Ep. 724 - There's A Bug In The House. Grab The Salt And Pepper.
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the Left screams in horror as a case challenging Roe heads to the Supreme Court. They say that women’s rights are under attack. But how can they even talk about women’s rights, given that, according to them, women don’t really exist? Also, is Roe likely to be overturned? And what happens if it is? We’ll tackle all of that today. Plus, Five Headlines including Fauci finally admitting that he’s been masking for symbolic reasons. And the ties between Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein come into focus, after months of the media canonizing Gates and insisting that we trust and listen to him. In our Daily Cancellation, we will talk about the recent push to convince us to eat bugs. Should we start eating crickets and cockroaches instead of bacon and hamburgers?
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the left screams in horror as a case challenging Roe heads to the Supreme Court.
They say that women's rights are under attack, but how can they even talk about women's rights, given that, according to them, women don't really exist?
Also, is Roe likely to be overturned, and what happens if it is?
We'll tackle all that today.
Plus, Five headlines, including Fauci finally admitting that he's been masking for symbolic reasons, basically, and the ties between Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein come into focus after months of the media canonizing Gates and insisting that we trust and listen to him.
Now they're talking about Epstein and all these other things.
In our Daily Cancellation, we will talk about the recent push to convince us to eat bugs.
Should we start eating crickets and cockroaches instead of bacon and hamburgers?
We'll consider that question today and much more on The Matt Wall Show.
[MUSIC]
In our age of hyperbole, every Supreme Court case is treated as something monumental and history shaping.
Occasionally, that's actually true, though, and this might be one of those occasions.
As CNN reported on Monday, quote, the Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up a key abortion case next term concerning a controversial Mississippi law that banned most abortions after 15 weeks, rekindling a potentially major challenge to Roe v. Wade at the majority conservative court.
Supposedly majority conservative court.
We'll get to that in a second.
Anyway, CNN says Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban, which then-Governor Phil Bryant, a Republican, signed into law in 2018, made exceptions only for medical emergencies or cases in which there is a, quote, severe fetal abnormality, but not for instances of rape or incest.
A federal judge in Mississippi struck down the law in November 2018, and the 5th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in December 2019 after being rescheduled for The court's consideration and conference over a dozen times the case could present a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide prior to viability, which can occur at around 24 weeks of pregnancy.
Now, of course, viability in this context refers to the unborn child's ability to survive outside the womb.
That threshold can be reached At 24 weeks, even earlier than 24 weeks in some cases, and it's being lowered with each passing year as technology improves, because that's really what this is about.
The viability, quote-unquote, is about modern technology.
It's not about the child.
But really, the concept of viability is a misnomer.
In truth, no child is truly viable in the sense they can survive on their own until many years after birth.
For some people these days, they haven't even reached that point by their, I don't know, 30th birthday.
The point is that babies outside of the womb require constant attention and care from their parents.
Yeah, they can breathe, and that's the sort of thing on their own.
Can they survive on their own?
No.
And that's not a small point.
Because parents are obligated, by law, To provide the care to their children that their children need.
And if they don't provide that care, then they have to find someone else who will.
If they fail to meet that obligation, or certainly if they simply just kill their child to save themselves the burden, they'll go to prison.
And that kicks in the moment the child is born.
That child is born and is quote-unquote viable, but still cannot do anything on his own, cannot survive on his own, needs to be cared for every second of the day.
And if those parents do not provide that care, refuse to, and don't find anyone else who will, they go to jail.
Now, there's no reason why we should force parents to care for their born children, but not their pre-born children.
It's the same person, after all, and they're just as much the parents at both stages.
But this is just one of the many arbitrary distinctions that the pro-abortion side has made and rested their legal case upon.
As for that legal case, I must say, The pessimist, or perhaps just the realist in me, is quite skeptical that this court, with its current makeup, will arrive at any decision that overturns or severely curtails Roe.
I pray they do, obviously, but I'm not gonna buy the champagne and the confetti ahead of time.
That's a financial investment that I think probably won't pay off.
The media claims that there are, well, what they tell us is that there are six conservatives on the court.
It's a 6-3, super conservative majority court.
In reality, there are only, what, two?
With a track record of being a conservative Supreme Court Justice?
Perhaps one or two of the three that Trump appointed will be added to that list eventually, but that remains to be seen.
There certainly aren't six, and almost certainly are not five.
You know, I don't think that the so-called abortion, that so-called abortion rights really hang in the balance for that reason, as much as I wish they did.
But we'll see.
We should also stipulate, and this shouldn't need to be explained, but it has to be, that overturning Roe would not lead automatically to abortion being illegal in every state.
Abortion should be illegal in every state, but that's not what would happen as a direct consequence of Roe being overturned, if it ever was.
All that would happen is that each state would be empowered now to make its own laws on the issue.
This is a situation that even a pro-abortion person, if they were honest, and I'm not sure that any such creature actually exists, an honest pro-abortion person, kind of a contradiction in terms, but even if such a person did exist, they should prefer that because you can be in favor of legal abortion while still recognizing that Roe was a bad decision.
The justices managed to locate a right to abortion In the Constitution, even though no such right is ever mentioned or even hinted at in the Constitution, and they found it within the right to privacy, which is also not mentioned in the Constitution.
So if you're keeping track at home, that is two degrees of removal from the Constitution.
The right to abortion is a non-existent constitutional right grounded in another non-existent constitutional right.
The justices may have just claimed that they discovered a secret decoder ring and found the right to abortion written in code or written in invisible ink or something.
That would have been somehow more credible than what they actually claimed.
It was just a bad decision on legal grounds.
Again, no matter how you feel about abortion, it's a bad decision.
And that's why Roe should be overturned.
Whether or not it actually will be, we'll see.
Now as far as why abortion itself should be illegal everywhere for everyone in all cases, that's simply because unborn humans are human and abortion is the intentional and direct destruction of those humans.
And it's always wrong to intentionally and directly destroy innocent human life.
That's the argument.
It's pretty simple.
Unborn, and every single step of this, this is a self-evident, this is morally and logically self-evident, this argument.
Because every single step of it is clearly true.
Unborn humans are human.
That cannot be denied.
That's a scientific fact.
Abortion directly destroys those humans.
Kills them.
Again, cannot be denied.
That's the whole point of the abortion.
So if you're going to quibble with any part of this, then I guess what you would have to quibble with is the assertion that it's necessarily wrong to intentionally and directly destroy innocent human life.
And if you're going to quibble with that, then that has implications far beyond the womb.
I mean, I'd have to ask if it actually can be okay to directly and intentionally destroy innocent human life, then what other innocent human life could you destroy?
But if you're of the opinion that it's wrong to intentionally and directly destroy innocent human life, and almost everyone on earth would at least claim to believe that, then there's no way to get around the fact that abortion is a moral atrocity.
Okay, so that's abortion.
That's Roe v. Wade.
There's another aspect to this discussion that I think also has to be brought up.
In response to the news about the court taking up this case, we've heard all of the panic and outrage and seen all of the performative hand-wringing that you would expect.
We've been told this is an assault on women's rights and an evasion of women's privacy, an attack on women's bodily autonomy, etc.
and so forth.
The Lieutenant Governor of Illinois tweeted the typical tripe that we always see.
She said, Say the word, abortion.
I'm over these folks who want to legislate my uterus.
We know what's best for our bodies and our futures, and it's our choice.
Abortion is healthcare.
Like Illinois' Reproductive Health Act, we must fight to protect the right to safe, legal abortion.
Yes, abortion is healthcare in the same way that a meatpacking plant is a veterinary clinic.
But that's not the point right now.
The point is that the language here, the language that the pro-aborts continue to use.
Like Joy Reid, for example, on MSNBC.
She invoked, in a segment last night, she invoked the Handmaid's Tale, which makes me wonder, by the way, what the country might look like if leftists would read some other book besides that and Harry Potter.
But in any case, here's what she said about that.
Listen.
Terrifying prospect, eerily reminiscent of The Handmaid's Tale, where far-right-wing religious extremists took up arms against America to carve out their own country out of ours.
One where women and their bodies were under the complete control of almost extravagantly corrupt and hypocritical men of God.
Now what's so scary and frankly traumatizing about that show, and the book that inspired it, is that it starts off in the very place That we live in right now, where women have the right to choose what they do with their bodies, until they don't.
And then, in what seemed like a blink of an eye, those rights were just gone.
So, what's the problem here?
Well, aside from the general inanity and absurdity of these silly feminists who think that they're being enslaved if they aren't allowed to dismember their children.
Aside from that, the problem, as I feel I must continue to point out whenever given the opportunity, Is that they're no longer allowed to make arguments like this.
Allowed according to their own rules, not mine.
Women's rights, women's health, an attack on women, blah blah, etc.
As a feminist, on the left, you have lost all of those talking points.
You forfeited them.
You gave them up.
You tossed them out the window.
That's what you did.
I mean, women aren't the only ones who can get pregnant, remember?
This has nothing to do with women specifically.
Uterus?
Who says that only people with uteruses can get pregnant?
Are you suggesting that a trans woman without a uterus somehow fundamentally lacks one of the essential qualities of womanhood?
I mean, do you need to sit here right now and say that no trans woman can ever get pregnant?
How dare you?
You can't say that because that would be to admit that there's an essential difference between a trans woman and a regular woman.
And that would be to admit that trans women, well, aren't really women at all because there's an essential difference between them and quote-unquote other women.
So you can't do that.
You can't admit that.
See, your ideological commitments no longer permit you to talk about women's rights at all.
There are no women.
Or if there are women, they're not in any way fundamentally distinguishable from men.
We're all stranded out here in the same ambiguous haze.
Now, does that mean that you can't still make a pro-abortion argument?
No, you could still be pro-abortion.
At the end of the day, all pro-abortion arguments are bad and stupid, so what does it matter which you use?
But if you're gonna... You are gonna have to recalibrate your whole approach.
And I'm gonna have to insist on that.
For decades, Your strategy, rather than intellectually engaging with the issue, and engaging with the arguments like the one that I just laid out, the pro-life argument, which is that unborn humans are human, and that abortion intentionally and directly destroys them, and that intentionally and directly destroying innocent human life is always wrong.
Rather than engaging with that, your strategy has been to cast women as the victims of pro-life efforts.
To victimize yourself.
Identity politics, all of that.
That doesn't work anymore.
You can't very well be a victim when you don't exist.
And I'm afraid to say, women don't exist.
Not according to me, according to you.
So you're gonna have to go back to the drawing board and figure this thing out.
Because what you're doing right now, it's just not working anymore.
Hate to tell you.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
Now I want to tell you about X Chair.
You know, when it comes to chairs, I'm a chair snob, I admit.
I'm like Princess and the Pea or Goldilocks.
I'm not sure which fairy tale I should be using here.
But the point is, I have very specific chair-related needs, especially because I spend so much of the time sitting down, unfortunately.
And that's why I'm so happy to finally have an X-Chair.
X-Chair has you covered with all your office chair needs.
The secret is not only their patented Dynamic Variable Lumbar Support, which offers unbelievable lumbar support to your lower back, but now thanks to their new X-HMT technology, you can also get heat and massage therapy while you're sitting at your desk.
You get all of that in this chair.
It's a massager, it's an office chair, it's everything all rolled into one.
Instead of your old, uncomfortable office chair, now you can look forward to spending hours
sitting in the ultimate therapeutic massager.
The X-HMT delivers heat and massage technology right to your core, helping increase blood flow,
muscle recovery, and energy.
All the perks that make working from home or office a joy.
X-Chair is on sale now for $100 off, so go to xchairwalsh.com,
that's the letter X, chair, walsh.com, or call 1-844-4X-CHAIR.
X-Chair has a 30-day guarantee of complete comfort, and you can finance your purchase
for as little as 30 bucks a month.
Go to xchairwalsh.com now.
Use code XWHEELS for free X-wheel blade casters.
xchairwalsh.com.
I endured a great trial recently.
My son is very into superheroes now, which is great, going through a big superhero phase.
And I loved superheroes too when I was his age.
And, you know, I want to show interest in the things that he's interested in.
So I sat down with him on Sunday night to watch the event.
We all watched it as a family, actually watched the Avengers and the first one.
And I've never, I never, I've never seen any of the Avengers movies.
And I know that I'm like 10 years late, I guess, but, uh, but I never saw them because I didn't before now, I didn't have kids that were old enough to watch them.
And I wasn't going to go and watch them myself because I'm a, uh, what do you call it?
A grown man.
So I wasn't expecting much.
But man, are these movies terrible.
So bad.
Really, really bad.
I thought they'd be bad, but they were even worse than I thought.
I didn't say that to my son, but between you and me, long, dull, repetitive, there are no stakes, right?
Even though the world is hanging in the balance, there's actually no stakes.
Nothing is at stake because everybody is indestructible until the moment when the script needs them to not be indestructible.
So like the Hulk, for example, he can he can pick up a tank and rip it in half and throw a piece of it into orbit.
But then he punches Captain America directly in the head, doesn't even cause a concussion.
And then at another point, Captain America, like, slips on a banana peel and is knocked unconscious for three days.
I'm paraphrasing the movie slightly, but the point is that their indestructibility fluctuates wildly depending on what is needed for that particular scene, and that just makes it boring.
It's like watching a video game, and it's long.
It's so long, too.
He's long drawn out scenes of these one dimensional cardboard characters whining about their feelings.
Speaking of the Hulk, you know, the movie is 18 hours long and the Hulk is actually the Hulk for 12 seconds.
And my son is sitting, all he wants to see is the Hulk break stuff.
But instead he's watching Mark Ruffalo take anger management classes.
This is not, who is this supposed to appeal to?
You don't have the actors or the script to turn this into a character drama.
So if it's going to be a mindless orgy of punching and shooting, then just pick a lane and go with that.
Really bad.
How do adults watch this?
They're grown adults who don't even have a kid.
It's not like this is a sacrifice to make it for their kids.
They watch it on their own.
What are you doing?
I will admit, the one thing I liked in the movie was Scarlett Johansson's character, because she was so useless.
It's hilarious.
You've got these immortal gods and superhuman creatures, and then they team up with a woman who's, as far as I could tell, she's a moderately athletic woman.
Why would you need her on the team?
It's like if the top nine scorers in the NBA were playing pickup basketball, and the team with four needed a fifth guy, so they got me to come and play.
Like, you'd definitely be better off with just four of you than having me on the court, because I'd be a liability.
But then again, I guess there's the affirmative action and all that, which even with superhero teams, they have to worry about.
So, just terrible stuff.
It's a shame that adults... This should be just for kids.
And even for kids, it's not that great.
Okay.
Where were we?
Alright, number one.
A reporter during the White House press briefing Talking about the masking and everything.
The reporter was concerned, and, you know, maybe you can, if you could put yourself into the mind of a race-obsessed left-wing reporter, maybe you can make sense of this, because I really can't.
But she's concerned that telling people they don't have to wear masks anymore might be racist.
Let's hear her out.
The largest national nurses union is saying that the CDC guidelines on masks is putting frontline workers and especially people of color at risk and that they're calling for the CDC to reverse that.
What's the White House's stance on that union in particular saying that they're members and people of color are at risk?
Well, I would say we don't have any particular response directly to the union.
I'm not going to show you the whole rambling response from Jen Psaki there, but It puts particularly people of color at risk.
Why?
In reality, it doesn't put anyone at risk, of course, but if it was going to put anyone at risk, why people of color?
It's a rhetorical question on my part.
I know the why.
It's instinct on the part of the media and people on the left.
It's just everything.
If they have a problem with anything, If there's anything they're opposed to, or anything they think is bad, they're going to immediately assume that it's also racist.
And they're not going to bother, even in their own minds, to sort that out and figure out, well, why is this racist?
They just assume that it is.
It's all instinctive.
Now, for more masking news, the mayor of Chicago You say you will follow the CDC's guidance?
What does that mean?
She was on MSNBC and she said that she respects, of course, the CDC and the CDC's guidance,
but she's going to reject it. Here's why. You say you will follow the CDC's guidance.
What does that mean? Should people in Chicago wear masks or not?
Well, I think we've got to get some clarification from the CDC.
The rollout, obviously, as the reporting has been, was a bit abrupt, and I think they've got a lot of clarification that they need to do.
I know, for me personally, I'm going to continue to wear a mask in public, and I'm going to encourage others to do so.
We've got to make sure that people are continuing to follow the public health guidance that has gotten us this far, and masks, I think, are a big and important part of that.
To say, well, if you're vaccinated, you don't have to wear a mask.
That's great.
But what about all the other people that are out there that aren't vaccinated?
And there's no way to know that.
So I think for the time being, most people are going to continue to wear masks outside and outside of their homes.
And I think that's smart.
And she's saying outside of your home.
So outdoors, indoors, you leave your home, wear the mask.
Because of unvaccinated people, Yes, there are unvaccinated people out there, but if you're vaccinated and the vaccines work, which you say they do, then why are you worried about the unvaccinated people?
What difference does that make?
They're not going to get you sick.
You're not going to get them sick.
Well, let me clarify.
They might still get you sick and you might get them sick.
Just not of COVID.
There's a million other things out there.
Yeah.
I've been saying that all along.
We think that we conquered COVID and now we're immortal, which is why I do kind of laugh when I, and I shouldn't laugh about this at all, but I kind of imagine it would be sort of funny, a little bit, if somebody, you know, they go and they get the COVID vaccine and then CDC makes the announcement and says, you can take the mask off.
And yeah, we got past the pandemic.
And so I was like, I'm immortal now, I'm fine.
And they just got the vaccine and they walk out of Walgreens and then they immediately get hit by a bus.
And die.
It's a little funny to imagine.
A little bit.
Because the threats are still out there.
There's still a million threats and something's still going to kill you.
But as far as COVID goes, why should you worry about the unvaccinated people from your own, using your own logic?
Now speaking of people who are still wearing the mask, we talked about this.
I want to read this to you, proving the point that I opened the show with yesterday, and I wish I had read this because this was an article in the New York Times that was published a couple days ago.
I just didn't see it before I did that monologue yesterday.
I wish I had seen it.
Perfectly proving the point.
Let me read a little bit of this to you.
This is from the New York Times.
It says, quote, Whenever Joe Glickman heads out for groceries, he places an N95 mask over his face and tugs a cloth mask on top of it.
He then pulls on a pair of goggles.
So, two masks and goggles every time he goes out to go grocery shopping.
He has used this safety protocol for the past 14 months.
It did not change after he contracted the coronavirus in November.
It did not budge when, earlier this month, he became fully vaccinated.
And even though President Joe Biden said on Thursday that fully vaccinated people do not have to wear a mask, Glickman said he planned to stay the course.
In fact, he said he plans to do his grocery run double-masked and goggled for at least the next five years.
Even as a combination of evolving public health recommendations and pandemic fatigue lead more Americans to toss the masks they have worn for more than a year, Glickman is among those who say they plan to keep their faces covered in public indefinitely.
For people like Glickman, a combination of anxiety, murky information about new virus variants, and the emergence of a sizable faction of vaccine holdouts means mask-free life is on hold, possibly forever.
Glickman, a professional photographer and musician from New York said, quote, I have no problem being one of the only people, but I don't think I'm going to be the only one.
And then it continues, but this guy double masked with goggles, fully vaccinated.
This is in any other time you saw, just imagine a year and a half ago.
Seeing a guy like that with goggles and two masks on at the grocery store, and assuming you knew that he had no other major health concerns, what would you think of that guy?
You would think that he's insane.
You would think that this is someone suffering certainly clinical hypochondria, OCD.
This is someone who should be in a mental institution.
This is someone who's a danger to himself and others, potentially.
This is a mentally unbalanced lunatic.
That would be everyone's assumption a year and a half ago, and you know what?
It's correct now, too.
But what I love most about this is that he says he got the virus back in November.
So he did all of that and he still got the virus.
This guy was walking around in two masks and goggles for 14 months and he still got it.
And yet it doesn't click.
He doesn't make the connection here.
Hmm.
I still got it.
Maybe this, everything I'm doing here isn't really working.
It's unnecessary.
So he got it and he was already immune from that.
And then he got the virus, the vaccine on top of it.
My Lord.
It's hard to even, on one hand, you want to laugh at these people because they're absurd, and they deserve to be laughed at, but on the other hand, it's incredibly disturbing.
One other thing here on the masking, I just want to play this for you.
Dr. Fauci interviewed on TV yet again, his favorite thing to do.
He's saying that he's not wearing the mask indoors anymore.
How has it changed what you do?
How has it changed your mask wearing practices?
Well, you know, George, I'm obviously careful because, I mean, I'm a physician and a health care provider.
of the pandemic. But there's a lot of people who are still in
the hospital, and they're all in the same relationships. How
has it changed? What you do?
How does it change your mask wearing practices? Well, you
know, Georgia. I'm obviously careful because I mean, I'm a
physician and a health care provider. I am now much more.
I mean, before the CDC made the recommendation change, I didn't want to look like I was giving mixed signals.
But being a fully vaccinated person, the chances of my getting infected in an indoor setting is extremely low.
And that's the reason why in indoor settings now, I feel comfortable about not wearing a mask because I'm fully vaccinated.
Okay, so he says there that he doesn't need the mask, he's not wearing it now.
Why did he wear it before?
Because he didn't want to send mixed signals, which is another way of saying that he was wearing it for show.
He was wearing it for symbolic reasons.
He was wearing it as theater.
It's theatrical.
He admits that there.
So now I want to go back to the ancient past of two months ago, when Rand Paul was questioning Fauci.
And said that wearing masks when you're fully vaccinated is theater.
And at the time, Dr. Fauci wasn't quite ready to admit that.
Let's watch that.
You're telling everybody to wear a mask, whether they've had an infection or a vaccine.
What I'm saying is they have immunity and everybody agrees they have immunity.
What studies do you have that people that have had the vaccine or have had the infection are spreading the infection?
If we're not spreading the infection, isn't it just theater?
No, it's not.
You had the vaccine and you're wearing two masks.
Isn't that theater?
No, it's not.
Here we go again with the theater.
Let's get down to the facts.
Okay, the studies that you quote from Crotty and Sette look at in vitro examination of memory immunity.
Which in their paper, they specifically say, this does not necessarily pertain to the actual protection.
It's in vitro.
And what study can you point to that shows significant reinfection?
There are no studies that show significant reinfection.
Let me finish the response to your question, if you please.
The other thing is that when you talk about reinfection, and you don't keep in the concept of variance, that's an entirely different ballgame.
So that was him two months ago.
It's not a year ago.
It's two months ago.
We're talking about March 2020.
That's March 2021.
And he say, oh, here we go again with the theater.
It's not that at all.
And then fast forward two months and he say, yeah, it was all theater.
It's just a liar.
All of these people lying like they breathe.
I don't even know if they can tell anymore when they're lying.
Okay, next, moving on here, you may recall how Bill Gates was effectively canonized, certainly over the past year, but probably for much longer than that.
We were supposed to listen to Bill Gates about the coronavirus.
It was never really explained why we should listen to this guy.
Is he an expert on this?
What is his opinion matter?
I know he's got a lot of money, he's very rich, but does that make him an expert on, does that make him an epidemiologist also?
But we were supposed to listen to him, trust him implicitly.
But that all changed, and rapidly so, after news that he and his wife were getting divorced.
And now there's just an avalanche of stories coming out about Bill Gates.
Including this one.
This is probably the most damning.
This is from the New York Post.
It says, Jeffrey Epstein reportedly gave advice to Bill Gates about ending his marriage with his now estranged wife, Melinda, during meetings the two had at the pedophile's Manhattan townhouse.
Epstein, who killed himself in August 2019, allegedly, in a lower Manhattan jail cell, gave Gates some pointers about what the Microsoft co-founder called his toxic marriage to Melinda.
Epstein and Gates met dozens of times, but from 2011 to 2014, the report said, with Gates treating the get-togethers as an escape.
A person who attended some of the meetings told the publication, most of the gatherings occurred at Epstein's Upper East Side pad.
A source told the outlet, quote, it's not an overstatement.
Going to Jeffrey's was a respite from his marriage.
It was a way of getting away from Melinda.
During some of the meetings, Gates spoke to Epstein about possibly getting involved with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, but a spokesperson for Bill Gates denied the allegations in a statement to the Daily Beast, quote, Bill never received or solicited personal advice of any kind from Epstein on marriage or anything else.
Bill never complained about Melinda or his marriage to Epstein, according to the spokesperson.
Okay, a few things here.
Number one, of all people, why are you consulting Jeffrey Epstein for marriage advice?
He's a bachelor, a pedophile, sex trafficker, and you're a billionaire, and you can consult anyone in the world, and he's the guy you go to for marriage advice.
That's interesting.
Number two, we know that all of this stuff, of course, we can assume is coming from Melinda's camp, and she's got a PR team.
If you're a billionaire getting divorced, find Melinda Gates's PR team because they're doing some work here.
But third, this just goes to show, this is the media.
Yet again, as I said, canonizing someone and then changing course.
It's not even as though changing course over a period of years or something, there's this gradual change in the way we're supposed to view this person.
It's a sudden shift.
This is from the Daily Wire.
It says, former Brooklyn Center Police Department officer Kim Potter, who shouted Taser moments before fatally shooting a 20-year-old man who appeared to be resisting arrest, according to the video of the altercation, will stand trial for manslaughter at the end of this year, according to a Hennepin County judge.
According to the Washington Post, Henneman County Judge Regina Chu said that Potter will be scheduled for trial in December in connection with Dante Wright's death.
Potter, who served on the police force for 26 years before resigning, was charged with second-degree manslaughter mere days after the fateful altercation with Wright.
So they're moving forward with this pretty quickly.
She was the one, you remember, we don't need to play the clip again, but she was the one Well, starting with Dante Wright was the one who allegedly committed an armed robbery of a woman, choked her in the process, and there was a warrant out for his arrest, and he was stopped for traffic violation.
They saw the warrant, tried to arrest him.
He resisted arrest, climbed back into his car, and then Kim Potter shouted taser, but didn't pull the taser, shot him, and then said, oh crap, admitting basically on camera that it was a mistake.
And then Dante Wright died, now she's being charged with manslaughter.
The interesting thing about this case is that it seems to me, from a legal perspective, ironically, if she had done it on purpose, and had said from the beginning that she did it on purpose, I think she would have a more persuasive legal case.
I think they'd still be bringing her up on charges, because that's just the way these things go now.
Innocent or not, they're gonna bring you up on charges if you're a cop and you kill someone in the course of an arrest.
But I think if she had said, if it was intentional, if she had said from the beginning that it was intentional, then she'd have a very good case.
Because he's someone wanted for armed robbery.
So this is an alleged violent, a suspected violent criminal.
He's resisting arrest.
He's climbing back into his car.
He could be reaching for something.
You don't know what he's going to do.
He could be reaching for something.
Also, keep in mind, his vehicle is a weapon.
And this happens frequently, that vehicles are used as weapons against police officers during the course of an arrest.
And not only that, but even if he's not reaching for a weapon, he gets back into the car, goes on a high-speed chase.
Now the community is put at risk.
Who knows what could happen from there?
So I think she could have had a real case for shooting him on purpose for all of those reasons.
But she admitted it was an accident, so that goes out the window.
And then you think about, okay, well, it was an accident.
Does that mean she should be charged with manslaughter?
And I would say even there, no.
I don't think she should be brought up on charges.
It was a mistake.
And, you know, you could think of it similar to medical mistakes.
Thousands of medical mistakes happen every year, and people die because of them.
And you don't normally hear about surgeons and doctors going to jail because of it, even though somebody died.
And it's a terrible thing.
A life was lost.
But we also understand that these are life or death things, and we have doctors involved in these situations, and if we tell them that, hey, listen, if anything goes wrong here, you're going to go to prison, Well, then you're probably not gonna end up with a lot of doctors at the end of the day.
So I would put it in that category.
I think it was a mistake like that.
It was clearly a mistake.
But why did it happen?
Yeah, it was a mistake on her end, but it happened because Dante Wright took it naturally.
He resisted arrest.
He's, again, suspected violent criminal.
Resisting arrest, climbing back into his car.
You're taking your life into your hands when you do that.
So he is the one who took this situation from a peaceful, non-lethal situation.
They were in the process of arresting him, and they would have just put him in a car and taken him to jail, and he can fight the charges in court like you're supposed to.
His life was not in jeopardy at all until he made the decision that he made.
So he is the one who created this situation.
He is the one who put Kim Potter in the position where she could make a mistake like that.
So if you want to put cops in a position where they could make a fatal mistake, then don't do that.
I mean, don't be a violent criminal to begin with.
It's probably the best course of action.
But then if you are, and they come to arrest you, as they're supposed to, don't resist arrest and start reaching around for things.
In a fair and just society, I think that's what we would do.
You take Kim Potter, you take her off the force, obviously.
Do you need to put her in prison?
Is she a threat to the public?
Is anyone worried that she's a danger to the public?
You take her off the force, it's not... She's not a danger to the public.
I don't see how justice is served by sending her to prison.
What's achieved by, you know, you put her in prison for 10 years.
Okay, what does that achieve?
We can assume that she's already distraught by this.
That her life is already ruined.
There's probably nothing you can do to make her feel worse about it.
And where does the fault lie ultimately, or rather, where does the fault begin?
It begins with Dante Wright.
All that to say, That's how it should be, but how is it actually going to be?
How it actually is going to be is that she's probably going to go to jail for 10 years, if not longer.
All right, moving on to reading the YouTube comments.
This is from Andrea.
She says, when Matt yells at us to hit the like button, we get a small taste of his kids' lives.
Pray for them.
Well, you're right, Andrea.
I do yell at my kids to like my YouTube videos.
That is, they know that any time I post a YouTube video, they better go on their accounts and like it immediately.
Anytime I say, hey kids, did you like my YouTube video?
Did you see my new content?
You didn't like it yet?
No dinner until you like my YouTube videos.
That's the way things are run in my house.
Another comment says, if you don't want to wear a mask, simply stop wearing one.
You'd be surprised how few people will say anything to you, but if they do, tell them you have medical reasons not to wear one.
By law, they're not permitted to question you about your medical status.
Well, it's been the case all along that people need to take charge of their own lives.
I would say this especially not just about you, but also your kids.
People that are still sending their kids out there wearing masks, claiming that they're following local ordinances or the rules at different establishments.
At a certain point, you have to just do the right thing, whether you have permission to or not.
Kimberly says, so now my dating profile will not only say must not love dogs, it will say must not wear masks.
Kimberly, you have your head on your shoulders and your priorities straight.
Well done.
Matthew says, I look forward to a day when my children will not be judged by a mask on their face, but by the content of their character.
Well, to be clear, I don't judge children for their mask at all.
I judge their parents.
And James says, hey Matt, I just realized that Bigfoot and the aliens are like the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus for adults.
How dare you, sir?
You are banned from the show.
You could say that, but that kind of slander is allowed for Bigfoot, because I'm pretty sure he doesn't exist.
But aliens?
You might want to be really careful what you say, considering they're here, and they're listening.
Uh, and finally on Bigfoot, Neon White says, every year over 15 million people buy hunting licenses and go out into the woods with guns to kill things.
If Bigfoot was real, there's a 100% chance that someone would have shot one by now.
Uh, yeah, not a 100% chance, but I put it at like, there's like an 80% chance at least.
So that's one of the reasons among many why I, I, unfortunately I can't believe in Bigfoot, but I'm still open to being convinced if anyone wants to try.
You know, I don't know about you, but my idea of a good time is not spending hours at an auto parts store.
Sometimes I'm not sure what my idea of a good time actually is, but it's definitely not at an auto parts store.
And that's why I'm so happy to have rockauto.com.
It's so much easier than walking into a store and someone demanding quick answers that you might not know the answer to.
And then they usually just have to order the part online anyway, because even if you can answer their questions, they're not going to have what you need.
They order the part.
Cut out the middleman.
Go to rockauto.com yourself.
You've got your phone in your pocket.
Just pull it out.
Go to rockauto.com.
They always offer the lowest prices possible.
They're not going to change prices.
And also, it's a really easy site to navigate.
You can quickly find what you're looking for.
And you're going to see all the parts available for your vehicle and choose the brands and specifications and the parts you prefer.
And listen, they're a family business.
They've been serving customers online for 20 years.
So if you need auto parts, go to rockauto.com right now.
See all the parts available for your car or truck.
And as always, we tell you, remember to write Walsh in there.
How did you hear about us box?
So they know that we sent you.
And not everyone has the privilege of getting to know the one and only Candace Owens live and in person, but that might be about to change for you.
If you sign up as a Daily Wire member with code VIP, you'll also get 20% off your new membership and be automatically entered for a chance to win a trip to the Daily Wire studios to see Candace live.
Not only will you be meeting Candace, you'll be getting an inside look at her studio, our office, and front row seats to watch her live and in action on her talk show, Candace.
And also we should mention, If you come here, you're going to be in the general vicinity of one Matt Walsh as well.
You're not going to meet me, but I'll be around.
You may walk the ground that I walked upon.
That's a, that's a perk.
You got to admit.
So don't wait, go to enter to win a Candace VIP pass now at dailywire.com slash wall slash subscribe.
That is it's dailywire.com slash subscribe.
This is all about me all of a sudden using code VIP for 20% off and for an experience that only Joe Biden could forget.
Rim shot.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
One of the most boring news events that we have to endure every 17 years is the emergence of the cicadas, when they crawl out of their underground lair to wreak havoc across the land, all at the behest of the evil wizard, Sormon.
I may be confusing them with orcs from Lord of the Rings, come to think of it.
But in any case, the whole thing always ends up being a dud.
The cicadas are hyped up for years, and then they come out, and they fly around for a little bit, and they die.
The only thing that makes this year's cicada batch a little bit more interesting is that this time, there are a bunch of freaks out there in the media trying to convince us to eat them.
This headline on Wired.com is typical.
It says, The cicadas are coming.
Let's eat them.
Why not embrace Brood X as the free-range, sustainable source of protein that it truly is?
Popular Science's headline says, The Brood X cicadas are coming and you should eat them.
Here's how.
And the New York Post says, eating trendy Brood X cicadas, what the bug recipes taste like.
Now, I'm not sure how the cicadas themselves are trendy.
I've never really thought of bugs in that way.
But if you're wondering what these recipes are, well, WJZ in Baltimore had a report a few days ago featuring a Johns Hopkins doctor giving some tips on how to prepare your cicada snack.
So here's that.
All right, cicadas, look, soon going to be buzzing around everywhere in our area.
It's going to be fun.
This was inevitable.
One expert at Johns Hopkins says they make cicadas, that is, for a very tasty and eco-friendly meal.
Stetson Miller has this for us.
Cicadas will soon be crawling all over Maryland.
Trillions of them in our backyards and trees.
And believe it or not, that means a lot of opportunities to try out a new snack, according to one Johns Hopkins professor.
They're a lot like shrimp.
They're like tree shrimp.
Sustainable food expert Jessica Fonzo is planning to collect and eat cicadas herself, and wants you to know that they're a great source of protein and also great for the environment.
We're in the middle of climate change.
Insects, they are a great alternative source to other animal source foods, which for example
cows which are producing a lot of greenhouse gas emissions.
If you're brave enough to try one, she says you should pick out the nymphs while they're
still white.
The ones that have just come out of the ground and only eat the females.
You can then freeze them in a bag, and then when you're ready to eat, boil them first for two minutes and then cook them to your liking.
You can roast them in the oven, put some salt and pepper on there, some Old Bay seasoning on them.
There's even a free cookbook online dedicated to cicada dishes called Cicada-licious.
Professor Fonzo is urging people to give them a try as an alternative, green source of food that only comes around once every 17 years.
Now, first of all, I have to say, claiming that they taste like shrimp is not a selling point to me.
Shrimp are hideous, foul-tasting, tiny little mutant beasts themselves.
They live in the dark depths of the ocean, 10,000 feet underwater.
So they're tiny and gross and ugly, and God put them in the ocean, deep down.
Basically a bright neon sign from heaven saying, don't eat this crap.
And yet we didn't catch the hint.
We still scooped them up, shoveled them into our fat faces.
So cicadas are like shrimp, not helping your case, if true.
But it's not true.
Bugs don't taste like shrimp.
They taste like bugs.
I've eaten some bugs.
I've had crickets.
You can go to my Instagram right now and see the video.
Do you know what the crickets tasted like?
They tasted exactly like you think a cricket would taste.
There is no surprise.
The moment you eat a bug, your immediate reaction is, yep, that's a bug.
And your second reaction is, oh lord, all of its limbs are now stuck in my teeth.
It's not a pleasant experience.
But it's one that our cultural overlords want us to have more often.
The push to eat bugs has been going on for a while now.
It's got big money behind it.
Speaking of Bill Gates, the Bill Gates Foundation has been promoting bug harvesting for a long time, though I sincerely doubt that Gates himself has ever sat down to a bowl of beetle soup.
The Guardian had a lengthy article a few days ago titled, If we want to save the planet, the future of food is insects, fried crickets on the school menu, milk made from fly larvae, and mealworm bolognese for dinner.
These are the environmentally friendly meals we can look forward to.
Bon appétit.
Milk made from fly larvae.
Well, that's only slightly more grotesque than almond milk, at least.
But this is what the elites want for us.
The UN, too, has come out to promote bug eating.
Overall, the future they imagine for us is one where we're living in our pod home the size of a shipping container, eating cockroaches for breakfast, and wearing medical masks whenever we leave the house.
They want us all to live like we're the last survivors in a post-apocalyptic hellscape, basically.
That's the ideal vision of the future in their minds.
And I find their vision repugnant.
Especially when it comes to the meal plan.
First of all, it's not necessary to eat bugs in order to save the planet.
You're not going to change the weather by eating bugs.
I shouldn't have to say that.
The claim being advanced by these people, and this is no straw man, it's actually what they believe, the claim is that if you eat crickets for lunch enough times, there will be fewer hurricanes.
It's the weirdest form of magical thinking.
Because as the logic goes, cows fart and burp a lot, and that's helping to cause weather-related catastrophes, and it's also melting the ice caps, so we have to look for a less flatulent food source.
But not only is this ridiculous, not to mention a form of body shaming towards the poor cows, but it also ignores the tastier solution, which is eat more cows and eat them faster so they have less time to fart.
Second, we're told that bugs are a sustainable resource.
You know, we don't have to worry about running out.
They say that now anyway.
We all know that once everyone starts eating bugs, it's only a matter of time before they tell us that our bug-chomping ways are causing a bug shortage, and now we have to start getting our nutrients by eating dirt popsicles and drinking smoothies made from pond scum in our own urine or something.
But also, more to the point, even if bugs are sustainable, so is our current diet.
We aren't running out of food.
There are people in this country, and certainly across the world, who need food, but that's a matter of distribution, not supply.
It's similar to the idea that the world is overpopulated and we're running out of space.
But that's not the case at all.
We have plenty of space.
In fact, the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of Texas if we wanted to.
The problem is in how the space we have is utilized.
We tend to crowd ourselves like sardines into cities while leaving huge swaths of land empty.
So we're doing a pretty bad job of using the space available.
That's the point.
Just as we may be doing a subpar job in some cases of using resources, but that's not the same thing as running out.
Third, most importantly, as already covered, eating bugs is disgusting.
It is beneath us as civilized people.
We are too high on the food chain to reduce ourselves to that barbarity.
The push to make us eat bugs is anti-human and it's degrading.
There's a reason why we are viscerally repulsed by the thought of eating bugs, or even just the sight of bugs.
They're dirty.
They're disease-infested.
They're gross.
They are pests, not cuisine.
You call an exterminator when you have bugs in your house.
You don't look up recipes.
When your kid comes to you and tells you there's a spider in his room, you tell him to bring you a shoe, not the garlic powder.
In summary, bugs are meant to be stomped on and destroyed.
Not put into your mouth, you sick freaks.
And so eating bugs is cancelled today.
And we'll leave it there.
Thanks for listening.
Thanks for watching.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
Also, 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, 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 director is Austin Stevens.
Production manager Pavel Vodovsky.
The show is edited by Sasha Tolmachev.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and makeup is done by Nika Geneva.
And our production coordinator is McKenna Waters.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Brazil transforms Christ the Redeemer into a massive Dr. Fauci.
Eric Clapton complains of a brutal reaction to the COVID vaccine.
