A college professor is now being told that he must use female pronouns to refer to a male student or be fired. The court says that this requirement does not infringe on free speech. Of course it does. We'll discuss. Also, a video of a bullied child has gone viral. But I have a question: what kind of parent takes a video of their child's emotional trauma and posts it online?
Check out The Cold War: What We Saw, a new podcast written and presented by Bill Whittle at https://www.dailywire.com/coldwar. In Part 1 we peel back the layers of mystery cloaking the Terror state run by the Kremlin, and watch as America takes its first small steps onto the stage of world leadership.
If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/Walsh
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
President Trump has given us the controversy for the day, like a teacher handing out the homework assignment.
The controversy is, should the movie Parasite have won Best Picture, and is Gone with the Wind a better movie?
So Trump at a campaign rally last night decided to go on an extended riff on this subject, which is great because a lot of people don't realize this, but Actually, constitutionally, the President is considered the nation's chief film critic.
That's one of the enumerated roles of the President of the United States.
So, it says so right in the document.
So, you know, that's good.
And it happens that he did get this one right, I have to say.
He said that Parasite should not have won Best Picture.
Now, his problem apparently is that Parasite is South Korean.
It's a foreign film.
That to me is not the issue.
The issue is that it just is not a very good movie.
I watched it myself this past weekend, in fact.
Now, in fairness...
I was in a delirious, half-dead state with the flu, so maybe that affected my judgment of the movie.
I don't know.
But it really seemed to me to be a sort of okay movie.
That is also a metaphor about class struggle, but the filmmaker beats you over the head with the metaphor that there's just no subtlety.
It has all the subtlety of one of the speeches that the dad in Full House gives at the end of each episode to the daughter.
Sort of, okay, here's the message of today's episode, boys and girls.
Except that in this case, in the film, there's a whole lot more stabbing than there typically is in a Full House episode.
So anyway, Trump is right about Parasite, and I'm glad that we could have that conversation, because it is indeed, without question, one of the most pressing issues that our country faces.
As for the less pressing issues, I want to begin today with a case at Shawnee State University in Ohio.
A professor is being told by a judge that he must use the preferred pronouns of a transgender student or he can be fired if he doesn't.
The professor claims that this requirement is discriminatory against him.
It violates his free speech.
It violates his religious liberty.
But the court said, no, you can be forced to pretend that a male student is female.
The court said it is reasonable for you to be made to participate in the delusion of a gender-confused student.
So there's a lot to discuss here with this case, so we're going to get into it.
But first, before we do, a quick word from Fairway.
You know, Fairway is a family-owned grocery chain and a top 10 employer in Iowa.
They've been in business since 1938, so they've been doing this for a long time.
They have over 11,000 employees.
They service five states with brick-and-mortar locations.
And they did all that before launching Fairway Meat Market to service the rest of the US.
In December, 2018, Fairway announced a new plan to help eligible full-time employees
pay off their student loan debt.
What I love about this before we even get to the product, which is so amazing, is that Fairway is just a great
company.
They're a great American company, and they're solving problems like student loan debt,
but they're doing it in, I think, the American way, which is they're choosing to help their employees.
They're doing it independently.
You don't need the government for that.
The Fairway Meat Department has always been considered the backbone of their operation.
What customers can expect from fairwaymeatmarket.com, it's still hand-cut by Fairway employees to ensure the best quality, and it's the same quality they promise at the counter, now delivered right to your home.
Okay, that's all the great stuff about the company and everything.
All that's wonderful.
But to me, the real point is, the meat is fantastic.
It's just a great product.
Okay?
Now, the guys over at Fairway were nice enough to ship us some of the meat, which is a great thing to come home to at the end of the day when you've got
a big box of meat.
And I tried, I mean, I tried the sirloin, the ribeye, a couple of the cuts of pork.
And it's just it's delicious.
It tastes like restaurant-quality stuff that you can make at your own home.
You don't need to be a culinary genius like myself to do it.
You can do it even as just a regular chef.
This week, my listeners can get the Heartland Package valued at $230 for just $99.99.
Okay, so that's over half off that you're getting, plus free shipping when entering Walsh at checkout.
The Heartland package includes eight 8-ounce all-natural boneless pork chops, six 8-ounce USDA choice ribeye steaks, one mouth-watering side dish that's loaded with potato bake, gourmet cheesy corn, or brisket baked beans.
You get all of that for more than half off.
That's more than 50% off the best meats in America, plus free shipping.
That's fairwaymeatmarket.com, promo code WALSH, and look for the Heartland package.
Okay, so Shawnee State University philosophy professor, Dr. Nicholas Merriweather, has gotten himself into trouble at his work.
Here's the background.
Dr. Merriweather last year was responding to a male student's question during class, and in responding, Dr. Merriweather said, yes sir.
He apparently refers to all of his students as sir or ma'am and calls them Mr. or Ms.
and then their last name when referring to them.
If you can imagine it, this guy apparently believes in actually being polite and courteous and having etiquette.
Okay, he's one of those weirdos.
Anyway, so he's been doing this, referring to people this way, presumably his whole life, just about, but this time it was a problem.
Turns out the sir that he was addressing prefers to be a ma'am.
Even though he is, in fact, a sir.
He was a biological male who identifies as female.
So, the trans student approached the professor after class and demanded to be referred to by female pronouns.
Dr. Merriweather said he couldn't do that.
Now, according to the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is the organization that's been representing Dr. Merriweather, the student then, quote, became aggressive, circling around him, getting in his face in a threatening fashion, while telling him, then I guess this means I can call you a C-word.
See you next Tuesday.
Except he said the word.
Before walking away, the student promised to get Dr. Merriweather fired if he did not agree to the student's demands.
Sounds like a lovely, lovely young man.
Reading more from ADF, here's what happened next.
They say, quote, the student filed a complaint with the university, which launched a formal investigation.
As a Christian, Dr. Merriweather believes that God has created human beings in his image as a male or female, and that God does not make mistakes.
To call a man a woman or vice versa would be to say something that is just not true and to endorse an ideology that conflicts with his religious beliefs.
So Dr. Merriweather offered a compromise.
He would refer to the student by a first or last name only.
Perfectly reasonable compromise that respects the freedoms of everybody involved.
But that was not enough for university officials.
Instead, they formally charged Dr. Merriweather, claiming that he created a hostile environment for the student.
Later, they placed a written warning in his personnel file that threatened, quote, further corrective actions if he did not refer to students using pronouns that reflect their self-asserted gender identity.
The university warned Dr. Merriweather that he'd be in violation of its non-discrimination policy if he agreed to refer to men As women, while putting a disclaimer in his syllabus saying he was being compelled to do so against his beliefs.
So apparently that was another compromise that Dr. Merriweather offered.
He said apparently, okay, I'll use the pronoun, the incorrect pronoun, but I'm going to put something in the syllabus saying that I'm being forced to do this.
That was no good either.
The message from the university is loud and clear.
You must endorse the university's favored ideology or be punished.
There is no room for dissent.
Okay, so that's the lead-up to the lawsuit.
And then eventually Merriweather filed a lawsuit.
And all that Dr. Merriweather wants to do, just to be clear, just to reiterate this, all he wants to do is his job.
He wants to do his job as a professor and not be forced to tell a lie.
That's it.
He wants to do his job without being forced to lie.
That's it.
That's his only request.
He's not asking this student to do anything.
He's not trying to take anything away from this student.
He's not trying to impose anything on this student.
He's even offered compromises.
There are ways that the professor could refrain from lying while also refraining from using any pronouns that this poor student might find traumatic.
But even those compromises aren't good enough for the student or for the university.
No, they need the lie.
The full lie.
So help you God.
Now that brings us to the court.
The latest news is that the court has dismissed Dr. Merriweather's case saying that he can indeed be fired for refusing to lie.
The court ruled, quote, Plaintiff's refusal to address a student in class in accordance with the student's gender identity does not implicate broader societal concerns and the free speech clause of the First Amendment under the circumstances of this case.
Reading out from a report in the Daily Wire says the court rejected the professor's religious objections, saying the reasonable person standard would not consider using preferred pronouns as unreasonable, and that the anti-discrimination policy is, quote, neutral, and therefore not specifically affecting any religious group or belief.
Most shockingly, the court upheld the university's position that it could not accommodate the professor due to his religious objection, as it would then be required to make similar accommodations for racist or sexist views as well.
Now, we should stipulate.
Actually, hang on, because there's another important point here that we need to mention.
But first, before we do, a quick word from Rock Auto.
RockAuto.com is a family business serving auto part customers online for 20 years.
Go to RockAuto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
And they've got everything that you could possibly need.
Engine control modules, brake parts, tail lamps, motor oil, new carpet.
It doesn't make any sense in the internet age to go in physically to the auto parts store
when you could just go online and get what you need.
It's so much quicker.
They've got the entire selection of everything you could possibly need.
I dare you to find something that they don't have on the website, because they got everything.
And it's the convenience.
You just do it at your house, you order it, they send it, gets there in a couple of days.
rockauto.com catalog is unique and remarkably easy to navigate.
Quickly see all the parts available for your vehicle and choose the brand, specifications, prices you prefer.
They've got amazing selection.
They've got reliably low prices.
All the parts you're ever going to need.
rockauto.com.
Go to rockauto.com right now.
See all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Walsh in there.
How did you hear about us, Fox?
So that they know that I sent you.
Okay.
Back to this case.
We should stipulate that although the professor offered the compromise of calling the student just by their first name or their last name, which presumably means that, you know, if this student chose a traditionally feminine name, you know, I don't know, I mean, let's say the student wanted to be called Sally or Jennifer or something, presumably the professor would call him that.
Because the thing with the name is you could choose any name you want.
So, if you say that something is your name, if that's what you want your name to be, then that's your name.
Okay, fine.
Not a problem.
Because you own your name, in that sense.
You could choose any name, and it's your name.
That's how names work.
They're very specific to you, personally.
Pronouns aren't like that.
Any more than a verb is like that, or an adverb, or a noun, or... These are parts of speech.
These are grammatical constructs.
You don't own them in that same sense.
You don't decide how they are applied to you.
That's not the way that language works.
It can't work that way.
Now... But there was another compromise.
That was offered by the university.
They said, okay, well, if you want, you could stop referring to all of your students according to their gender.
Stop calling everybody sir or ma'am.
And that will be acceptable.
But this compromise gives the whole game away, doesn't it?
Because it shows that this student, it shows what he's really up to and what the university is really up to.
What he really wants is control.
Okay?
He's an egomaniac, control freak, just like the people at the university, trying to exercise power and domination over somebody else.
That's it.
That's what this really is.
That's what's really happening every time somebody freaks out and demands that you adopt different pronouns.
Trying to control the language you use.
When speaking to them and even when they're not in the room.
Okay, that is an egomaniac on a power trip.
If the student has some issue with not being called ma'am, how would that issue suddenly be magically resolved if nobody else is being called ma'am?
I mean, what difference does it make to him what the professor calls other people?
How would that solve his... Whatever emotional trauma he supposedly experiences from not being called ma'am, or she, or her, how is that trauma alleviated by controlling what other people are called?
Is this about the trans student trying to stand for his alleged rights, or is it just about controlling language?
It would seem to be the latter in this case.
Which is why he'd be fine if he could force the professor to change the way he talks to everyone.
A few additional points here.
There are two ways, really, to threaten or impose upon free speech.
One is to prevent people from saying what they believe.
The other is to force them to say things they don't believe.
This case represents the latter.
Well, it represents both, actually.
But primarily the latter, and the latter is the far more extreme kind of free speech infringement.
It's one thing to punish people for what they say, or to tell them they're not allowed to say such and such.
It's another to punish them for what they don't say, and to tell them they have to say such and such.
And even worse in this case is that the school wants to force the professor not just to say something that violates his beliefs, but to say something that violates reality.
They want to force him to lie, to speak untruth, right?
To be dishonest.
I'm not a huge fan of the ADF and this professor making this a religious liberty issue.
I'm not saying it isn't a religious liberty issue.
It is, but in a sense it is.
Because it's true that the Christian faith forbids lying, and it's true the Christian faith says that God created us male and female.
But you don't need to be a Christian to see that men are men and not women, right?
The fact that individuals with male reproductive organs are men, that's not a Christian fact.
That's not a matter of faith or of doctrine.
That's reality.
That's scientific reality.
And I'm wary of, in a sense, reducing our position on this subject to one of religious doctrine.
Because I think the other side would like everyone to believe, That we're only resisting their gender ideology because of what the Bible says or what our churches say.
They want everyone to believe that our point is a religious one.
It's a religious point.
And so, when we refuse to do what they want, we are imposing our religion on them.
That's what the other side wants people to believe.
But it's not true.
Because it's got nothing to do with it.
Everything that I say on the gender issue All of it, I would say, even if I wasn't a Christian.
If I was Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, if I was atheist, Buddhist, pantheist, whatever, doesn't matter.
I'd be saying the exact same thing, because this is about reality, first and foremost.
It's about truth versus fiction.
So this is really not actually a religious liberty issue.
It's even more fundamental than that.
This is just about the reality that we live in, and what's happening here is it's not that the university is trying to get a professor to deny his faith.
I mean, that would be bad enough.
The university is trying to get the professor to deny reality.
And given that this is a university, supposedly a place of education, that's a pretty big deal.
Because there are always going to be people who claim that, well, it's no big deal for universities to get professors to stifle their religious views because it has no place in the classroom anyway.
People are always going to be saying that.
Okay, but should universities be telling professors to stifle their understanding of biological realities too?
By the way, in this same vein, Elizabeth Warren, the pander queen, sent out a tweet yesterday reacting to a proposed bill in Arizona.
The bill in Arizona would require that males play sports against other males and it would ban males from playing on female sport teams.
Elizabeth Warren reacted to it saying, This is just cynical, dishonest, stupid nonsense.
We need to protect trans kids and all LGBTQ plus kids and ensure they feel safe and welcome at school.
I urge the Arizona legislator to reject this cruel bill.
This is just cynical, dishonest, stupid nonsense.
Elizabeth Warren knows damn well this has nothing to do with the safety of trans kids
or anything like trans kids being quote, a threat.
That's not the point.
Everybody agrees that all kids should be welcome at school.
All kids should feel safe at school.
That's our point.
Our point is that when you put men on the, when you put boys on the girls teams, Not to mention the girls' locker rooms and bathrooms.
Now the girls are being made to feel unsafe and unwelcome.
And like they don't belong in their own areas and their own spaces.
That's our point.
You see, here's... And this is the way I think it should be framed.
When you've got a... We've got a small minority of males Who are demanding access to female sports, female locker rooms, female bathrooms.
And they say that they will be emotionally traumatized if they are not granted that access.
They say even that they feel unsafe if they're not given that access.
Okay.
On the other hand, you've got a much greater number of actual biological females who say they don't want men in these spaces, Because they feel emotionally vulnerable when that access is granted.
They feel unsafe and they feel like their privacy is being taken away.
Here's the point.
We've got two competing claims being made.
In essence, somebody has to win and somebody has to lose.
We've got the small minority of males and we've got the majority of females.
One of these groups, we're gonna have to say to them, sorry, SOL, you're out of luck.
You gotta just deal with it.
We have to say that to one of these groups.
Now, let me ask feminists, Elizabeth Warren, who are you gonna say it to?
You're really gonna say it to the females?
You're saying in this competing, in this competition, You're going to put the emotional needs of the men over that of the women?
Is that what you're saying?
Well, that is what you're saying, and fine, go ahead and say it and make that case, but that is in fact the case that you're making, and then don't claim to be a feminist at the same time.
Because if that's feminism, then the word really just has no meaning anymore.
Okay.
One other thing I want to talk about today.
And I'm going to once again take the minority position on something, as I so often do.
I want to talk about a certain viral video clip that's been making the rounds online.
And I don't want to play the video itself, because given my position on this, it would be rather contradictory for me to do so.
So I'll just give you the gist if you haven't seen it.
There's a viral video, massively viral, last I saw there was overall, I think the original Video on Facebook had gotten like 300,000 plus shares alone, which is a lot.
And it's a video of a young child with dwarfism, crying, devastated, saying that he wants to kill himself because of the bullying that he suffered in school.
He's sitting in the back of, I guess, appears to be his mom's car.
And his mom is filming him and filming it for Facebook Live, talking about her son being bullied.
And the child, as I said, is just wrecked, talking about killing himself.
And he's nine years old, right?
Now obviously for a child that age to be having thoughts like that, for any person to be having suicidal thoughts is terrible, but for a child that age, nine years old, to be thinking about that is unimaginable.
My oldest kids are not too much younger than this kid, and I simply cannot fathom ever hearing them say they want to kill themselves.
So like any person with a soul, right, when I saw this video, I felt a very deep mix of sadness and anger at the bullies and many other emotions.
It's just so terrible.
It really gets to you.
Now as often happens, because this video went viral, celebrities have gotten in on the action.
Hugh Jackman sent out a video to the kids supporting him.
The child is Australian and Hugh Jackman's Australian, so I guess he felt especially called to respond, which is great.
And then, of course, someone started a GoFundMe campaign.
campaign as always happens with these things and Now they're gonna send the kid to Disney World with the
money the GoFundMe account earned many thousands of dollars in just a few hours
Okay, so all that is is nice, but I Also have another thought and it's the same thought I have
every time I see stuff like this online And I don't understand why more people don't have this
thought Or maybe they do, it's just they don't feel secure in saying so because they're afraid they're going to get shouted down by everybody.
And that is this.
What kind of parent records their child during such an emotionally vulnerable moment and puts it online for public consumption?
And I don't want to hear about raising awareness.
What kind of parent uses their child's emotional trauma for awareness?
Is that really your first thought when your child is emotionally devastated by something?
Your first thought is, oh, this would be great for an awareness campaign.
What kind of parent thinks like that?
And what right do you have as a parent to decide for your child that their most intimate and devastating moments are going to be shared and consumed by millions?
What right do you have to decide that this is going to be a public spectacle?
Ten years from now, let's think about this.
This child, nine years old, ten years from now he's 19, he's a grown adult.
You think he's going to be happy that the time when he threatened to kill himself at the age of nine is documented and online and has been seen by millions of people?
Do you think he's really signing on to that?
You think he understands what he's signing on for?
If he even did sign on for it?
And don't tell me that he agreed to be filmed because, first of all, we don't know if he did.
And even if he did, he's nine!
He has no clue what he's agreeing to, or what it means, or how any of this works.
That's what a parent is supposed to be there for.
So I'm trying to figure this out, because as a parent, I've had difficult moments with my kids.
Nothing quite like this, thank God.
But I've had... There have been times when they've been very upset about things, and I've been in a position of consoling them and comforting them, like all parents do.
It has never occurred to me To pull out my phone and stick it in their face and then put it on Facebook.
I can't imagine how that would occur to you.
I mean, that thought process needs to actually—your kid's sitting there crying, inconsolable, and so you have to think to yourself, hold on a second, let me get my phone, let me get this on, let me get this on tape.
Not everything has to be done in public.
Not everything is everybody's business.
Let your child have privacy.
Not to mention there are a lot of very cruel trolls online also.
So, even more so than in school.
People online are even worse than they are in school.
And now you're opening your bullied child up to more bullying.
In fact, when I saw this video, whoever shared it on Twitter, On this particular share, I was looking at the comments, the very first comment under the video was somebody making fun of the child's appearance.
Now, clearly, to be an adult, or anyone, making fun of a child's appearance at all, especially in this circumstance, that makes you scum.
I mean, you are human scum.
You're the worst of the worst.
But there are a lot of scumbags on the internet.
And there are a lot of people who say terrible, terrible things.
About kids, even.
There are many people on the internet, which is to say there are many people in real life, unfortunately, who have no compunction at all about anything, and have no problem saying the worst things about other people.
So your child has already been the victim of ridicule, and now you're putting him up for more of it?
Who does that?
Now, the justification I've heard is that, well, this mother was at the end of a rope, and she didn't know what else to do.
There was no other solution, and so this is what she did.
What?
How is this a solution?
I don't understand as a parent, you know, I understand being a parent and feeling like you're at the end of the rope and there's a certain problem you're dealing with and you don't know how else to solve it and you're not sure what the solution is.
I understand that.
But why does that translate to, oh, well, might as well make a viral video.
Might as well get the mob involved.
Might as well put it on Facebook.
How is that a solution?
Like, if you're at the end of your rope with something like this, then I can understand, maybe you pull them out, you find a different school, I mean, you go into the school, you kick the damn doors down to find these punk kids that are bullying your son.
I mean, there are a lot of things I could see a desperate parent doing, but pulling out your freaking phone and sticking it in your kid's face and then putting it online, I don't see that as a solution.
And I don't see how a loving parent would ever, ever, ever even consider that quote solution.
You know, Internet mobs, I have a lot of experience dealing with
internet mobs.
problems.
They don't solve anything.
Okay?
You don't go to internet mobs for solutions.
That's not what they do.
There are three things you can get out of an internet mob.
Fame, shame, money.
Those are the three things.
Those are the only three things an internet mob can do for you.
Fame, shame, and money.
Okay, well, so this mother's gotten money out of the mob.
I'm not gonna say that that was her number one reason why she did it, or, you know, I'm not gonna say that.
It certainly seems like that's possible.
I mean, there are parents who exploit their children for internet fame so that they can then get the GoFundMe money and all that.
That does happen.
It certainly seems like that's what's happening here.
I don't know.
And they got some fame out of it too.
So yeah, you got fame and money out of it.
And I guess some shame for the bullies.
How does that solve anything?
Yes, the child will go to Disney World.
Great.
And he'll have a nice time.
That is awesome.
Okay?
And I'm sure that will be helpful.
But it's not going to stop the bullying.
It's a momentary thing.
It's a momentary boost, at most, that the kid will get out of this.
He goes to Disney World.
He sees the nice video messages from celebrities.
You get a momentary boost out of that.
It's not going to stop the bullying.
In fact, it only makes it worse because now you've added more bullies into the mix.
And the bullies who were already bullying the child, you think they're going to stop now?
You think a bunch of 9 and 10-year-old kids are going to stop bullying because they see this kid on the news now crying about being bullied?
That's not how bullies work.
The bullies aren't going to see the segment on the Today Show and think, oh gee, we really screwed up on this one.
Yeah, it was really inappropriate.
We shouldn't.
No.
They're going to see the kid crying and they're going to make fun of him more for it.
Because that's how kids work.
And bullies especially.
So you get a momentary boost.
You get money.
Does absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop the bullying.
Does absolutely nothing whatsoever to address the deeper things internally that are happening with your child that are making him think about hurting himself.
And in exchange for that momentary boost, now you have put this online forever for everyone to see.
And for the rest of your child's life.
He is going to be known as the kid in that video who said those, you know, really sad and horrible things.
And you have made that decision for your kid.
You have decided for your kid that that's what his life is going to be.
Or at a minimum, that this video and this incident is going to be a big part of his life from here on forward.
You have decided that for him.
You have no right.
Your kid is not your intellectual property that you can just use for clicks and views.
I get so sick of this.
It's like it's not even human.
You've got these parents that are barely freaking human that they would look at their kids this way.
What do you need the attention for?
Great, you got a bunch of shares.
Who gives a damn?
What does that do for you as a parent?
Leave your kids out of it.
Let your kids have a life.
Just let them exist.
Let them have some privacy.
Let them have an emotional moment on their own without you sticking a camera in their face.
Yeah, you see a moment and you know that, oh, this would get a ton of hits.
So what?
get a load a ton of hits so what is that what it's about honestly I think the same thing with I probably should stop
before I get myself into trouble into even more trouble but I said I
think the same damn thing about parents
Even when I see these viral videos of happy moments with kids, you know, of intimate, personal, but happy moments.
Many times, even with that, I think, why did you need to put it online?
I don't understand why you needed to do that.
Even something like, forgive me, but even these very nice videos of, you know, things like a child finds out on Christmas that their stepfather is going to adopt them and, you know, and opens the gift and sees and is very happy.
I mean, I feel great for the kid.
I feel great for the family.
It's a wonderful thing.
Why do you need to put it on the internet, though?
It's a very personal moment.
Why couldn't you just have that moment with your family and cherish it and you have it as a memory?
If you want to film it for your own benefit so that you can look back on it later and remember it, then fine.
But you don't even really need to do that because you have the memory.
You have the moment.
It's part of your life now.
Why do 10 million people need to see it?
Give me one good reason why they need to see it.
All right.
And I say this as someone who is on, you know, I spend my whole life on the internet, okay?
So I, you know, I get it.
I understand the desire people have to find content and put it on the internet, you know.
But we shouldn't be using our kids for that.
That's it.
We'll leave it there.
Thanks, everybody, for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great weekend.
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.
Tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, we're there.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knowles Show, and The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring, supervising producer Mathis Glover, supervising producer Robert Sterling, technical producer Austin Stevens, editor Danny D'Amico, audio mixer Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
If you prefer facts over feelings, aren't offended by the brutal truth, and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune in to The Ben Shapiro Show.
