Ep. 827 - The Disgraceful Political Show Trial Of Kyle Rittenhouse
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, as the Kyle Rittenhouse case heads to trial next week, we’ll talk about the people who should really be standing trial for everything that happened in Kenosha last summer. Also, the Daily Wire breaks major news that could be the nail in the McAuliffe campaign’s coffin. And more damning information has come out about the armorer on the set of that Alec Baldwin movie. Was this a diversity hire gone wrong? Plus, an Instagram influencer poses for selfies next to her father’s coffin. And in our Daily Cancellation, I’m afraid I must cancel many of you in the audience. I don’t want to do it, but I must.
Daily Wire just signed ousted ESPN sportscaster Allison Williams who resisted Disney’s vaccine mandate for a new sports series. Take back your content from the Hollywood elites - get 25% off a Daily Wire membership with code DONOTCOMPLY: https://utm.io/udJyw
You petitioned, and we heard you. Made for Sweet Babies everywhere: get the official Sweet Baby Gang t-shirt here: https://utm.io/udIX3
Subscribe to Morning Wire, Daily Wire’s new morning news podcast, and get the facts first on the news you need to know: https://utm.io/udyIF
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, as the Kyle Rittenhouse case heads to trial next week, we'll talk about the people who should really be standing trial for everything that happened in Kenosha last summer.
Also, The Daily Wire breaks major news that could be the nail in the McAuliffe campaign's coffin, and more damning information has come out about the armorer on the set of that Alec Baldwin movie.
Was this a diversity hire gone wrong?
Plus, an Instagram influencer poses for selfies next to her father's coffin, and in our daily cancellation, I'm afraid I must cancel Many of you in the audience.
I don't want to do it, but I have no choice.
All of that and much more today on the Matt Wall Show.
As we survey the scorched and barren landscape of America circa 2021, you may arrive at the
conclusion that the people running this show have done, you know, less than a stellar job.
You may even say that President Biden, though still very early in his tenure, is already making a run for the title of worst president ever.
He presents a compelling case for himself.
Gas prices are skyrocketing.
Grocery store shelves are empty.
Our cities are gripped by historic levels of violence and crime.
The FBI terrorizes parents at school board meetings.
Our military worries about diversity and inclusion.
And the State Department celebrates Pronouns Day while China strengthens its empire across the globe.
And although Biden promised to assume office and shut down the coronavirus, it has in fact killed more people under his watch than it did under Trump.
All of this, and we haven't even mentioned the 13 U.S.
service members killed in Afghanistan, all of it would seem to add up to, if not the worst first year in presidential history, certainly very close to the top of the list in the conversation for the title.
But then again, in the interest of balance and fairness, We must acknowledge Joe Biden's one achievement, and it's a major one.
Incredibly, although he is a barely sentient lump of Play-Doh, Biden has still managed somehow to achieve one historic feat, and that is that he solved systemic racism.
You might not have noticed, but he did, and it's a pretty big deal.
I would hope you would agree.
Admittedly, you know, I have no direct evidence that Biden solved systemic racism, or even that there was any systemic racism to solve in the first place, but there's a very good circumstantial case that can be made.
Consider this.
In Trump's tenure, mostly during the election season, coincidentally, every police shooting of a black suspect was the result of racism, which is why it was necessary for BLM to riot continuously for six months.
Every shooting was a big deal, you might recall.
It was a major topic of conversation.
It was all the media focused on for months.
And then amazingly, almost miraculously, Joe Biden took office in January of this year, And ever since then, there has not been one BLM riot.
Nobody is talking about police shootings anymore.
It's not because there haven't been any.
The numbers this year are about what they were last year, but apparently it would seem that none of these shootings are racism-related.
Every shooting under Trump during the campaign was racism.
None of them under Biden are racism.
Wow.
Either that or BLM stopped caring about racism entirely.
Either that or the whole police brutality panic was always a political ploy and BLM are a bunch of evil underhanded duplicitous fraudulent race hustling hacks.
You know, those are kind of the options.
And on second thought, maybe that third option might be the right one.
In any case, memories of those ancient days are now coming back to the surface as the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse is set to commence next week.
Rittenhouse is, of course, the young man who shot three attackers, two fatally, during the riots in Kenosha in the summer of 2020, back when systemic racism existed.
It's relevant to note that those riots were sparked, ostensibly, By the shooting of Jacob Blake by Officer Rustin Sheskey.
Blake was shot after accosting a woman who he had previously allegedly raped, and then fighting with police while armed with a knife, and finally trying to climb into a car that was not his while children were sitting in the back seat.
Officer Sheskey was cleared by local prosecutors and by Biden's DOJ.
The latter was announced just a few weeks ago with little notice paid to it.
Did you even hear about that?
Even Biden's DOJ couldn't find any charges to hang on Chesky, and not for lack of trying.
But his actions were so utterly and unassailably justified, and Blake was so clearly the bad guy and the aggressor in the situation, that even the people over at the DOJ under Biden couldn't find anything to do with this case other than let it quietly go away.
Be that as it may, riots broke out, or rather continued, and Rittenhouse, who arrived on the scene to try and help protect property owners from the rampant destruction being visited upon them by the unchecked mob, eventually was forced to use his weapon in self-defense.
And it was indeed self-defense.
Okay, it was not just, in fact, it was not just self-defense, but it was one of the clearest cut cases of self-defense that you will ever see on film.
That's not an exaggeration.
Video footage proves, incontrovertibly, that Rittenhouse was being pursued, attacked, by violent mobs who had made their intentions clear both by word and deed.
Rittenhouse can be seen trying first to flee, and only resorting to deadly force when he had no other choice.
To say that it was not self-defense is to say that Rittenhouse had a legal obligation to submit himself to the mob, trusting, I guess, that they'll only beat him severely and not go beyond that.
In fact, the case against Rittenhouse is so flimsy that the prosecutors themselves, while trying to make the case against him, can't help but accidentally vindicate him.
So yesterday, in a pretrial hearing, Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge Bruce Schroeder ruled that prosecutors may not refer to the dead rioters as victims.
And this has led to a major temper tantrum among leftists online, as you can imagine.
But the ruling makes sense.
To call them victims is to assume that they were murdered.
But murder is what the prosecution must prove, so it can't be assumed ahead of time.
Yet the judge will allow, and the left, you know they love this detail even more, the judge will allow the defense to call the dead rioters rioters and looters and arsonists, though only during closing arguments if they present evidence that the labels are accurate, which they are.
Here is the prosecution protesting this decision and explaining, you know, why they have a problem with it.
But listen to what is actually being said here.
Listen.
What I'm hearing the defense say is, for example, Mr. Rosenbaum started fires that night.
Well, that has nothing to do with the allegation that he chased after Mr. Rittenhouse and tried to physically attack him.
Arsonists or alleged arson has nothing to do with an alleged physical assault.
There's an argument that Mr. Rosenbaum was shouting racial slurs.
That has nothing to do with a physical assault.
There's an allegation that he's telling other people at Ultimate Gas Station to shoot him, which Clearly is different than what was going on with Mr. Rittenhouse.
He clearly didn't want Mr. Rittenhouse to shoot him, so I don't see that there's any commonality there.
So, this is bad character evidence, Your Honor.
This is an attempt to tell the jury Mr. Rosenbaum's a bad guy and deserved to die.
That's really what it is.
He was an arsonist, he was a rioter, he was starting problems, he was disorderly, he was loud, he was whatever.
Therefore, It was okay for the defendant to kill him.
That's really what's going on here, Your Honor.
And that's not at all what 90404 allows.
Yeah, well, the prosecutor really laid that out well, didn't he?
I mean, one of the quote-unquote victims, Rosenbaum, was an out-of-control violent rioter who did pursue Kyle Rittenhouse, did try to whip up a mob, and by the way, he was also a sex offender charged with molesting a minor.
Many of these facts are directly relevant, and the rest are indirectly relevant because they establish what sort of man this quote-unquote victim was, which lends more credence to Rittenhouse's version.
of events, though the most credence comes from the video footage, which is, again, already decisive and exculpatory.
You'll notice that the mindless hordes calling for Rittenhouse's head, they don't have any interest in talking about the actual events of that night, because they know that the events themselves absolve the defendant of any wrongdoing.
Instead, they say that Rittenhouse shouldn't have been there in the first place.
And they make a big deal about the fact that he crossed state lines.
Every post you see from, you know, someone on that side of this online about the Rittenhouse case, every single one, in all capsules, like, he crossed state lines!
He crossed state lines!
Well, so what?
What they don't mention is that the kid worked in Kenosha.
It's not as though he traveled hundreds of miles by plane, train, automobile to get there.
Even if he did, I'm not sure I see what the relevance would be.
But he worked in the community.
He was very much a community member.
Earlier, he had been helping clean up graffiti.
He was more of a community member and more involved and more concerned about his community than any of those rioters.
Hands down.
So he belonged there as much as anybody else on the street that night.
Though, you might say that none of them belonged there.
Because none of it should have happened.
And on that point, you'd be correct.
Kyle Rittenhouse should not have felt the need to patrol the street with a gun.
Not because there was no need, but because there should not have been a need.
The BLM mobs never should have been allowed to reign terror and destruction for weeks and months on end.
In response to a police shooting that was completely justified.
The police should have done their jobs.
They should have been allowed to do their jobs.
Those in charge of establishing and enforcing law and order should have done so.
They're the ones to blame for all this, ultimately.
So if anyone should be on trial in the Kyle Rittenhouse case, it shouldn't be Kyle Rittenhouse.
It should be the mayor of Kenosha and the governor of Wisconsin.
They ought to be standing there in chains, facing a lifetime in prison for handing their city over to thugs and looters and abandoning their citizens to the violence and chaos that inevitably followed.
Rittenhouse went to Kenosha that night to do what they would not do.
He was attacked and had to defend himself in the process, making him a victim in this story.
And now his victimhood is compounded by this politically motivated show trial.
So in the end, you know, you might say that the left is correct.
That it will be an outrage if Kyle Rittenhouse just walks away from all of this a free man.
Because he should walk away a free and rich man after suing for malicious prosecution.
That would be true justice in this case.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
Okay, I just want to show this quickly before we get to the headlines right at the top here,
because it is pretty outrageous.
Biba Adams, who's a reporter, brings this to our attention.
Let's pull up the tweet.
So she was at Walmart, and here it is.
She says, this is a toy tank, like for kids to ride in.
Who the F wants to buy kids a tank?
Never mind, I know who.
And yes, this is Walmart.
And then she She censors the word Walmart, which is a vulgarity now, I suppose.
So it's this giant toy tank that I guess is that kids can ride in.
And I have to say, this is terrible.
I am stunned.
It makes me sick with anger.
Because why didn't they have something like this when I was a kid?
Why didn't we have toys as cool as this?
It drives me crazy.
I'm fuming over it.
Every time I go to the toy section, To get my kids a toy.
I'm looking around, I'm getting mad because where was all this stuff when I was a kid?
Apparently that thing actually fires Nerf balls as well, so it's kind of functional, which is awesome.
I'll tell you my one objection to toys like this.
This is my only one.
It's not that it encourages violence, or whatever.
It is, as a parent, that that's the kind of thing you get for your kid, and it's awesome, and it's amazing, and you would have loved it when you were a kid, and you get it, and you give it to them, and they're super excited, and they use it once, and they love it, and they're thrilled, and they never use it again.
That's the way that always goes.
How many, just every single holiday as a parent, you go through this.
In fact, just last year, I got my kids this.
It wasn't as cool as the tank, but I got them this really, this really neat, and this is how I sold it to them.
I said, this is really neat, guys.
A really neat remote control car.
I had remote control cars when I was a kid, but this thing was, it was like top speeds.
It would go like 60 miles an hour.
That's probably an exaggeration, but it would go really fast.
It could go on any terrain.
It could flip over and keep going.
It had little lasers and lights.
It could play music.
It was the coolest thing.
And I take him outside, you know, and first I'm playing with remote control first just to make sure it's safe.
You know, I said I got to play with it for 10 minutes just to make sure it doesn't explode or anything.
I just want to make sure it's safe.
And it's the coolest thing ever.
And, you know, then my sons are playing with it a little bit and then they run off to the woods and they come back and they say, Daddy, look what we found.
A really pointy stick.
And they have a pointy stick.
And then that's what they play with.
They don't care about the remote control car anymore.
So that's my problem with the tank.
But other than that, That is, uh, I want to thank Biba Adams for pointing us in that direction.
Um, maybe they make them for adults.
I guess that would just be a regular tank.
So here's what, um, let's talk about Virginia and the campaign.
We'll start with this.
Here's what Terry McAuliffe was doing last night.
And I'm going to make you watch this as punishment.
It's really punishment for watching my show rather than just listening to it like a normal podcast listener.
So here he is with, with Joe Biden.
Let's play this.
Um, there he is dancing.
Yeah.
This is penance that you have to watch that.
It's penance for the audience.
Play it one more time.
Make him watch it again.
Look at those moves.
He's like your drunk, creepy uncle trying to hula hoop or something.
Look, if you can't dance, then don't.
All right, especially not on... This is the kind of arrogance that these people have in the bubble that they've lived in.
Because this is not the first time that Terry McAuliffe has done this.
He gets on stages and dances all the time.
Nobody's ever sat him down and said, listen, Terry, this is awful.
You're traumatizing people.
Will you stop it?
Every time you dance, you drop five points in the polls.
Nobody tells him.
I think probably bigger news though from Terry McAuliffe is this exclusive from the Daily Wire.
It says a law firm that employed Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe has made a cottage industry out of aggressively fighting victims of alleged sexual abuse in schools, being paid handsomely to defend school systems that the girls say fail to protect them.
In one case, the Hunton Andrews Kurth law firm, where McAuliffe served as a senior advisor for 2019 until recently, is battling a young woman who says that, and this is horrific, says that she was repeatedly raped on her Fairfax County Middle School campus as a 12-year-old, and that she was slashed with a knife, burned with a lighter, and anally penetrated.
The law firm and McAuliffe's campaign refused to comment on whether the law firm still employs McAuliffe by the deadline, but McAuliffe reported income apparently linked to the firm in 2021 after announcing his run for governor of Virginia on December 8th, 2020.
Later advertisements from the firm for McAuliffe fundraisers referred to McAuliffe as a former colleague.
The girl said she was afraid of having a real name attached to the case because one of her alleged tormentors had threatened to kill her if she came forward.
The McAuliffe-linked law firm is seeking to have the case thrown out because it was filed under a pseudonym, even though there's no dispute that the school system knows who she is.
In a separate case, and I can't read this, you gotta go to Daily Wire and read the entire story, but I'll read one more example here.
It's a long story.
It's an important story.
A girl alleged that the FCPS administrators were told of an unwanted sexual incident on a band trip.
A school security officer told her there was no point in seeking criminal charges, and the school gave an award to her alleged abuser.
Hutton told the court that the school system lost documentation showing its investigation of the allegations, in part because it was not using a sexual harassment allegation database that it had promised to use pursuant to a federal settlement in the other girl's case.
Okay, so if you're wondering, As I've been telling you about, and again you can go to dailywire.com and see the entire story there.
It's another exclusive story.
As we're doing more investigative pieces like this, going out and covering the stories that the corporate media will not cover.
These are, this is real news, real news stories.
And yet another reason why, by the way, you should subscribe and become a member.
And if you do that right now, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use promo code real news.
You can become a member of Daily Wire that way.
But.
If you're wondering, the reason why this story is so important, aside from the fact that Terry McAuliffe is trying to become the governor of Virginia at a time when they have a crisis in the school system with a lack of accountability, and this is someone who wants to become the governor who's partly responsible for that lack of accountability.
But the other thing that makes this so important is that, as I've been telling you about the epidemic of sexual abuse in the school system, Uh, one of the reasons why we don't, we don't hear about it because of guys like Terry McAuliffe and the people in the law firm and the tricks that the school system plays, not just in Loudoun County, um, but across the country.
You know, I told you about that AP report.
This was, Every once in a while, you know, the corporate media will do some real investigation or report some real news.
And so a few years ago, the AP did a report about sexual abuse on public school campuses by students on other students.
And then you've got you've got teacher on student sexual abuse, which is a whole other category.
And there's thousands of such cases and millions of literally millions of victims of that.
The AP, when they thought to look into it a few years ago, they found that through the previous few years, there had been something like 17,000 cases.
17,000!
Just in that few-year window, and just student-on-student abuse.
This stuff is very common.
Very common.
But we don't find out about it, and this is one of the reasons.
All the different ways of hiding it from the public.
It's all about how they categorize these incidents, whether they choose to pursue it and pursue legal action.
And then you also have kids who, like the girl in the story, are terrified to come forward.
I mean, think about all these Me Too cases we heard about.
And the question was, well, how did, how did, um, you know, how did Weinstein manage to, to do this for decades without anyone coming, really coming forward and saying anything about it?
Um, all of these, all these victims, all these women who fell victim to it.
I mean, why did they come forward and say anything?
Why did it go on for decades?
And the reason that we're given is that, well, they were afraid to do it.
They felt intimidated.
They were worried about their Hollywood careers and so forth.
Well, if that's the case for adults, what about 12 and 13-year-old girls in middle school and high school who fall victim to this?
And they've got no one advocating for them, no one on their side.
What hope do they have?
So this is a major story.
This is a major, far-reaching story across the country.
And here at The Daily Wire, we're going to continue to pursue that and let you know about it.
Meanwhile, Terry McAuliffe doesn't care about the students who are raped in Loudoun County schools or in any other schools, but the students themselves certainly care.
And that's why hundreds of students across Loudoun County We have some footage here, staged a walkout yesterday because of Loudoun County's cover-up of rapes of students, multiple rapes of students, in the Loudoun County school system.
So you can see there, and it wasn't just one school, there were multiple schools where the kids walked out.
You see it here, but once again, if you go to corporate media for your news coverage, you probably didn't know this happened.
So I want you to compare, here we've got hundreds of high school students walking out because of the sexual abuse and rape of their fellow classmates in school during school hours.
So compare the media coverage of that, which was nil, there was basically no coverage, to the, you know, the few dozen weirdos who walked out of Netflix headquarters because Dave Chappelle told some jokes that made their tummies hurt.
Corporate media, three weeks of coverage for that, and still ongoing.
I mean, at the actual walkout at Netflix, there were far more news cameras than there were people walking out.
But these kids, there's some local coverage, and then you're hearing about it from conservative media, but that's it.
Because this is simply not a conversation that the corporate media wants to have.
Okay, what else do we have here?
We'll stay on the school board issue for a minute.
As we know, it's not just a problem in Lowndon County.
Here's a Minnesota school board which has instated new rules to stop those domestic terrorist parents from reigning terror at the school board meetings.
Here's Jodi Sapp.
She's a school board member.
And here she is explaining the new rules.
Listen.
I just want to remind everyone this is a business meeting of the school board.
It is not a meeting that belongs to the public.
Each speaker is asked to state his or her name and address for the record.
Failure to do so will result in an individual... This is a meeting of the... This is not a meeting for the public.
She says this meeting does not belong to the public.
No, Jody.
I got news for you.
The entire public school system is supposed to belong to the public.
It is all public concern.
All of it.
That's why we call it the public school system.
But this is how they feel about it.
This is, as parents, this is simply not your business.
And if you're going to intrude in our business, which is deciding what your kids are going to be taught and how they're treated, and whether their sexual abuse will be reported to police and all that, if you want to intrude in our business, then you got to follow our rules.
We're going to make it as hard for you as possible.
So here she is explaining the rules.
Keep playing.
Not being allowed to speak.
John, can you give us your name and address, please?
My name is John Wicklin.
I live in Mankato.
Could I get your address, please, John?
I'd rather not, since you guys have it already.
Don't give your address.
You can't speak.
And I get so much property damage and eggs and everything else from fun people and their friends.
John, you need to give your address.
I live on 5th Street.
Excuse me?
I live on 5th Street.
You gave his house number.
Alright, so are our kids safe?
Effective tonight, the school board will enforce the following guidelines.
Open forum participants are prohibited from calling out or addressing any individual school board or school district staff member.
If this occurs, open forum will be closed and the individual will not be allowed to participate in future open forums.
Crowd noise or any sort of grandstanding during open forum, including applause, Talking, hollering, or any outbursts will result in open forum being closed.
Further, beginning at the November 1st school board meeting, open forum participation will be limited to those individuals who wish to speak to an item on the board agenda.
The board agenda is always made available the Thursday prior to our meetings and they're always on the district website.
This evil wench.
They all look exactly the same, by the way.
All of the little mini, petty, bulbous tyrants that are running our schools, they all look exactly the same.
There's like a uniform for these people.
They are so mad that parents are there taking an interest in what they're doing and trying to exert some actual influence over the school system.
And speaking up for their own kids.
They are so angry about it.
And that's why the response here has to be show up, get louder at the school board meetings, keep showing up.
More and more people keep doing exactly what they don't want you to do.
And don't stop.
That's my one fear about This school board, you know, movement right now is that it will just stop and fade away and go away.
And we have, let's be honest, we have a history of that on the right.
Not just on the right, but in our culture, where people generally have the memories of, you know, field mice or something, and a couple days later, it's like it never happened, you move on to the next thing.
Always chasing the next shiny object.
There are a lot of things for us to focus on in this culture, a lot of battles worth having, but this one has to continue.
Because if two months from now, we're looking back on this and saying, hey, remember when everyone was showing up to those school board meetings?
That was nice.
If that's what we're saying two months from now, then none of this will matter.
We have to be relentless and consistent.
And that's been one of our big downfalls, I think, of the conservative movement, is a lack of consistency and not being nearly relentless enough.
So keep coming, get louder and louder.
This is the lengths they'll go to, though.
What Jody there is saying is you have to say your address into the microphone.
Like the guy pointed out when he was sitting there, well, you already know the address.
You know the address.
There's no reason why I have to say it.
The only reason why the school board would insist that you say it is to intimidate you.
That's the only reason.
They are trying to get people hurt.
And they are indirectly encouraging mobs to show up to these people's houses.
That's what they're doing.
There's no other reason why you should have to say it.
And did she also say at another point there that no talking is allowed?
I'm not exactly sure how you're supposed to voice your opinion if you're not allowed to talk.
I don't know, maybe draw pictures?
Do a little Pictionary?
Sign language, would that be okay?
All right.
Let's see.
This is some more information from the set of the Alec Baldwin movie where that tragic shooting occurred.
It says, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the 24-year-old armorer who handled weapons on the set of Alec Baldwin's Rust, was the subject of numerous complaints on her previous film just two months earlier after she discharged weapons without warning and infuriated star Nicolas Cage, according to a crew member who told The Wrap.
Stu Bramoft, who served as key grip on the CAGE Western the old way this summer, told The Wrap that Gutierrez upset both CAGE and other crew members on Montana production by failing to follow basic gun safety protocols, like announcing the arrival and usage of weapons on the set.
After firing a gun near the cast and crew for a second time in three days without warning, Cage yelled at her saying, make an announcement.
You just blew my effing eardrums out before walking off the set in a rage.
And then according to other people on the set, they, you know, they said this, this, by the way, was her first film where she had been the, the armorer.
And, uh, there were other alleged incidents where she was walking around with guns under her arm, tucked under her arms, holding guns, got them tucked under her arms.
You know, like there are a bunch of, I don't know, pillows or books or something, and she's carrying them around.
And then the barrels of the guns, as she's walking around, end up pointing at other people.
And that's another basic rule of gun safety here, is you can't point the barrel at anybody.
Now, when you hear about the armorer on the set, who is supposed to be in charge of gun safety and making sure that these guns are safe and ready to be used in the film, She's 24 years old.
No experience.
Apparently, according to what we're hearing here, incompetent.
Previous complaints.
And according, again, according to people on the set, they said that it was recommended by people on the set that she should be let go.
She's not qualified for this.
But then she ends up working on another film right after that.
And you start to wonder, like, how did that happen?
Why did she get this job?
Now to be clear, I don't think this is primarily her fault.
I think that primarily this falls on Alec Baldwin.
He's the one who was holding the weapon.
He's the one who pulled the trigger.
And he's the one who apparently failed to check it, which would have just taken a second.
Just one second of your time to check the weapon and save somebody's life.
And he didn't do that, so this primarily falls on him.
But obviously, as the armorer, this was a major failure on her part.
You wonder, how did she get this job?
And then I think back to the new diversity rules that were put in place by the Academy Awards.
This was last year, remember?
They said if you want to be eligible for an Academy Award, And anytime they're making a film in Hollywood, they always want to be eligible for an Academy Award.
There's a whole bunch of diversity boxes that you have to check.
And among them is this.
I'm reading now from the New York Times, back when this was first announced.
It says, at least one actor from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group must be cast in a significant role.
The story must center on women, LGBTQ people, a racial or ethnic group, or the disabled.
At least 30% of the cast must be actors from at least two of those four underrepresented categories.
Now this is a category standard A. And so you have to check one of the boxes from standard A in order to be eligible for an Academy Award.
But then there's also standard B.
And you have to check a box here too.
And it says, two or more department heads, meaning jobs like director, cinematographer, or composer, must be female, LGBTQ, disabled, or part of an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
At least six other crew members must be from an underrepresented group.
At least 30% of the film's crew must hail from the four underrepresented groups continually laid out in these guidelines.
Hmm.
So it makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Was this a matter of box checking on the part of the producers of this film, Rust?
It could have also been nepotism.
Apparently this woman's father has ties with Hollywood, has been in Hollywood for a long time.
Could be both.
But this would be an interesting question to explore, wouldn't it?
It's just we know the corporate media won't explore it.
Was that a factor This is far from a stretch.
We know the Academy Award, less than a year ago, imposed rules, arbitrary rules, saying that you have to have a certain number of females on the crew.
And then shortly after that, an apparently unqualified, incompetent, way too young for the job female was hired and someone is dead.
You don't have to stretch very hard to connect those two things, potentially.
Of course, I don't really know what went into this decision-making process here.
It would require people in the media with connections here to follow this trail, follow the breadcrumbs, and they're not going to do it.
But it's definitely a question worth asking.
And whether these two issues are tied in this case or not, it still underscores how absurd rules like these are.
Because whatever the reason is for this woman to get the job that she got, it's pretty clear she wasn't qualified for it.
And it's also clear that the only thing that should matter when someone is applying for a job is whether or not they are qualified for it, whether they can do the job, what they look like, their demographics, whether they belong to an underrepresented group.
I'm not exactly sure how you can call women an underrepresented group when they're more than half of the world population.
But none of that should matter at all or should factor.
Okay, this is from the New York Post.
It says, a fitness model has been slammed online after she shared a series of photos posing in front of her father's coffin.
Described by commentators as sick, vile, and disgusting.
Jane Rivera from Miami, Florida is a TikTok star who's gained popularity through her fashion, travel, and swimwear posts.
Last week, she took to Instagram, revealing her father, a veteran, had passed away.
And then here she is in the pictures.
We can see her posing in one picture there.
So she's right in front of her dad's coffin.
In one picture, she's actually, I guess, showing off her butt right in front of her dead father.
And there were multiple pictures, but now because of the reaction, she's taken down her Instagram page.
This is how out of touch and what a bubble these influencers live in.
Where she posed for these selfies in front of her dead father and put them online and was not expecting anybody would be upset about it.
People were upset.
She took down her whole page.
If you see this kind of thing, and we see this a lot, Influencers or wannabe influencers reacting to tragic situations by, you know, they want to get the selfie, they want to mine it for clicks and likes and all of that.
And we see this and it's easy enough to say, oh, it's just silly, superficial, stupid people, which of course, that's part of it.
But there's a real, I mean, there's something happening psychologically to people.
And young people, especially, who grow up online and they become so dependent on affirmation online that they really become sociopaths.
This is sociopathic behavior.
To respond to your father's death that way.
I mean, for that to even be something that enters your mind.
Here's my father laying in a coffin.
He's dead.
Let me get a quick self.
This will be great for Instagram.
There's a real mental sickness.
That is present in a lot of people's minds, I think, and that's pretty clear.
All right, let's get now to reading the comments.
Who's rocking polka dot and flannel shirts without shame?
Do you know their name?
They're the Sweet Baby Gang.
Matthew St.
Peter says, I take comfort in knowing that Matt Walsh would never put the life of a dog above the life of a human, especially after his dog ate his remote.
Yeah, you know, if I was gonna put any animal life over human life, it wouldn't be dogs.
I think that's the thing.
I probably wouldn't do it for any animal life, but dogs would not, wouldn't make the cut.
Derek Wood says, I'm outraged about the cruelty to the unborn and to the cruelty of man's best friend.
Both can be true and both should be investigated, charged, and led to the jail time of all those involved.
Jason Trimble says, Jesus specifically commands us to love our neighbor as ourself.
Who is our neighbor?
Our family, friends, and those who interact we interact with in life, even our enemies, not our dogs.
Ozzy says, I unfortunately went through an alphabet squad phase.
I was thinking about becoming trans and almost came out to my parents, but then I discovered your channel and helped me realize how lost I was.
Thank you so much for speaking the truth.
Well, thanks for, thanks for telling me that Ozzy.
And that's, uh, that does actually, Make me feel like there might be a small bit of difference being made here.
And I'm glad that you were able to see the light on that.
And it's interesting that you say that, though, because we're told that that never happens.
I mean, you said that you were feeling a little bit confused and you were thinking about becoming trans.
And we're told that that's not how it works, right?
Anyone who identifies as trans is because they've known it ever since they were a young child.
It's deeply ingrained within them.
How many times have you heard someone say, oh, it's not like anyone would wake up one day and just decide to be trans?
But as you attest to, that is sort of what happens, actually.
Pesky says, Mr. Walsh, I humbly point out that I am indeed the young man who confronted Ben Shapiro in the name of the Sweet Baby Gang.
I am deeply honored to have served you and our fellow Sweet Babies in our quest for world domination.
And I will continue to carry the SBG torch via my own YouTube channel.
Our voices will not be silenced.
So you put the little plug for YouTube channel.
I respect that hustle.
And I would want everyone in the Sweet Baby Gang to do the same when given the opportunity.
And I appreciate your service.
And I would encourage, at any YAF event, with other Daily Wire personalities, don't be afraid to show up with your Sweet Baby Gang flag flying high.
They all love it, trust me.
They won't tell you, but they do, deep down in their hearts.
Ian says, here we go again on this channel.
You know, I'm getting sick and tired of getting back slapped by conservatives because of my love of animals and how much I decry the abominations done to them.
If that's how Matt and Michael feel, then I don't need to be this kind of conservative either.
As a Catholic, I hold to be both to be in the same regard, dogs and humans, if not the same value.
Pulling my support from the DW now that I've heard Matt's take, Mistreatment.
Some dogs are mistreated.
That's a gross understatement if ever I heard one.
And the disdain from the DW hosts over this and the outcries while they fall back on their pro-life arguments are revolting.
I am pro-life all the way and I feel horror in equal measure.
B-Rob says, I'd say I value babies over puppies, but I definitely value dogs over adult people.
Dr. Lecter says, Matt, as a self-proclaimed animal lover, I would have to slightly disagree with your thoughts about people versus dogs.
My only argument is that in my past chosen profession, all I've seen is brutality, violence, and aggression inflicted on people by other people.
Mostly the violence I've seen is on weaker people being preyed upon by bullies and aggressive thugs.
Would you have an issue with using death row inmates and or child rapists as the guinea pigs?
After all, we're trying to develop things for humans.
Let's use the ones that have no desire to be in civilized society.
We're going to respond to all this in a second.
Hold on.
Lateralist says, every life matters.
It's not always about us humans.
Nancy says, I value dogs and people equally.
Another comment says, it's a lot easier to hate humans than it is to hate dogs.
Liking animals isn't the problem.
People being less likable than animals is the problem.
Richard says, you're very wrong about this, Matt.
You really don't get it.
Very disappointed in you that you failed to capture this moment.
Torturing dogs is evil.
PM says, dogs are better than most people.
I have no problem valuing them more.
Jared says, puppies are better than humans.
Just saying.
Good Morning Toast says, no, it's not a sickness.
Dogs are nicer than people.
Simple as that.
And Don says, I so value the life of dogs over most people because people are inherently evil.
Dogs are trained to be violent, which falls back on a whole people who trained the dogs.
So that's why people suck and dogs rule.
Okay.
A lot of comments in that vein telling me that I'm wrong for daring to suggest that people have more value than dogs.
And I'm going to respond to all of those comments in the Daily Cancellation, which will be right after this.
You know, if you're one of those old fogies like myself with boxes of old tapes and films and, you know, photo albums and everything just sitting around collecting dust, potentially, depending on where they're stored, you know, they could be damaged.
If that's the case for you, then you've got to check out Legacy Box.
Legacy Box is your chance to have aging tapes, films, and photos digitally preserved.
So the ability to relive your family history is never lost because of a leaky pipe or summer days that make your attic hot enough to melt tapes.
Plus, this week, Legacy Box is offering 40% off at LegacyBox.com slash Walsh so you can start future-proofing your past today.
With Legacy Box, you can reclaim all the priceless footage you haven't been able to see in years.
The service could not be simpler.
You just use their kit to safely send the moments you want preserved.
Their team will create a digital archive by hand right here in the USA, and they'll return everything back to you, and it's as simple as that.
You put everything in the box, send it to them, they send you back what you want.
You get everything on the cloud, you get it on a thumb drive, on a DVD, whatever you want.
It's very, very easy and simple for you, and also cheap and quick.
What is there not to love?
Visit Legacybox.com slash Walsh to take advantage of this limited-time offer for 40% off.
Take advantage of this exclusive offer today and then use their kit whenever you're ready.
That's Legacybox.com slash Walsh to save 40% off.
Legacybox.com slash Walsh.
You know, when it comes to the facts, The Daily Wire's newest podcast, Morning Wire, has a never-ending supply.
Not only has it been topping the Apple and Spotify charts since its release, it's the only daily podcast that values your time and the truth.
And while we're working overtime to bring you the news you need to know, We need your help to keep the facts trending towards number one.
So subscribe and start listening now to Morning Wire on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts, and leave a five-star review if you like what you hear.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Today, we're going to cancel the people who wrote those comments that I just read, and many others in the audience who wrote similar comments or sent messages in the same vein.
Unfortunately, you're all canceled today.
Your time has come.
So just take your medicine.
Don't complain about it.
Now, if you missed the show yesterday, you're canceled for that also for missing the show, of course, but let's back up for a moment.
Yesterday, we discussed the backlash that Anthony Fauci is facing after it was reported that the NIAID, under Fauci's leadership, funded a study in which beagle puppies were drugged, infected with parasites, and sometimes had their vocal cords cut to prevent them from barking.
This was all done ostensibly to help develop medicine and medical treatments for humans.
Now, there's nothing wrong in principle with experimenting on animals in order to develop treatments for people.
But this particular experiment seems to be gratuitous, not to mention, from what I've read, mostly useless, since beagles don't make good analogs for humans in a laboratory setting.
But that's not the only controversial quote-unquote study that Fauci has been linked to.
His organization has also funded an experiment where aborted babies were chopped into pieces and their parts were grafted onto mice.
Now, as I pointed out, the outrage over the experiments on puppies has been significantly greater than the outrage over the experiments on human children.
I argue that this discrepancy is a symptom of our culture's pseudo-pagan animal worship.
We tend to value animal life, especially dog life, over human life, and that's a bad thing.
It's not that dogs have no value.
It's just that human life has infinitely greater value.
That was the argument I presented, and as you just heard, it has not been greeted with wide approval or acclaim.
There are lots of people, even on the right, who will openly profess that they value dogs over their fellow human beings.
Now, I find this point of view totally perverse, And though I shouldn't have to explain why, apparently I do.
So let me try to lay out the case now.
A few points to take into consideration.
First of all, if human life does not have special, unique, inherent value, then there is no point to any of the arguments we have, or any of the issues we care about, or the things we fight for.
There's no point to life at all, in fact.
At least not much of a point.
The whole basis for the doctrine of human rights, for example, is that human beings have inherent worth and value above that of a beast or a bug.
There's a reason why we would say that it's an infringement on a child's rights if you, you know, feed him out of a dog bowl on the floor and lock him in a crate and make him go to the bathroom out in the yard.
Yet we wouldn't say that it's an infringement on a dog's rights to do that.
The reason is that children are human.
And as humans, they have unique dignity, which carries with it rights and liberties.
If you don't believe that, then again, there's no basis for your conservatism, or even your liberalism, or any ideology except absolute suicidal nihilism.
Second, the good thing is that even though people say they think dogs have equal value or more value, most of those people don't really believe it.
Going back to the kid in the crate situation, I'm guessing that every single person who left an angry comment on my show yesterday would react with utter shock and horror at a child being treated like a dog, but they would not react that way to a dog being treated like a dog.
Further, I'm betting that all of them, if they were driving along and saw a dead dog on the side of the road, they'd feel sad about it, yeah.
But if they saw a dead human, they'd react quite a bit stronger to it.
And further, I'm betting, I'm hoping, that if, you know, a woman and a dog were trapped in a burning building, and they could only save one, all of them would save the woman.
I'm betting and hoping that none of them would say, sorry lady, I gotta take this dog out, and leave her to burn to death.
So these examples only show that people think they value dogs and people the same, but they're confused.
You know, and it's good that they're confused, because if they actually did value them the same, They'd be full-on psychopaths.
It might be said that the definition of a psychopath, the literal definition, could be a person who treats other people like dogs.
But I don't think that most of this dog worship is born from psychopathy, necessarily.
I think it's born partly from moral degradation, yes, but also largely from confusion.
Third, part of the source of that confusion is this half-baked idea that many people have, as expressed in some of those comments, That dogs are somehow morally superior to humans because humans do a lot of terrible things while dogs never do terrible things.
Only that's not true, of course.
I mean, dogs maul children.
They kill people.
Further down the scale of atrocities, they chew your couch and pillows and shoes.
The difference is that you don't hold dogs morally responsible for that.
You would never say that a dog who does something bad, even as bad as killing a child, Has committed evil.
And why?
Because you recognize that dogs are incapable of making moral choices.
They're not assessing a variety of options and choosing one based on which is the most ethical or moral.
And that's correct.
That's how they get off the hook when they do bad things.
That's why you get to always blame the owner when a pit bull sends someone to the hospital.
There's no bad dogs, there's only bad owners.
Fine.
But if you're letting dogs off the hook for bad actions because they can't make moral choices, then you can't very well give them credit for good actions.
You can't ascribe traits like courage and selflessness to dogs if you're not also going to ascribe traits like evil, selfishness, cowardice to them in equal measure.
Dogs act on instinct.
They act on training.
They're not moral beings.
So yes, humans do terrible stuff that dogs don't do.
Humans also do incredible, courageous, beautiful, selfless, loving things that dogs don't do.
Humans are complex, conscious, moral creatures.
Dogs are not.
Fourth, but this is really what it comes down to, I think.
Humans are complex, like I just said.
Complicated, difficult.
This is why we often prefer pets.
Pets are easy.
They're not complicated.
They don't ask much of you.
They have needs, but their needs are simple.
Their lives revolve around us.
They give us what we need emotionally without asking for anything in return.
This isn't because of any moral virtue on their part.
It's just because they're animals.
Ice cream can give you what you want without asking anything in return, too.
So can a tree if it's hot out and you want shade.
But it would be bizarre to say, I value this tree more than the human race because it provides better shade than people.
Trees do what trees do.
Dogs do what dogs do.
It's good to be grateful for both.
And to value the things they do and what they give you, but to value them above people, or on the level with people, is deeply confused.
And again, I'm being generous by calling it confused.
The other option is that it's totally morally depraved and a sign that you're a burgeoning serial killer.
But whichever is the case, either way, you're still today, I have to say, unfortunately, cancelled.
You and your dog.
He's getting lumped in with this also.
And that'll do it for us today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
Well, 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.
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 producer is Mathis Glover.
Our technical director is Austin Stevens, production manager, Pavel Vodovsky.
The show is edited by Ali Hinkle.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Heart.
And our production coordinator is McKenna Waters.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Today on The Ben Shapiro Show, with Terry McAuliffe running a rough race in Virginia, Joe Biden steps in to deliver a disgusting smear against Glenn Youngkin.
Plus, Democrats continue to struggle over their spending package as inflation sets in.
