Today on the Matt Walsh Show, America has become a collection of police states where the Bill of Rights is effectively nullified and citizens can get arrested or fined for engaging in activities that have no plausible chance of spreading the virus. Is all of this worth it for the possible reward of safety? Also today we cancel AOC for claiming that the virus is targeting minority populations because of racism. And I read emails from people who’ve had run-ins with law enforcement because of the stay-at-home orders.
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
Today on the Matt Wall Show, America has become essentially a collection of police states where the Bill of Rights has been effectively nullified and citizens can get arrested or fined for engaging in just normal everyday activities.
Activities that really have no plausible chance of spreading the virus anyway, but they're still getting arrested or fined for it.
Is all of this worth it?
For the reward of safety, the possible reward of safety that we might be getting from it.
We'll talk about that also today.
We'll cancel yet again, I think for the fourth time, we're going to cancel Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for claiming that the virus is targeting minority communities because of racism.
So you knew that was coming.
And also I have a bunch of emails I want to read from people across the country who've had run-ins with law enforcement.
Over these state home orders or people close to them have had run-ins and and also I've got a number of emails from police officers themselves who are not in favor of having to enforce these ridiculous laws and have raised some objections of their own that I think are interesting and so I want to read those too.
We'll get to all of that coming up but before we do I want to check in with a new sponsor on the show and you know and I also want to say just to just to begin with that I really appreciate all the sponsors and advertisers who support the show and keep it going.
This is a difficult time for everybody, for all companies, many of the sponsors, you know, we're all sort of struggling to get through it financially.
And so I appreciate you guys supporting the show and I appreciate you supporting the sponsors, if you can.
You know, if you're listening to the show and you hear an ad for a product that you want to buy and you were thinking of buying anyway and you have the money and you're able to do it, then I really appreciate you doing that.
We're all trying to get through this together, of course.
You, me, all the shows, advertisers.
And on that note, I want to talk to you about ebb sleep.
It's really important, these days especially, to have a healthy immune system.
You've got to keep your immune system going.
One of the best ways to do that is just to get sleep and keep your body rested.
That's why it's time for Ebb.
Ebb sleep is a wearable solution that fits over the forehead and gently cools the forehead to reduce those racing thoughts, allowing people who suffer from sleeplessness to drift more comfortably into a deeper, more Restorative sleep.
I know that I have trouble with this myself, so I've found this to be very useful.
The mind's normal way of dealing with stress and challenges is to be on guard, be more vigilant, and then you start thinking about.
There's a lot of things to think about these days, and that's what happens when we try to sleep, and that's what keeps us up.
But brain imaging studies followed by 3,800 nights of clinical studies by renowned sleep researchers revealed a revolutionary new way to sleep.
And actually four out of five users report getting to sleep faster with EBSleep.
EBSleep understands the uncertainty you may be experiencing at this time and wants to help.
So you can save $25 off your order by using promo code WALSH to save and continue to try Ebb risk-free for 60 nights to confirm that it is the solution you've been looking for.
And I'm pretty sure that you'll find that that's the case.
Go to tryebb.com slash WALSH.
Let us help you get sleep you need and remove the risk from your purchase.
That's tryeb.com slash walsh.
T-R-Y-E-B-B dot com slash Walsh.
Tryeb.com slash Walsh.
Use promo code Walsh to save order today.
With everything going on, you can get the sleep you need and deserve, especially these days.
All right.
So on Saturday, police in Kansas City intervened, quote unquote, to shut down a parade of elementary school teachers.
The staff of a local school there, John Fiske Elementary School, decided to organize the parade just as a way to boost morale for the students and to encourage them in their new distance learning adventure.
And all of the teachers, administrators, they got together.
Well, they didn't really get together.
They were in their own cars, right?
And so you would think isolated in that way, you would think that there's really no chance whatsoever of a virus being transmitted from car to car.
But a spokeswoman for the police later explained, after the illicit gathering was broken up by the cops, that the celebration of education was not necessary and was non-essential.
It was a non-essential celebration.
We can't have any non-essential celebrations right now.
Two days before, The Kansas City community was saved from the threat of cheerful elementary school teachers waving from their minivans to students.
Two days before that, police in Malibu arrested a man who was caught paddleboarding in the ocean.
Now you gotta see the footage of this because two boats and three additional deputies on the shore were all brought to the scene to try to stop this guy from paddleboarding.
Watch this.
Sheriff from the beach.
But Sheriff Boat's coming now.
This might be our first, uh... Could this be the first arrest made for surfing?
Documented in history?
Lookit, now he's trying to abode, dude!
High-speed pursuit!
High-speed pursuit!
RUN!
Oh my god!
He cut him off!
Throw the tacks down!
Pop the tires!
Uh-oh.
Yeah, now, you see that, and you think, how could that guy, out by himself in the Pacific, possibly contract or spread the virus?
How is that going to work, exactly?
Now, when I was talking about this over the weekend, I was told by people, well, he's got to get to the ocean somehow.
He probably drove there.
Okay, yeah, so let's just walk through this.
He leaves his house.
Walks down his driveway or whatever he has, he gets in his car, so he's isolated in the car, drives down the road, gets to an empty parking lot, walks down the beach, gets in the water.
At what point through that whole process is there any plausible possibility that he would spread or contract the virus?
Well, nobody really knows.
But orders are orders, after all.
In fact, somebody on Twitter told me that when I was complaining about this.
They said, verbatim, they said, orders are orders.
That's the new American motto.
Forget about freedom and liberty, orders are orders.
And so the guy was pulled out of the ocean and hauled away in handcuffs.
Not far from that harrowing scene, down south about two hours, I think, or an hour and a half maybe, the San Diego Sheriff's Department was giving out citations to people who'd committed the nefarious crime of watching the sunset on the beach.
Watching the sunset is now a crime.
And around the same time, over on the East Coast, Pennsylvania State Police were pulling over and ticketing a woman who, according to the citation, was going for a drive.
Now, this was in York County, Pennsylvania.
And she was going for a drive in York County, Pennsylvania.
You may think there that, first of all, when you've been locked in your house for three weeks, going for a drive is sort of an essential activity for your mental health.
And you may also think, if you're familiar with Pennsylvania, York County, Pennsylvania, it's a rural area, so you'd think a woman driving along a country road in the rural county of York, Pennsylvania, is not really at risk and is not putting anybody else at risk.
You'd think that.
But none of that matters, because the politicians have spoken, and orders are orders.
You may leave your home only for the reasons that they decree.
A woman in Minnesota was recently pulled over and ticketed for two offenses.
The first was she was driving on a canceled license.
Okay, that's fair.
Give her a ticket for that.
But the second one is she was violating the state's stay-at-home orders.
Now, what was she doing?
She went to Taco Bell, and right before that, she had stopped at her storage unit that she's renting.
Why would one be essential and not the other?
Apparently, Taco Bell you're allowed to do, you can't go to your storage unit.
As far as I know in Minnesota, they don't have anything specifically written in the law saying you're not allowed to go to a storage unit, and I can think of many essential reasons for a person to go to a storage unit, right?
But, it's just something that, I guess it's up to, it's the judgment call of the police officer, and if he wants to take it, he's going to do it.
The point is that you can't just go out and move around as you please.
That's the point.
What do you think this is?
A free country?
Now, officials in other parts of the nation, as we talked about last week, have banned... Well, we know that they've shut down stores and retailers and everything, but they've also banned essential retailers from selling non-essential items.
Like, for example, mosquito repellent.
John Cardeo on Twitter posted this picture.
Take a look at this.
It says, by order of the town, they're not allowed to sell these items.
Look at the items that they're not allowed to sell.
Mosquito repellent.
Now, I would think mosquito repellent is pretty damn essential.
Prevents West Nile, prevents malaria.
I would think that's an essential activity, but apparently we can only fight one disease at a time.
We're focusing on coronavirus, not those other diseases.
So forget it.
We'll let those diseases come do whatever they want to do.
We're focused on coronavirus right now.
The mayor of Port Isabel, Texas, has decided, for whatever reason, that residents may not travel with more than two people in their vehicle.
And this, I've been told by people around the country, this is a somewhat common regulation now.
That you're being told not only where you can go in your car, but how many people are allowed to be in your car when you're going there.
Now once again, if you all live in the same house and you're a family, Okay, you're already exposed to each other in a house, so why can't you be exposed to each other in a car?
What's the difference?
And what if you're a single parent with three kids?
Well, I guess two of your kids are out of luck.
You can only bring one kid if you gotta go to the store.
Or stay home and starve.
You know, that's your other choice.
Now, how exactly are they going to enforce this?
That's not exactly sure, but I know that some states have made that enforcement part easier on themselves by setting up checkpoints to stop and question every car that passes through.
A person from New York who gets caught in Florida right now, for example, may face 60 days in jail.
Now, I want to remind you here that Florida and New York are states in America.
They are not places in Soviet Russia, despite how it may sound.
Meanwhile, protesters outside of abortion clinics in California and North Carolina, other places as well, have been arrested for violating their state's stay-at-home orders, despite the fact that they were following the protocols of social distancing.
So this wasn't a whole group of people all bunched up together, they were spaced out like you're supposed to be for social distancing.
But, doesn't matter.
You would think that that would protect them.
Also, there is that obscure legal artifact known as the First Amendment that you think also would protect them, but no, not that either.
The First Amendment has been officially neutralized, as the multiple pastors who've been arrested for holding worship services have also found out.
All of this may seem quite oppressive and Gestapo-ish, but a police chief in Colorado put those worries to the side.
If you think that this is oppressive, he said it's not oppressive.
He explained that leaving your house and going outside and doing things is not a right, but a privilege.
It's a privilege, and it can be revoked if it's misused.
There was a prosecutor in Ohio who kind of exploded in a fit of rage during an interview over the weekend.
And he said that those who defy his state home orders, or his state's state home orders, are committing felonious assault.
Right, so if you, like, go to the beach or something, against your state, you're committing assault.
Assault against who?
I don't know.
And if you're guilty of that, to quote him directly, he said, you can sit your butt in jail, sit there and kill yourself.
Again, I remind you, this is the United States of America.
Or at least it used to be.
Now, apologists for our newly established police state will tell me that states and localities have the authority to impose restrictions in an emergency, and that's true.
But the question of how far their authority actually goes is already complicated, and in this case it's made even more complicated by the fact that these state home orders in many cases are based not on a current medical emergency in the respective state, but on models that forecast the possibility of an emergency in the future.
Minnesota is under a stay-at-home order, despite having only 29 coronavirus deaths up to this point, and a population of over 5 million.
Now, perhaps the situation will get worse.
Perhaps it won't.
The point is that there is no current emergency in Minnesota, or many of the other states that are on lockdown.
There is, rather, a model that projects an emergency in the future.
And if projected emergencies can justify the effective nullification of the Bill of Rights, then where's the limit?
Haven't we now granted the government the power to seize near total control on the basis of any real or phantom threat?
Isn't that what's happened here?
And there are other problems too.
We don't know that these lockdowns will actually have the effect of saving lives.
We don't know that.
It's possible, as Dr. Fauci himself has admitted, that the virus will come roaring back to life anyway, whenever we leave our houses, whenever that happens to be, whether it's a month from now or six years from now.
It's also possible that the illness came to America back in November, or December, or January, aboard any number of the hundreds of thousands of travelers from China who came here during that span.
Now, if that's the case, then it would seem the viral horse left the Chinese barn a long time ago.
And it's way too late to do lockdowns.
And that means that we are doing these lockdowns and we're obliterating our national economy, driving millions into ruin for no reason.
In fact, all we're doing is locking people down in their homes, locking people who've been exposed in their homes with people who had not to that point been exposed.
So what do we have then?
We have a series of indefinite stay-at-home orders based on dubious models and dubious projections with a dubious chance of success and which often outlaw behavior that could not even plausibly put anyone at risk from the disease that may or may not or maybe already has become epidemic in the states where these laws have been enacted.
Is that good enough to justify treating Americans like they're subjects in a communist dictatorship?
Is it good enough?
I would argue that nothing could ever justify a lot of what we're seeing here.
The First and Fourth Amendments, which are the provisions of the Bill of Rights that have really had the worst time of it recently, I would say serve no purpose and have no reason to exist if they can be cancelled or overridden whenever the government might have a specially compelling reason to do so.
In fact, I would say it is only when the government has a specially compelling reason to override the amendments that the amendments serve any function.
After all, we really don't need them.
We don't need them during the times when the government has no interest in infringing on them.
So if we toss aside our right to assembly, our right to practice our religion, our right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, etc., whenever the government insists that such protections are dangerous and must be tossed aside, then we might as well not have them in the first place.
Most of the time, right, the government just really doesn't have any special interest in stopping you from going out and getting together and doing what you want to do.
If we're saying that only when they have an interest in doing it can they do it, then okay, well then basically they can do it.
And these rights mean nothing.
It's kind of like locking a criminal in a cell, but giving him the key to open it, along with a stern warning to only use the key if he really, really feels like he has a good reason.
Doesn't the key make the cell a rather pointless accessory?
Now sure, he might remain in the cell sometimes, but only when he wants to.
And it's precisely when he wants to be behind bars that you don't really need the bars at all.
The bars are only there for the times when he really desperately wants to get out.
That's why you have the bars that he can't escape from.
I would argue that the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, they're only really there for the times when the government really, really, really wishes they weren't.
And if in those times we say, okay, it's not there, you can pretend it's not there, what's the point?
Why do we even have it?
I'm not suggesting that state governments should do nothing in response to the coronavirus.
I am suggesting that they shouldn't have the power to do whatever the hell they want, for whatever reason they want, to whatever extent they want, for however long they want, with whatever penalty they want.
Which is what is happening right now all across the country.
Governments should act justly and prudently to respond to threats that endanger citizens' lives.
But there is little in the way of justice or prudence or respect for basic human liberties in these measures that we're seeing all across the country.
And that, to me, is the problem.
We're going to get to headlines here in a second, but first, All Access Live.
I want to remind you again, if you haven't tuned in yet to one of these things, then I would suggest 8 p.m.
Eastern, 5 p.m.
Pacific.
We do them, well, I want to say, I think we're doing them every day now.
Certainly most of the days of the week we're doing them.
And, you know, originally All Access Live was going to be something for our All Access members that we were going to roll out a couple months from now, but we moved it up, and now it's open to all Daily Wire members.
And we're just doing it as a way to kind of give us a break from the isolation.
It's a really relaxed conversation.
And so if you're around tonight at 8 p.m.
Eastern, 5 p.m.
Pacific, make sure you tune in to All Access Live, and I think you'll enjoy it.
All right, let's go to headlines.
Number one, here's the headline in Vox.
It says, the CDC has begun testing blood for immunity against coronavirus.
Reading out says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has begun conducting blood tests that says will help determine if a person has been exposed to the coronavirus, even without showing symptoms.
These serological tests, or sero-surveys, are different from the nose swabs used to diagnose active cases of COVID-19.
By analyzing blood, researchers will be able to tell if a person developed certain antibodies in the blood, indicating that they were infected by the virus and recovered.
If a person can be shown to have developed these protections against reinfection, they could potentially re-enter society.
Now, and then it says that they've already started testing.
Well, let's see here.
Who are they going to test?
They're going to roll out these surveys in three phases.
And here are the three phases, the three groups that will get tested.
People living in hot spots of the disease, such as New York and Seattle, but who were not diagnosed.
Then a representative sample of people living across the country, and then healthcare workers.
Now the survey says that they've already started testing some of the people that live in these hotspots, but the tests of people who live across the country, they're not going to roll those out until the summer.
And then as far as the healthcare workers, who knows?
This is really unacceptable.
The testing in general has been a disaster, but these tests in particular are extraordinarily important.
Very important right now.
Not three months from now, not in the summer.
And there's no excuse for this lazy, lackadaisical, slow-walked rollout of the test, because we need this data right now.
We need the data to tell us if this virus has already been here for months, like we just talked about.
And if it has, then, as I just said, the horse has left the barn.
Which means the lockdowns are useless.
Worse than useless.
They're not only financially, but also in terms of health, physical health, counterproductive.
Because you're locking people away who've already been exposed.
We could very well be in a situation that, you know, a young person who's been exposed has been locked in isolation now with their elderly parents, and because of that prolonged exposure that's not broken up by, you know, going out and doing things, now the elderly parents get infected where otherwise they might not have.
Either way, the point is, if this thing has been spreading since November, and we start doing lockdowns in mid-March, well then we will have destroyed the economy for no reason.
In fact, this is anecdotal, but I've heard from many, many, many people who tell me that, you know, in the range of November, December, January, February, they came down with a pretty severe respiratory illness.
Many cases tested negative for the flu.
And, you know, they say it's like, this is, I never had anything like this before.
It was very strange.
I've heard this.
It's all anecdotal, of course, but I've heard this from people all across the country that have messaged me about it.
And I was in the same boat.
No, I had a pretty serious respiratory illness in early February.
Now, I did test positive for the flu, so it's probably likely that I just had the flu.
But there were some things that were interesting.
Like, for me, I had, and the doctors couldn't figure it out, because I ended up going to the hospital.
I wasn't hospitalized, but I went to the hospital.
I got an IV.
And I talked to a number of doctors and nurses between urgent care and the hospital they went to, and they couldn't figure out why about three days before I came down with the flu, I had this rash that looked really itchy, but wasn't that itchy.
And they did a bunch of blood work and everything, and they thought maybe it was a blood infection, and it wasn't that.
The blood work came back fine.
They couldn't figure out what it was.
Maybe it was an allergic reaction.
Well, it turns out it wasn't that.
And then I'm doing some reading over the weekend and I find out that there are some doctors who are saying that coronavirus sometimes presents itself first with a rash that precedes the more normal symptoms that we're used to hearing about.
So, what does that mean?
I don't know.
It's possible I could have had both.
There are people who have these co-infections where they get the flu and coronavirus all at once.
Or coronavirus and some other illness on top of it.
The point is, who knows?
Right?
But it is quite possible that millions of us have already been exposed to it, have already had it, have already recovered from it.
And months or weeks after that, we got locked down in our houses and told we can't go to our jobs.
Okay, let's go number two.
Well, the coronavirus models haven't really been panning out too well, but here's one scientific model that I think probably will.
Reading now from the mirror, it says, with the UK now in its third week of lockdown,
many bored Brits have turned to gaming in the hopes of filling their time stuck in the house.
But a new study looking into the effects of gaming on the human body may put you off gaming for a while.
Researchers from onlinecasino.ca have predicted what avid gamers could look like
in just 20 years if they don't change their habits.
The team has created a model called Michael, who doesn't look too well.
Um...
And this is what, now here's Michael, I'll show you the picture.
This is what they came up with.
This is what they're saying.
If you play games, video games too much.
This isn't me, okay?
I didn't come up, the researchers are saying if you play video games too much, you might look like this in 20 years.
Basically, you'll look like Gollum.
If Gollum lived in his mom's basement instead of a cave.
And if he had a BMI of 97.
My only question is, why are they saying gamers will look like this in 20 years?
I think a lot of them sort of already do.
No offense.
Don't, you know, don't take that as an insult.
I didn't mean it that way.
Personally, I think Michael's a pretty handsome guy.
That's my personal opinion.
Let's go to number three.
Here's Joe Biden on ABC saying Something.
We cannot let this, we've never allowed any crisis from the civil war straight through to the pandemic of 17 all the way around 16.
We have never, never let our democracy say second fiddle way that we can both have a democracy and elections and at the same time, correct the public health.
We cannot let this, we've never allowed any crisis from the Civil War straight through to the pandemic of 17, all the way around 16.
We have never, never let our democracy sakes second fiddle.
Way they, we can both have a democracy and correct the public health.
I have no idea what that, I honestly don't know what he's even trying to say there.
That is gibberish.
And as everybody's been saying, this is a symptom of dementia.
It's not a joke.
This really is what you start to see from people who are developing dementia.
It's nonsensical.
Now look, we've all stumbled over our words.
I certainly have plenty of times.
I do it all the time.
But to string together a whole paragraph like that of total nonsense, and when I say nonsense, I'm meaning just literal nonsense.
You can't make heads or tails of it.
It's almost like someone took some words and just put them in a blender and then poured them out, dumped them on the table, and this is what it looks like, right?
Or if you dump a bag of Scrabble letters on the tables, like this is what Joe Biden is offering now as insight.
It's very concerning, to say the least.
Number four, the New York Times used cell phone data to track the movements of Americans and to report which areas of the country are being very disobedient and still driving a lot, you know, instead of staying home.
And they provided this handy map.
So take a look at this.
The red areas are where people are still driving about as much as they did before the outbreak happened.
But do you notice something?
All of the good boys and girls, the people not driving a lot who are obeying, most of them live in the metropolitan northeast or on the west coast.
And the bad boys and girls who are very naughty and are not listening and are still driving a lot, they live in the south or the midwest.
Now, what might explain that?
Well, it could be that urbanites are enlightened and compassionate and very concerned with stopping the spread and helping their fellow man.
I'm sure that's how the New York Times would like us to interpret this, whereas Southerners are a bunch of selfish hicks who hate science and the elderly and don't care about anybody but themselves.
That's how we're supposed to interpret it.
But the other possible interpretation here is that people in urban areas don't have to drive to get to the grocery store or the pharmacy.
Or if they live even in the suburbs, not far from a city, probably there are retail outlets within a 60-second drive of them.
Whereas in rural areas, the basic necessities are far more spread out, which means that folks have to drive in those areas if they want to go to the grocery store or the pharmacy.
So that could be what it is.
But I think The bigger issue here is that the New York Times has our cell phone data and is tracking our movements and then publishing the information to shame us.
That, to me, is the far more concerning aspect of this.
Number five, Dr. Birx on Friday warned Americans that the next two weeks will be really, really bad.
Where have I heard that before?
I feel like I've been saying that for the past five or six weeks.
And we need to be super extra careful.
And she seems to now be recommending precautions that go even further than what we've been doing in the past.
Listen to this.
This is the moment to not be going to the grocery store, not going to the pharmacy, but doing everything you can to keep your family and your friends safe.
And that means everybody doing the six feet distancing, washing your hands.
So yeah, she's saying don't go to the grocery store or the pharmacy now.
You kind of need that.
You might need medicine.
You might need to eat.
So now she's saying we shouldn't even do that.
Total madness.
Speaking of which, going on to our daily cancellation.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez moves into the prestigious position of being the most cancelled person, at least on this show.
And I think probably nationwide, too.
She's probably the most cancelled person, and for good reason.
This will be, I believe, her fourth, third or fourth cancellation.
And here's why this one's happening.
Check out the tweet.
It says, COVID deaths are disproportionately spiking in black and brown communities.
Why?
Because the chronic toll of redlining, environmental racism, wealth gap, et cetera, are underlying health conditions.
Inequality is a comorbidity.
COVID relief should be drafted with a lens of reparations.
So she's tying in reparations with coronavirus relief.
A lot to unpack here.
First of all, what the hell is environmental racism?
I've heard this phrase many times from kooky left-wingers.
I still don't know what it is.
And whatever it is, I would argue that white people are more often victims of it.
For example, you know, I know I get really bad sunburns when I go out in the summer.
I could be outside for three and a half seconds.
Just in the time it takes me to get from my house to my car, I could be burned to a crisp.
And whereas people with darker skin aren't as susceptible to that, so to me, that is environmental racism.
Or maybe we could call it solar racism.
That is the sun singling me out for being pasty white and literally burning me.
Almost setting me on fire and burning me to death in an act of cosmic prejudice.
So I think, at least I have a claim also to being a victim of environmental racism.
Second, the wealth gap is an underlying health condition.
So now I guess if you go to the doctor for a physical, and he runs some blood work and everything, and then he comes back, you know, he might say, well, look, everything looks okay.
You do have a slightly elevated blood pressure.
We need to keep your cholesterol in check.
And I'm afraid to say you have wealth gap.
To use the more medical term, you're broke as a joke.
Now, so I can think of all kinds of places that can go, all
kinds of Orwellian possibilities for treating being poor as an underlying health condition.
But then third, we get to this thing where she's, you know, the whole idea of that coronavirus is affecting minority communities based on any kind of racism or whatever is obviously absurd.
Why is that actually happening?
Well, it's not hard to figure out because it's targeting cities.
It's not targeting cities, it's just that it's affecting cities more than rural areas, not because of the race, the respective races of the people that live there, but because of population density.
So it's not about race, Alexandria Cortez, it's about population density.
And when you've got a lot of people living on top of each other and cramming themselves into subways and everything, it's gonna spread disease.
Not just coronavirus, all kinds of other diseases too.
Whereas if you live out in the country and you're more spread out, there's not as much of a risk there.
So that's really all there is to it.
And I can pretty much guarantee you that any minorities who live in rural areas, which plenty do, they're gonna be in the same spot as the white people who live in those same areas.
Okay, I'm gonna move on to emails now, and doing things a little bit differently this time.
I've gotten a bunch of emails From people around the country who've had experiences with these stay-at-home orders.
And I just want to read some of these.
I'm not going to read any names or anything, but just some of the experiences people have had, I think are worth looking at.
So we'll start with this.
It says, Hey Matt, in all honesty, what the hell are we supposed to do about the police stopping us?
I was fishing in Stockton, California by myself with no one around me.
And they told me that I have to leave because what I was doing wasn't essential.
I responded by saying, what is it that I'm doing wrong?
No one is around me and I'm not sick.
They responded by telling me that if I don't leave, they will cite me with a $500 fine.
Another one says, my husband's uncle and his wife were stopped by police for walking in an abandoned shopping mall and again for walking along an empty beach in Oregon.
Another one, hi Matt, I live in Long Island, New York and cops on horseback are ticketing people walking in the street not far enough apart from each other.
Most of them live in the same house.
Another one, friend of mine was surfing by himself in Pensacola on Friday, was approached by authorities and told to go home.
Crazy how everybody's okay with this.
Another one, my teenager was in her car talking to other teens in their cars in a parking lot and the police came and broke it up, threatening fines.
Hey Matt, been following these citations too and thought you might find it interesting that the governor of Wisconsin has ordered that all golf courses be closed.
It makes no sense to me that people wouldn't be able to golf, especially playing solo.
This got me thinking about the essential versus non-essential tags.
In some contexts, I understand the need for these, but shouldn't we also be categorizing things according to their likelihood of spreading the virus?
Just because something is non-essential, why should it be banned if it doesn't increase the spread?
Here's one.
This one isn't really about law, necessarily, but it is absurd, I think.
It says, Hi, Matt.
I wanted to share my experience today.
I'm from Venice, California.
Wife is 20 weeks pregnant.
And I've actually gotten a lot like this, this exact sort of situation.
This is very common, apparently.
Wife is 20 weeks pregnant, had to go for ultrasound, and they wouldn't let me be with her and see my baby's ultrasound due to COVID concerns.
They said, no guess.
And I told them that I'm the husband and father.
I wasn't, I guess, and I had every right to be there.
It was infuriating.
I even brought a mask and gloves, told them that if my wife has it, I probably have it too.
The staff was very rude and told me I wasn't even allowed to wait in the waiting room, had to go sit in my car and wait for her there.
This was in an office, not even a hospital.
I couldn't see my boy in his 20-week ultrasound, my first baby.
I feel they robbed me of such an important experience.
It sucks.
When will this madness stop?
Now my wife is worried they won't allow me to be there for the delivery in a couple of months, and I've heard of cases like that too.
And it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
You live together, so you've already been exposed.
If one of you has it, the other one probably does too, or at least you've both been exposed to it already.
Someone else says, I was fined $100 for smoking crack outside a defunct Wendy's.
Tyranny is right around the corner.
But you know what?
If we can't even smoke crack at Wendy's, then what?
Just what's the point?
What's the point of America anymore?
This wasn't the cops, but- this is a different email- but someone going along with the non-ess- something going along with the non-essential narrative.
My friend was taking his kids for a walk and he ran into his neighbor.
They started talking while maintaining social distance and someone driving by takes a picture of them and says that she's gonna call the cops.
He later finds out that she posted the picture online on the township police's Facebook page, I believe.
Luckily, the police took my friend's side and said he wasn't doing anything wrong, which is surprising because we live in one of the lockdown counties in Pennsylvania.
If he lived in another township where the cops are more overzealous, he probably would have been fined.
Can you imagine?
That, I think, is the worst thing about this.
Even putting aside what politicians and bureaucrats and law enforcement are doing, to me, or I would say at least the most discouraging aspect.
Is how many Americans are treating each other and their neighbors, turning into snitches.
I just think it's... I can tell you, I was at a park a few days ago, going for a run, which is an approved activity, just so you know.
We have gotten the approval to run where I live.
But I saw people playing basketball and it appeared to be a family, just by the makeup of the people.
It very much appeared to be a family playing basketball.
Now, I'm pretty sure, but 95% sure, that basketball is now an illicit activity.
You're not allowed to do it.
It's considered non-essential.
Now, I'm not 100% sure.
That's part of the problem here.
It's very vague.
But I saw that.
And what?
Do you think I called the cops?
No.
Because I would rather be dead than be the kind of person that would call the cops on a family playing basketball in a park, minding their own business, not hurting anybody.
It could not ever be worth it to become that kind of person.
And the fact that so many people are not just willing to be that kind of person, but are excited for the opportunity.
I mean, this woman in this story here, It sounds like she was just patrolling the neighborhood.
If I was driving along and I saw some people walking around and they were, you know, standing at a distance and talking to her, it wouldn't even occur to me.
In fact, you know what I would think?
Here's what I would think to myself.
I would think, well, that's nice.
That's great.
You know, you've still got neighbors who are staying in touch and everything and breaking up the isolation a little bit and respecting the social distance.
That's what I would think.
That's what a normal, that's what you would think, right?
A normal person.
Well, here you have this scumbag who sees this And decides, I'm gonna roll down my window, yell at them, threaten to call the cops, and then take their picture and post it online.
Just sociopathic behavior.
It's not just politicians and bureaucrats and law enforcement that are having a power trip.
It's also your neighborhood snitch.
Your neighborhood snitch is living in hog heaven right now.
She is, this is her dream come true.
And I say she only because almost every story I've heard like this, it's almost always a middle-aged white woman doing it.
And I'm not saying that every middle-aged white woman is a neighborhood snitch, but I think probably 95% of neighborhood snitches are middle-aged white women.
That's how it works out.
I don't know why that's the case.
Maybe someone could do an anthropological study on this.
I'm not sure.
But that is how it works out.
Okay, then I got a few emails from police officers who are very much not on board with what's happening.
And I think these are interesting.
So let me read a couple of these.
It says, I'm a cop in a small town.
We've gotten many calls of paranoid people snitching on kids playing basketball or going fishing because we have a few parks in town.
But luckily, we don't enforce any of those BS social distancing rules.
I'm sure it's worse in other places, though.
I agree 100% with your stance that this whole thing is nonsense and not right.
I'll sooner resign before I'd ever take someone to jail for something so stupid.
I'm a police officer in a suburb of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
We have lots of busybodies calling in safer-at-home violations.
If it's a personal residence, we're not even responding to the call.
If it's a business, we go to verify that it's open, then leave the decision up to the health department.
Most of us officers hate how this is playing out and don't feel good about having to possibly enforce any of this.
This is I'm a cop in Massachusetts.
I would be pretty pissed if I was being told to risk exposure to myself and by extension my family by interacting with people who aren't necessarily doing anything that could spread the disease.
It's bad enough that we have to risk exposure answering regular calls.
Fortunately, my department hasn't told us to enforce quarantine violations and I can honestly say if they do, I'll be looking the other way.
And I've gotten several other emails like this from police officers.
Let me just say, these are good police officers.
And I think we also have to keep in mind that it's not the cops who decided on these laws.
They're the ones that are just being forced to enforce them.
And I would have to imagine that a great number of them do not want to.
Because, number one, because they know that they have to effectively harass otherwise law-abiding good citizens for doing normal things like fishing.
And I think probably most police officers have no interest in doing that.
But also, like the police officer in Massachusetts points out, they have to risk exposing themselves now.
So this guy who's out fishing or paddle boarding or whatever, there was no risk of him spreading the disease to anybody if he had it.
But now, because you're enforcing the law, now there is a risk, whereas before there wasn't.
And so we have to remember that, you know, a lot of these police officers...
Now I have heard stories of people who've had these kind of run-ins with cops who seem very excited to be given this power and authority, but I think probably most are not.
And certainly these here are not.
So I appreciate that.
I appreciate that attitude.
And anyone else who has stories like that, I'm always interested in reading them and calling attention to them because I think that this, I think this stuff matters.
I think it does.
This stuff should, this just should not be happening in America.
And there's no disease that could ever make it okay.
And we'll leave it there.
Thanks everybody for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Stay safe out there.
God bless.
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.
Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny D'Amico, and our audio is mixed by Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
The experts tell us we're heading into the peak of the crisis, so get ready for some really bad behavior from politicians, Twitterers, and of course, our awful, awful press.
