On Monday’s episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” the Daily Wire editor-in-chief talks about The Washington Post’s reaction to President Trump killing ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Bahgdadi, and the reaction of former Obama officials. Video and partial transcript below:

So the headline in The Washington Post is “Trump says Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi blew himself up as U.S. troops closed in.” [There is another Washington Post article that] says, “Despite Baghdadi raid, some analysts questioned U.S. ability to prevent ISIS resurgence.”

So you mean you’re going to act like [there are] bigger questions than just Baghdadi is dead, so that doesn’t end it? Okay, literally, the Obama campaign was run on the premise that al-Qaida was basically defeated and that ISIS was the JV team. In 2012, it was run on this premise, and the media didn’t have any serious questions about any of that.

There are some of us who were pointing out that killing bin Laden didn’t actually end the terror threat from al-Qaida. But it was a big win, obviously. The fact is, The Washington Post had none of those questions. I think it’s an okay question, honestly — you killed the leader of ISIS; does that end [it], and that’s a fine question. But The Washington Post, I do not remember any of these places running headlines the day after the bin Laden kill, [saying] “Well, that didn’t defeat al-Qaida did it?”

[The Washington Post also has another headline that says] “In creating spectacle around Baghdadi’s death, Trump departs from Obama’s more measured tone on bin Laden.” That’s the headline. Trump departs — Obama was so measured about bin Laden. He was so even-keel about bin Laden in creating spectacle around it, because we know Obama never created spectacle about bin Laden’s death. No spectacle at all. I mean, aside from every campaign rally for the next year and a half. No spectacle, none.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1550&v=TOHthrlFc_U

What I most remember about the bin Laden speech, Obama’s announcement of the bin Laden speech, what I really do remember is how self-effacing Barack Obama was. I remember him just like putting it all on the American military. Oh, wait, that’s not what I remember at all. What I remember him doing is basically getting up there and suggesting over, and over, and over that he deserves full credit for the bin Laden kill, because it was really, really kind of about him.

OBAMA: Then last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside Pakistan. Finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice. Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

You hear Obama in that clip. A lot of “me” there; you might say that he was creating a spectacle around bin Laden’s death. You might say that. Listen, that’s his prerogative, he was the president when bin Laden was killed. But let’s be straight about this: Barack Obama was not shy, exactly, about the killing of Osama bin Laden. He wasn’t shy and retiring.

I’m old enough to remember also that for all the talk about Barack Obama’s gutsy call, there were multiple reports that Barack Obama canceled the operation to kill bin Laden on three separate occasions before finally approving the May 2, 2011, Navy SEAL mission. [Richard Miniter writes in a book] that Obama canceled the mission in January 2011, again in February, a third time in March. Then, there are reports that he had been asked in like a Thursday to approve the raid, and then he waited for days on end to approve the raid. So, you know, all the talk about that gutsy call — but the media didn’t have any of those questions. It was a gutsy call; he got the credit.

By the way, he did deserve the credit. He finally made the right call, so he gets the credit. But I’m just going to point out that the media had none of these questions about any of this stuff. The skeptical treatment of the Baghdadi death by the people on the Left of him are like, yeah, we’re all celebrating, but — it contrasts very strongly with [the media cheering] bin Laden’s dead! Look, it justifies his entire foreign policy ever written! Did anybody worry?

Like James Clapper, who was director of National Intelligence [under Obama], James Clapper, he was worrying over the weekend that Baghdadi’s death could actually galvanize ISIS. I’m wondering, when he was serving in the Obama administration, did he have those same worries when bin Laden was killed?

CLAPPER: A huge symbolic meaning for taking out about Baghdadi, who has been a target for some time. I think what’s going to be interesting is, to the extent to which this negatively affects ISIS, or does it galvanize ISIS, the remnants of ISIS, which still survives as an ideology and has franchises in other places besides Syria.

So probably, we shouldn’t have killed him, you know, [it] might galvanize ISIS other places. Probably should let him just keep living over there and everything would’ve been okay. Ambassador Dana Smith, who was the Obama ambassador to Qatar, she had a long thread talking about how terrible it was that Trump used this sort of language to describe the death of Baghdadi. She said:

SMITH: This gruesome, vivid and probably exaggerated description of dogs chasing down Baghdadi will endanger our personnel in the region. When bin Laden was killed, we were careful to be clear that he had been given a proper Muslim burial. Not because we gave a damn about him, but because it was important for our relationships in the region and safety. Also, it’s how America rolls. With honor. We don’t delight in death like the terrorists do. This description is horrifying. Should go without saying but to be perfectly clear, I’m remarking on the presser. Not on the actual operation. The killing of Baghdadi was unquestionably good and necessary.

Okay, but what evidence do we have that terrorists stop hating us if we treat their dead with innate levels of tremendous respect? By the way, Trump isn’t talking about Marines going and pissing on his remains or something. He’s talking about what this guy did; it isn’t about how Americans treated his remains; it wasn’t about us defacing his remains; he’s talking about this guy’s end.

He’s [saying] this person was a coward, and you shouldn’t follow cowards. If you read the writings of Osama bin Laden, so much of his writing is about how the United States is a weak horse. He kept using that phrase, a “weak horse.” The United States was a “paper tiger.” The United States didn’t have strong leadership like he was, they weren’t brave, although one of the key tactics that is used by terrorists is calling their opponents cowards, and portraying themselves as puffed up and brave. So pointing out to would-be followers that, No, actually, your leader is a guy who blows himself up in a tunnel with little kids because he’s pathetic, that’s not a bad thing.

Listen to full episodes of “The Ben Shapiro Show” on iTunes.

Watch “The Ben Shapiro Show” on-demand!