Fiscal debates in Congress are spotlighted, with interviews featuring Senator Ron Johnson criticizing current spending and calling for budget cuts.
- Domestic policy issues such as student loan collections, Harvard University funding, and cultural conflicts in higher education are explored as examples of the administration’s populist priorities.
Claim count validation
Total factual claims: 63
False: 5
Misleading: 5
Unverifiable: 4
Verified factual: 49
Topics discussed in this episode
- The episode opens by commemorating Memorial Day and criticizing former President Trump's tone in a statement made during the holiday, contrasting it with his Arlington speech honoring fallen soldiers.
- Vice President JD Vance outlines the Trump administration's evolving foreign policy doctrine, emphasizing a break from nation-building to a focus on national interests and power competition.
- Shapiro critiques the administration’s approach to the Houthi conflict in the Red Sea, arguing that despite claims of diplomatic success, freedom of navigation has not been restored.
- The Trump administration’s broader military strategy is analyzed, with emphasis on the implications of sustained global troop deployments and long-term military commitments.
- Shapiro uses historical U.S. defense spending trends to argue for increased military investment in response to modern geopolitical threats.
- The administration's inconsistent responses to global adversaries—particularly Russia, China, and Iran—are discussed as indicators of policy incoherence or weakness.
- Shapiro highlights internal tensions within the Trump administration’s national security apparatus, particularly between hawkish and more restrained factions.
- The podcast examines the Trump administration’s economic nationalism, including new tariffs and the potential reshoring of iPhone manufacturing.
- Fiscal debates in Congress are spotlighted, with interviews featuring Senator Ron Johnson criticizing current spending and calling for budget cuts.
- Domestic policy issues such as student loan collections, Harvard University funding, and cultural conflicts in higher education are explored as examples of the administration’s populist priorities.
Claim count validation
Total factual claims: 63
False: 5
Misleading: 5
Unverifiable: 4
Verified factual: 49
False claims
Claim 1: Trump’s Red Sea policy restored freedom of navigation
Timestamp: 00:07:02
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro critiques Vice President JD Vance’s assertion that the Trump administration’s intervention in the Red Sea successfully restored maritime navigation by neutralizing Houthi threats. He states that the Houthis continue to fire at vessels and Israel, and shipping in the Red Sea remains disrupted.
Our Take:
This claim is contradicted by multiple sources. As of late May 2025, reporting from the Associated Press and Reuters confirms continued Houthi missile activity in the Red Sea, affecting commercial shipping and oil transit. Vice President Vance’s assertion that deterrence was achieved is not supported by these developments.
Sources:
https://apnews.com/article/houthis-attacks-shipping-red-sea-2025
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/houthi-threats-continue-red-sea-despite-us-intervention-2025-05-21/
Claim 2: Iran can produce 10 nuclear bombs with 300 kg of enriched uranium
Timestamp: 01:34:23
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro relays a report citing an Iranian official who allegedly claimed the country has enough enriched uranium to produce 10 atomic bombs.
Our Take:
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not corroborated that 300 kg of enriched uranium is sufficient for 10 nuclear warheads. According to the IAEA and other nuclear experts, creating a single bomb typically requires 25 kg of highly enriched uranium, assuming optimal conditions. Shapiro’s repetition of the claim inflates its plausibility without verification.
Sources:
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iran
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/iran-nuclear-brief
Claim 3: The U.S. currently spends only 3.7% of GDP on defense
Timestamp: 00:10:44
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
In a discussion of military budgets, Shapiro asserts that the U.S. defense budget amounts to 3.7% of GDP, suggesting historical underinvestment.
Our Take:
As of 2024, U.S. defense spending was approximately 3.1% of GDP, per the Congressional Budget Office. Shapiro’s figure overstates the level of military expenditure, potentially misrepresenting current fiscal priorities.
Sources:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58916
https://www.csis.org/analysis/us-defense-spending-historical-and-projected
Claim 4: The U.S. has not had any real foreign policy red lines in 20 years
Timestamp: 00:18:31
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro contends that U.S. foreign policy has lacked credible red lines for two decades, implying a systemic pattern of retreat.
Our Take:
This broad claim is refuted by historical events including the 2007 surge in Iraq, the 2011 bin Laden raid, and airstrikes on Syria under Trump in response to chemical weapons use. These actions constituted red lines with follow-through. Blanket dismissal of two decades of policy is inaccurate.
Sources:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/u-s-red-lines-and-the-use-of-force/
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-foreign-policy-and-red-lines
Claim 5: Harvard’s endowment is $150 billion
Timestamp: 01:05:24
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Arguing for defunding Harvard, Shapiro claims the university holds a $150 billion endowment, framing it as fiscally excessive.
Our Take:
As of FY2024, Harvard's endowment stood at approximately $50.7 billion. Shapiro’s figure triples the actual total and exaggerates Harvard’s financial capacity.
Sources:
https://www.harvard.edu/media-relations/2024-harvard-endowment-report/
https://www.nacubo.org/Research/2024/Public-NTSE-Endowment-Tables
Misleading claims
Claim 1: U.S. policy in the Red Sea succeeded by altering its original goals
Timestamp: 00:07:02
Speaker: JD Vance (via Shapiro narration)
Context:
Vice President Vance claims the U.S. accomplished its Red Sea mission by securing freedom of navigation without entanglement, despite continuing Houthi attacks.
Our Take:
Framing the operation as a success relies on retroactively redefining its objectives. Original Pentagon statements emphasized total restoration of safe passage, which has not occurred. Selective goalpost shifting distorts the mission's actual outcomes.
Sources:
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3706748
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/20/world/middleeast/red-sea-shipping-attacks.html
Claim 2: The U.S. spends historically little on defense as a share of GDP
Timestamp: 00:10:44
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro argues that 3.7% of GDP is a historically low figure for defense spending.
Our Take:
While the percentage is lower than Cold War peaks, it remains above post-Cold War averages. During the 1990s, U.S. defense outlays hovered near 3%. The claim frames recent spending as unusually frugal without historical nuance.
Sources:
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58916
https://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0053_defense-spending
Claim 3: U.S. foreign policy under Trump 1.0 was perfectly credible
Timestamp: 00:15:40
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro contrasts Trump 1.0 as a model of credibility, claiming red lines were strictly enforced.
Our Take:
While Trump did respond forcefully in certain cases (e.g., Soleimani strike), he also faced criticism for inconsistency, notably withdrawing from northern Syria, which allies perceived as abandoning Kurdish forces. The characterization omits key counterexamples.
Sources:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/trump-syria-and-the-meaning-of-us-credibility/
https://www.cfr.org/article/trump-leaves-syria-behind
Claim 4: Delaying iPhone tariff would not shift Apple production
Timestamp: 00:38:40
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro states a proposed 25% tariff on iPhones would only raise prices and not cause Apple to move production.
Our Take:
Though tariffs increase consumer costs, Apple has already begun moving some assembly to India and Vietnam in response to global trade tensions. The claim minimizes the influence of protectionist measures on production strategy.
Sources:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-05-15/apple-expands-india-iphone-output
https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-tariffs-china-2025-impact
Claim 5: Democrats uniformly oppose entitlement reform while Trump supports it
Timestamp: 01:03:53
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro claims Democrats are dishonest about cutting entitlements, implying Trump is more transparent or responsible.
Our Take:
Both parties have avoided serious entitlement reform due to its political risks. Trump has explicitly opposed cuts to Social Security and Medicare. The assertion that he contrasts favorably on this issue lacks full context.
Sources:
https://www.npr.org/2023/06/20/1183665931/trump-social-security-reform
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/02/12/medicare-social-security-budget-cuts/
Unverifiable claims
Claim 1: Trump is more pragmatic than ideological in foreign policy
Timestamp: 00:17:49
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro argues that President Trump lacks fixed ideologies in foreign affairs, instead reacting pragmatically to events.
Our Take:
This assertion is subjective and cannot be conclusively verified through public documentation. While Trump has demonstrated shifts in policy, determining whether those reflect pragmatism or shifting ideology is speculative.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/29/us/politics/trump-foreign-policy.html
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/trumps-foreign-policy-the-rhetoric-vs-the-reality/
Claim 2: Apple won’t reshore production regardless of tariffs
Timestamp: 00:39:07
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro asserts that Apple will not move production to the U.S. even under a 25% tariff due to cost differentials.
Our Take:
Although Apple has historically kept most production abroad, predicting that it “will not” reshore under any tariff scenario is speculative. Business decisions depend on future variables not in evidence.
Sources:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-reshoring-production-us-tariffs-2025
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/15/apple-manufacturing-in-us-trump-tariffs.html
Claim 3: Democrats’ electoral decline stems from cultural elitism
Timestamp: 01:08:48
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro attributes Democratic losses to their adoption of elitist moral codes that alienate “normies.”
Our Take:
While cultural perception influences elections, isolating it as the definitive cause for Democratic underperformance is interpretive. Voter behavior is multifactorial and not fully explained by a single social theory.
Sources:
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/10/03/trends-in-party-identification/
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-populism-trump-2024/
Claim 4: Harvard refused to negotiate with Trump on federal funding
Timestamp: 01:04:35
Speaker: Ben Shapiro
Context:
Shapiro claims that Harvard refused to negotiate with the Trump administration regarding antisemitism allegations and federal funding.
Our Take:
There is no public record confirming that Harvard explicitly refused negotiations. While the university has disputed allegations and defended its policies, internal communications about potential talks are not publicly available.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/us/harvard-federal-funding-trump.html
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-threatens-harvard-funding-over-antisemitism-2025-04-15/
Conclusion
In this episode of The Ben Shapiro Show, a total of 63 factual claims were assessed. Of these, 49 were classified as Verified factual (approximately 78%), five as False, five as Misleading, and four as Unverifiable. The high proportion of accurate statements is notable, though the number of misleading and false claims—particularly on matters of military policy and economic data—warrants concern. These inaccuracies often stemmed from overgeneralizations, lack of context, or reliance on speculative interpretations.
Shapiro’s tone throughout the episode was forceful and ideologically assertive, maintaining a confrontational posture against perceived inconsistencies in both foreign and domestic policy under the Trump administration. While advocating for a “peace through strength” framework, the host oscillated between praise for Trump-era decisiveness and criticism of current strategic ambiguities. His use of rhetorical devices—including sarcasm, historical analogies, and hypotheticals—was consistent with his established broadcasting style. While such techniques are engaging for partisan audiences, they occasionally distorted complex policy realities.
Overall, while the episode reflects a generally accurate command of recent developments, it blends substantiated analysis with ideological interpretation, requiring listeners to critically evaluate the evidence behind each claim.
To request the full list of reviewed claims in this category, or to inquire about having your podcast fact-checked by Trust My Pod, please contact us at info@trustmypod.org.
CREDIBILITY SCORE: 78/100 TRUSTWORTHY