All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 31, 2019 - The Matt Walsh Show
36:04
Ep. 361 - Courageous Media Exposes Dastardly Daily Wire Hoax

The Daily Wire created a photoshopped image of Trump giving the Medal of Honor to a dog. Our courageous news media was on the case, thank God. We'll pay tribute to their heroism today. Also, the most disturbing Drag Queen Story Hour Yet. And a report exposes how Planned Parenthood disseminates talking points to Democratic politicians. Date: 10-31-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Okay, I really need someone to help me out with this.
Hopefully the media can look into it.
I was doing some research this morning.
Actually, I was researching marine biology, which is how I spend my free time, and I came across a really fascinating photograph.
Take a look at this.
As you can see, in this footage, there's a bear holding machine gun riding a great white shark.
Now, I've heard of this phenomenon before.
I'm pretty sure they mentioned it in a David Attenborough documentary that I watched.
A while ago.
But there's part of me, as I'm looking at that photo, there's part of me that thinks, I gotta be honest, there's a part of me wondering, has this been doctored in some way?
Has it been altered?
Is there some funny business going on here?
I don't know.
Because on one hand, it makes perfect sense.
You would expect bears and sharks to team up.
Why haven't they done it by now?
On the other hand, we live in the age of fake news, folks, and we need to face that fact.
There are people out there.
There are propagandists who want to confuse us and sow discord.
So you can never be too sure.
And I'm hoping the Washington Post or CNN or the New York Times can look into this, do some fact-checking, just see, you know, run it up the flagpole, see what happens.
Maybe call the White House, see what they have to say.
Because we need to get to the bottom of this, guys.
If there are shark-riding bears patrolling our oceans, we need to know.
And the other question we really, this is the question we need to ask is, whose side are they on?
Of course, I asked for the media's help here because they've really been on top of the forgeries and photoshops this week.
They've been doing a lot of fact-checking.
They spent all of yesterday, as I'm sure you've heard, trying to figure out if this photo of Trump giving the Medal of Honor to a dog was photoshopped.
Here's that photo.
Turns out, pretty surprising here, turns out it was.
It was photoshopped.
In fact, it was photoshopped by, I'm ashamed to say, it was photoshopped by The Daily Wire.
My own company.
My own company is trying to fool the world into thinking that the White House gives Medals of Honor to dogs.
Thank God the media exposed it.
Thank God the media exposed us!
And we're going to talk more about this issue today.
Also, on top of that issue, we're going to be talking about some other things as well.
The most disturbing drag queen story hour yet.
And this one really sets the bar for, at a whole new level.
And we're going to talk about that.
Several other things as well.
But first, a word from stamps.com.
You know, when I talk about stamps.com, I always wonder, who in the world still goes to the post office?
And why?
Why would you do that?
Stamps.com brings the post office right to you.
You don't need to go there, they'll bring it to you.
No need to interrupt your work day or fight traffic to get to the post office, especially now during the holidays.
That's when you really want to avoid it, because that's when you're going to get all the foot traffic and everything.
It's going to be crowded, busy.
So, stay away from that.
That's why you need Stamps.com.
Anything you can do with the Post Office, you can do at Stamps.com.
Stamps.com eliminates trips to the Post Office and saves you money and also gives you discounts that you can't even get at the Post Office.
Stamps.com brings all the services of the U.S.
Post Office right to your computer, whether you're a small business sending invoices or an online seller shipping out products, even if you're a warehouse.
Sending thousands of packages a day, whether it's a big or small operation that you're running, stamps.com can handle it all with ease.
Simply use your computer to print official U.S.
postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.
Once your mail is ready, just drop it in your mailbox, give it to your mail carrier, and that's it.
Don't spend a minute of your holiday season at the post office this year.
Sign up for Stamps.com instead.
There's no risk.
With my promo code Walsh, you get a special offer that includes a four-week trial plus free postage and a digital scale.
No long-term commitment or contracts.
You get all that stuff if you just go to Stamps.com.
Click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and type in Walsh.
That's Stamps.com.
Enter Walsh.
Stamps.com.
Never go to the post office again.
Okay, hey, by the way, the picture of the bear riding the shark is actually from a shower curtain that I found on Amazon.
So, pretty much the greatest shower curtain of all time, if you're interested in...
Picking one of those up, go check that out.
Now this thing with the dog photo, I think it all started with Steve Herman of some news outlet or another earnestly fact-checking the obvious joke image of Trump giving a Medal of Honor to a dog.
An image that the brilliant Daily Wire social media team did in fact come up with.
After that, and then Trump tweeted it out, and I think Steve Herman was among the first This is what he said.
I've requested details from the White House on this photo.
There was no such canine event on today's POTUS schedule, but there is a Medal of Honor ceremony set here for later today for an active-duty Green Beret.
There was no such canine event, Steve Herman says.
And then he goes on.
He's got a long thread dealing with this important issue.
It's photoshopped, acknowledges a White House official.
The dog is not here at the White House.
Yet.
Then he goes on some more, and he starts retweeting.
Someone else says, why the terrible photoshop on top of everything else?
Someone else says, this is incredible.
It is despicable.
Additional words fail me.
Wait, it's incredible.
It's despicable.
So this is, Steve Herman thinks it's despicable.
He retweeted someone who said that it's, that this Photoshop is incredible and despicable.
What's despicable about it?
I don't even, I don't even understand the criticism.
And then he retweets someone else, someone else saying, well, just the president of the United States disseminating a doctored image created by a right-wing propaganda site.
Hey, you might hurt my feelings saying stuff like that about us.
So that's Steve Herman, and then a bunch of other news media outlets started fact-checking.
My favorite headline was from Twitter's trending section, where they do sort of their own headlines.
And it said, their headline was, this photo of Trump awarding hero military dog is altered, New York Times reports.
Then it continues, on Wednesday, President Trump shared a photo of the canine hero injured in the operation that led to the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
A New York Times report pointed out the image appeared to be an altered version of a 2017 Associated Press photograph.
Well, thank God for that report.
It's been altered, folks, in case you were wondering.
Because I had no idea.
And then the actual New York Times report is great.
The headline is, Trump Tweets Faked Photo of Hero Dog Getting a Medal.
And the best part is that there are two authors on this article from the New York Times.
Two.
They put two reporters on this story.
Okay, you check to see if any dogs have ever been awarded the Medal of Honor, and I'll contact the White House.
We're gonna get to the bottom of this if it's the last thing we do.
And then a bunch of other outlets got into the act and they started actually calling up the Medal of Honor recipient whose photo was used to make the funny joke image of the dog.
And they wanted to know if he was offended.
Or I should say, they wanted him to be offended and suggested to him that he should be.
But he, being a grown man and a Medal of Honor recipient, was not offended at all and apparently laughed and said he thought it was funny.
And also said that, uh, that, hey, you know, dogs, dogs are also part of the team.
And so I got no problem with them being recognized.
So he was cool about it, but the media insists that this is something we should be upset about.
They can't even explain why we should be upset.
Just that we should be.
Because on this one, I have to tell you, I really don't understand what the criticism even is.
Very often the media will make criticisms of Donald Trump that I think are frivolous or stupid or I disagree with, but I at least understand conceptually what they're saying.
In this case, even if I wanted to be offended by this jokey, funny Photoshop of a dog, I can't figure out why I would be.
I couldn't be offended even if I wanted to be.
And this, after three years, the media is still doing this.
They're still embarrassing themselves by picking apart every little thing Trump does.
It's on top of everything else.
If you're left-wing media and you hate Donald Trump and you want him gone, this is a really bad strategy.
Of course it's bad news reporting, but we're way past that.
They don't care about actually reporting the news.
They don't care about that.
So, even from their perspective, as left-wing propagandists, this is just a terrible strategy.
Rather than focusing on the big things, Uh, that Trump does wrong.
We're going to, we're going to pick apart every single little thing.
We're going to turn into headline news.
And then of course, if ever they do have a legitimate criticism or a real thing, a real, a real controversy, no one pays attention to it because, well, just the day before they were going on about the dog.
All right, but I'm not going to go on about it for much longer than that.
So we'll move on.
This is interesting.
Judicial Watch has a report which In this report, it shows how Planned Parenthood influences Democratic politicians.
And we all know that Planned Parenthood does.
But it turns out, unsurprisingly, that they influence Democratic politicians by just telling them exactly what to say verbatim.
So let me go to the Judicial Watch report.
which you can find at judicialwatch.org, says, Judicial Watch today released 115 pages of documents
from the office of Governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam, that show he received abortion talking points
directly from Planned Parenthood.
These documents were obtained as a result of two separate Virginia Freedom of Information Act
requests.
The February 1st, 2019 request was seeking all records of communications of Northam or members of his staff
related to abortion, women's reproductive health, and or Virginia House Bill 2491.
Judicial Watch likewise requested communication records between Northam and his staff with Virginia State Representative Kathy Tran or her staff.
So this was just summarizing rather than reading the entire thing.
This was after the statements that Northam made, the infamous statements, in that radio interview, where he was asked about what a state lawmaker, a state representative, Kathy Tran, had said about how abortion should be legal up until birth.
And Northam was asked about that, and infamously, he went a step further and strongly indicated that he thinks that, oh yeah, abortion should be legal up until birth, and maybe even afterwards, because after the baby is born, a decision will be made.
Or no, his actual words were, just to remind us all what he said, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen.
The infant would be delivered, The infant would be kept comfortable.
The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desires.
And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.
Strongly indicating that the discussion is about what are we going to do with this kid?
Kill him or keep him?
So after that, and that blew up in his face, PR nightmare.
And so he gets in contact with the folks over at Planned Parenthood, asking them what he should say in the future about abortion.
And Alexis Rogers responded in an email from her PPAV, it's a PlannedParenthood.org email account, titled, Top Line Messages for Northam.
And these are the talking points that she gave to Northam to say.
There is no such thing as an abortion up until birth, which is totally false, of course.
Making a decision about whether to continue a pregnancy is a complex and personal decision.
Politicians have no place in this process.
As a physician, I know how important it is to trust my patients and for my patients to trust me.
These are complicated medical decisions that families deserve to make in private without political interference.
And then, in a section of Talking Points titled, Tricky Q&A, Rogers advises, if possible, answer on background, not for attribution, if a woman is in labor, she couldn't and wouldn't have an abortion, and that politicians and pro-life groups were characterizing safe legal abortion in a completely inaccurate and misleading way.
Okay, so, These are the exact points that Northam is being given.
And this is what Planned Parenthood does with Democrats.
They just tell them, this is what you're supposed to say.
I think it's really interesting there that this woman from Planned Parenthood is telling him what to say from his own perspective as a doctor.
So she is saying, she who is not a doctor, presumably, is telling him what to say from his perspective as a doctor.
And it just goes to show how completely empty these talking points are.
The reason why you go and try to get talking points from someone is because you don't want to engage on the issue.
And so these are all ways of just deflecting.
The very first talking point that he's given is to simply deny what he's just been talking about.
There is no such thing as an abortion up until birth.
Well, the only reason why this controversy came up for him is that one of his own state representatives was advocating abortion up until birth.
Explicitly!
And so Planned Parenthood's solution is just to say, oh yeah, just pretend you never said that.
Pretend that the thing that we are advocating doesn't exist.
That's how it works.
Planned Parenthood is, they are, they own the Democrat Party.
The Democrat Party is a prostitute.
Okay, now we go over to a report in the blaze.
These drag queen story hours seem to be getting progressively more disturbing.
And this may be the worst one yet.
Reading now from a report in The Blaze, a photograph shows a miniskirt-wearing Drag Queen Story Hour performer with an exposed crotch as children sit close by.
According to a writer who attended the event earlier this month at Ridgedale Library in Minnesota and then took the photo, Ann Taylor noted in her caffeinated thoughts piece that about 22 children ranging in age from infant to toddler, preschooler and elementary schooler were in attendance along with adults.
Taylor said performer Sasha Soda, who wore a pink miniskirt, spiked heels and a shirt with an exposed midriff, strode in suggestively past the children, sitting down in a chair before several preschool-aged girls "...with his legs spread wide, exposing his nylon-covered crotch in front of children sitting at eye level.
We noticed that he did this often while reading nervously before the children."
And then here's a picture of it.
I hate to show it to you, but we need to know what we're dealing with here.
And there's a picture of Sasha Soda flashing these children.
She also mentions... You could go to Caffeinated Thoughts or go to The Blaze and read more of this.
But she talks about, as you heard, 20-some children there.
Parents are there.
She mentioned that there were some dads there who left.
Now, she didn't say whether the dads left with their kids.
I hope they did.
But the first thing I think when I see this, see stuff like this, is why isn't any father?
Why haven't we seen a case yet?
Where a father steps up and confronts one of these people for what they're doing on the spot.
If you've got a guy sitting down in a miniskirt flashing children, that would be a good time as a father not just to leave meekly and sneak out the back, But to stand up and say, this is not acceptable, this isn't going to happen, you need to get up and get the hell out of here.
Why isn't that happening?
Where are the parents in this?
And even worse, of course, in many of these cases, you have parents who are Not only do they not leave, but they stay there and they watch approvingly and they smile and nod and clap along.
It is absolutely disgusting.
So for me, this goes back first and foremost to the parents.
Libraries could have these drag queen story hours where they invite cross-dressing men to come and flash children.
If they did that and nobody showed up, Then it wouldn't be a problem.
This is only a problem... The only reason why it's an issue is because parents are choosing to put their children in the car and drive to these events.
So for me, this goes back to the parents.
Yeah, the libraries... It's insane for libraries, especially tax-funded libraries, to be using tax funds to put on these perverse, disgusting events.
That is despicable.
And they shouldn't be doing it.
But it would be a moot point if all the parents in the area were real parents and just refused to bring their kids.
Because then you would just have a cross-dressing man sitting alone, sadly, in a room by himself, reading a story to himself.
That's what it should be.
By the way, Chad Felix Green over at The Federalist, he wrote a piece on this incident as well, and he reports that this drag queen is a, quote, provocative adult entertainer who usually performs at gay nightclubs.
So this is not someone who's just in the business of putting on women's clothes to go and read to children, as weird as that is already.
This is someone who, according to Chad Felix Green at The Federalist, this is someone who, what he normally does is he goes and he dresses and he dances for adult gay men at gay nightclubs.
This is an adult entertainer.
That this library has called up and said, hey, would you put on one of those outfits, one of those skimpy outfits and come and read to some kids for us?
And then I guess they posted it on the bulletin board in the library, and parents walk by and they see it and they say, oh, that sounds great!
Yes, a cross-dressing man reading to kids!
I gotta get my kids in for this!
It's mind-boggling.
It really is.
Okay, before we get to emails, I should say, happy Halloween.
You know, I'm a big fan of Halloween.
I get really excited for it.
In fact, here's a photo of me a couple nights ago at a Trunk or Treat event with the kids at our church.
As you can see, I'm very, very excited and happy and thrilled to be there.
You can just see the enthusiasm on my face.
And you can also see my quintessential dad outfit.
I didn't even realize until now, as I look at that photo, that I am officially a middle-aged man.
The only thing I'm missing with that outfit is, I guess, the all-white New Balance sneakers, and then, well, sort of knock-off New Balance sneakers that I bought at Target, and then maybe a fanny pack.
Those are the only two things missing, and then I'm full-on dad.
But I'll tell you what my lack of excitement was.
It's dark.
There are a million kids running around.
You know what a trunk-or-treat thing is?
It's like you go to a parking lot and people show up and they park their cars and then they stand there with candy and you just walk to each car in the parking lot and get candy.
So I've got my three kids.
I'm trying to keep track of them.
They're running in 19 different directions at once because, you know, that's something kids can do.
Kids are like, who's the blue guy in Watchmen who can Multiply himself and go with it.
That's kind of what kids can do.
They can multiply themselves and go in multiple directions at once.
So I'm trying to keep track of that.
It's dark.
There are all these other kids there.
There are a bunch of cards.
Probably literally 6,000 cards with candy.
And none of the kids even say trick or treat anymore.
That's not a thing anymore.
You just walk up demanding the candy with your bucket out.
They get the candy.
Very businesslike.
And then they go to the next one.
And they go to the other.
And it's just total mayhem.
The thing that annoyed me the most, though, Is that I knew we're going to have to do this all over again.
We're going to do it tonight.
Because what I've discovered as a parent is that these days you can't just have one holiday celebration.
Every holiday is celebrated five or six times.
You've got trunk or treat at the church, you've got the Halloween party at school, you've got a Halloween thing somewhere else, and then you've got Halloween on Halloween, and then maybe you've got a second Halloween after Halloween, and then Christmas comes, and there's Christmas on Christmas, and then Christmas with the grandparents, and Christmas with the other grandparents, and Christmas with the other family who didn't show up for the other seven Christmases, and Christmas parties, and by the end of it, my kids have acquired this truckload of new toys, 95% of which they'll be sick of by next Tuesday.
Back in my day, dammit, we had one holiday, okay?
The whole year, that's it.
My parents said to me, what holiday do you want to celebrate this year?
You want to do Christmas?
You want to do your birthday?
You want to do Halloween?
Because you only get one.
And if we chose Halloween, we had to walk 10 miles in between each house, without shoes on, in flooded streets, And we didn't get candy.
We gave them candy.
We passed out the candy.
And we liked it, dammit.
Kids these days have no idea what it was like in the 90s.
Which is why I get away with making up crap about it.
We'll go to emails.
I don't know if it's just something with my family or if this is just how it is now.
Where you celebrate each holiday 60 times.
Because it really wasn't what I did as a kid.
But it seems to me that's the trend now.
Or maybe it's just me, I don't know.
Or really, it's not me, it's my wife who insists that, you know, each holiday must be celebrated.
Twelve or thirteen different times.
Okay, from Simon, it says, Dear Great Bearded One, I have proudly worn a beard for a long time, but last night shaved it off into mutton chops to look more like Jake Blue's John Belushi for my Halloween costume.
I felt no one would understand the costume if I had the beard.
Now, the morning after, I see my naked face and I am ashamed, wondering if I have sinned against God and against my future leader.
I would appreciate some guidance on this matter.
Were my actions appropriate?
Simon, First of all, I think you know the answer to the question.
The guilt that you're feeling should tell you everything you need to know.
Let me ask you something.
If you wanted to dress up as an injured Civil War soldier, would you cut your arm off to sell the costume?
If you wanted to be the headless horseman, would you cut your head off?
If you were going as Ray Charles, would you blind yourself?
And hey, you were going as John Belushi.
Did you gain 100 pounds?
You know, were you method acting, as far as that goes?
If the answer is no to all of these questions, then you tell me why it was necessary to shave your beard.
So, no, your actions were not appropriate.
They were despicable and a betrayal of the bearded community.
You, sir, are a traitor and a scoundrel.
And may you feel the wrath of God in this life and the next.
But thanks for the email.
From Beth says, Hi Matt, what's your take on Halloween?
Some of my friends feel strongly that it's a pagan holiday and Christians shouldn't celebrate it.
Yes, now we do the annual is Halloween a pagan thing.
Every year we have to talk about this.
So I appreciate, Beth, because this has to be our annual discussion about that.
No, I don't think that Halloween is pagan.
I think the anti-Halloween stuff among Christians is frankly silly.
Of course, they're free to make their own decisions in their own families about whether they want to celebrate Halloween or not.
But as a matter of history, no, Halloween is not pagan.
Actually, at its root, it's a very Christian holiday.
Halloween, All Hallows' Eve, All Saints' Eve, tomorrow is All Saints' Day.
That's the roots of the holiday.
Now, can you trace certain aspects Of the modern traditions associated with Halloween back to, quote, pagan cultures a long time ago?
I mean, sure, probably.
But you can do that with every holiday and probably every tradition you can think of.
Probably you could trace some of the associated customs back to, quote, pagan civilizations.
Because you go back far enough into the past, and almost everyone was a pagan.
Certainly all of the major civilizations were pagan.
You know, the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, so on and so forth.
So, that's part of our human heritage, and therefore certain aspects of that past, some parts of our traditions, have carried over.
And so what?
They don't have any pagan meaning anymore.
Birthdays!
Birthdays are pagan.
I don't know if people knew this.
I think the Jehovah's Witnesses know this.
I think this is why they don't celebrate birthdays.
I'm pretty sure about that.
Well, I know they don't celebrate birthdays.
I'm not really sure why, but maybe that's the reason.
They say, well, it's pagan.
And that's actually true, that pagan cultures were the first to celebrate birthdays.
I think it really, you trace it back to the Egyptians.
Don't quote me on this, I'm pretty sure.
Google it to check, to check.
But I'm pretty sure that birthdays, you trace back to Egyptians, and many of the things, like birthday candles and so on, originally those were expressly religious things, religious symbolism.
It was a pagan religious celebration.
Now, Judaism in ancient times, they did mark certain special birthdays, but there was no tradition of celebrating every single birthday in Judaism, which is, you know, we trace our own religious heritage back to that.
And so if you want to go back far enough, you say, well, birthdays were not really a Jewish thing.
They're not a Christian thing.
They were a pagan thing.
But, I ask you, when we celebrate birthdays, are we therefore worshipping pagan gods?
Obviously not.
Just because it's something that originates with paganism doesn't mean that it still has pagan intent or pagan content.
Pagans also wore pants.
Does that mean we shouldn't wear pants?
Are we idol-worshipping when we wear pants?
It gets absurd after a while.
But all of this is irrelevant anyway because Halloween is, in practice, in reality, actually a very modern holiday.
All of this history, which, as I said, really begins in Christianity with certain of its associated traditions, perhaps going back to paganism, but all that is academic because Halloween, as it has become today, is a modern commercial invention.
Halloween, the type that we celebrate today, has very little resemblance to anything that anyone did back in ancient times, whether monotheistic or polytheistic.
So really, it's a modern thing that we do.
It's just a silly tradition.
It's not a big deal.
Now, if you're telling me you don't do Halloween just because it's a hassle and you don't feel like dealing with it, then I'm with you, because that I totally understand.
But if you're telling me that you're worried that all the people who are celebrating Halloween are sort of accidentally worshipping pagan gods or something, then I have to say that I find that to be a little bit ridiculous.
This is from Mitchell, says, after reflecting on LGBTQ History Month, a particular idea kept pestering me, the search for a non-binary pronoun.
The currently prevailing notion is they-them, but this solution fails grammatically.
We need a singular pronoun.
And this brings me to what I call the it argument.
The English language already has a genderless pronoun, it.
But certainly referring to another person as an it would be deemed rude and downright dehumanizing, which is correct, but why?
We, for the most part, use the word it to describe subjects or objects that are not men or women, i.e.
inanimate or animals.
For example, if you were to pay a compliment to a parent of a baby and didn't know the gender, you wouldn't call the baby an it.
You would just call the baby a baby.
However, you wouldn't be so careful with regards to a person's car or pet goldfish or even dog.
If the starting position of a non-binary person is, I am not a man and I am also not a woman, then they have coincidentally put themselves in the same group as inanimate objects and animals, thus dehumanizing themselves.
I submit that by rejecting it as a sufficient pronoun on the grounds that it is dehumanizing, they are ceding the idea that being a man or woman is an integral part of the human condition.
I'm a long-time viewer, first-time emailer, and I would love to hear your thoughts on this argument.
Does it hold water or could it be improved?
I would say it does hold water.
I don't think I can improve on it.
I think you're exactly right.
And I think, I'm not even going to add to it, I think you have landed on something, on an important insight here.
That when you get rid of the he or she, I think the people who do that realize that it's kind of dehumanizing.
So they're trying to come up with a pronoun that isn't he or she, but that also isn't dehumanizing, and they have a lot of difficulty doing it, which is one of the reasons we talked a few weeks ago about all the made-up pronouns now.
Because they're just, yeah, they're trying to avoid the most obvious thing would be it.
But nobody wants to be an it for good reason.
And so, yeah, maybe that should make you think that, oh, okay, well...
So maybe it is integral to the human person to be a he or she.
And I should just stick with that because I am a human being.
I'm not an it.
This is from Antonio says, hi, Matt.
I would like, I hope you will be Supreme dictator one day.
I would like to ask you 10 yes, no questions.
I think that if the questions are correct, you'll correctly formulated.
This interviewing method is very interesting.
Let's see if you can give me 10 yes, no.
One should abortion be illegal?
Yes.
That was an easy one.
Two, should sex change operations be illegal?
Yes.
Three, were the many accusers of Kavanaugh lying?
Yes.
Four, should Jussie Smollett go to jail?
Yes.
Five, is Islam a religion of peace?
No.
Six, will you send your children to university?
That one I can't do yes or no, because first of all, it's not going to be totally up to me.
So that one I'm gonna have to I'm gonna have to do an a on that one not applicable at the moment I'm not sure Seven would you like to know the day of your death?
No.
Eight, would you take a pill that would guarantee eternal life?
No.
Are you talking about eternal mortal life?
Well, mortal, I guess it's not because it's eternal, but eternal life in this world where I'm just living in this physical body forever?
There are a lot of problems there.
I mean, for instance, eventually the Earth itself will be destroyed.
I mean, eventually our entire solar system, eventually our whole galaxy will be destroyed.
And then if I'm still around, I'll just be floating around in space for eternity?
That sounds horrifying.
9.
Will Trump be re-elected?
I'll say yes if the left and the media, the Democrats, continue on their current trajectory and continue with their current strategy.
Then I would say yes, he will be.
10.
Is feminism a cancer of Western society?
Yes.
Well, it was a fun exercise.
I don't know.
I wish you challenged me a little bit more with the yes or no questions.
Most of those were pretty easy.
So what I would say, Antonio, is maybe try again.
I mean, really challenge me.
Give me something hard here.
But thanks everybody for watching and hope you have a nice Halloween.
A fun Halloween, if that's even possible.
And I'll talk to you tomorrow.
Godspeed.
If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe, and if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
Also, be sure to check out the other Gelliwire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knoll Show, and The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Robert Sterling, associate producer Alexia Garcia del Rio, executive producer Jeremy Boring, senior producer Jonathan Hay, our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Donovan Fowler, audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
It is Halloween, and that means overexcited children pretending to be what they're not will be coming around your house asking you to give them your stuff.
So it's kind of like the Democrat primaries.
Scary.
We'll talk about it on The Andrew Klavan Show.
▲
Export Selection