Today on the Matt Walsh Show, now that the anti-groomer bill has been passed in Florida, despite the pro-grooming efforts of Disney, Republicans in the state have moved on to punishing and exacting revenging on Disney. Some milquetoast conservatives are uncomfortable with this, but I think it’s great. Also, Jen Psaki tearfully defends the castration and mutilation of children. Piers Morgan deceptively edits an interview with Donald Trump. A public health expert recommends that you bring extra masks with you in public to hand out to strangers. And in our daily cancellation, a woman is concerned because her boyfriend has dedicated his life to digging a huge hole in the ground.
What is a Woman? Matt Walsh tracks down the answer in his new book. Preorder your copy now at whatisawoman.com.
It’s time to build new things that we can believe in. Subscribe to The Daily Wire today with promo code BUILDTHEFUTURE for 20% off your membership: https://utm.io/ueuRb.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, now that the anti-groomer bill has been passed in Florida despite the pro-grooming efforts of Disney, Republicans in the state have moved on to punishing and exacting revenge on Disney.
Some milquetoast conservatives are uncomfortable with this, but I think it's great.
Also, Jen Psaki tearfully defends the castration and mutilation of children.
Piers Morgan deceptively edits an interview with Donald Trump.
A public health expert recommends that you bring extra masks with you in public to hand out to strangers.
In our daily cancellation, a woman is concerned because her boyfriend has dedicated his life To digging a huge hole in the ground.
We'll talk about all of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
When the supply chain and inflation cause meat prices to soar, their response isn't to solve the supply chain and inflation, it's to tell you that this is the perfect opportunity to switch from juicy, delicious, nutritious meat to something called lentils, or worse, bugs.
Because, you know, bugs don't count, apparently.
Apparently their lives don't count, so we just eat them.
That doesn't make any sense.
People like Bill Gates and outlets like Time Magazine tell us eating bugs is the solution to all of our problems.
I've realized something.
It's not enough to not eat bugs.
You have to be anti-bug eating.
And I say this as someone who has eaten the bugs before, and I do not recommend it.
That requires taking action against the bug-eating movement.
The best way to do that is to eat more meat.
So I've decided to double down on my meat intake, and I'm inviting you to join.
I just subscribed to the Cowboy Box from Good Ranchers, which contains almost 10 pounds of all-American beef.
If you're worried about the supply chain or inflation increasing the price of meat over time, the solution is not lentils or crickets.
The answer is subscribing to Good Ranchers.
They lock in your price for life once you subscribe, and they only source from American farms.
So please Don't let the vegans and bug eaters win.
We need to double down on eating meat, literally.
Go to GoodRanchers.com and enter promo code WALSH at checkout for $30 off your first order.
That's code WALSH at GoodRanchers.com for $30 off your first order.
You know, the left in this country for many decades were in a rather enviable position.
They were playing against a team that only ever stayed on the defensive side of the ball.
You know, the right only ever played defense.
Sometimes it played defense relatively well.
Most of the time it played defense poorly.
Sometimes it didn't play defense at all.
But the one enduring fact through quarter after quarter of this never-ending football game is that the right never had possession of the ball.
They were never advancing up the field.
It was all defense all the time.
The problem is that it doesn't matter how well you play defense.
You could have a Hall of Fame defense.
You could have Lawrence Taylor and Ray Lewis in their primes on your defense.
And you still won't win if you never move the line of scrimmage in the other direction toward the other goal line.
Now that may be changing, finally.
Or at least there's a push on the right to change that.
The most important political fight right now is not between Republicans and Democrats, but between the new right and the old right, between the faction that wants to take the ball away from the left and run upfield the other way, and the old sort of tired, milquetoast establishment faction that wants to keep doing things as they've always been done, no matter how fruitless and unproductive those methods were, and still are.
Now this rift between new and old, right, it's really come to the foreground in recent days with, well really in recent months it has, but especially in recent days with this news out of Florida.
As the Daily Wire reports, Florida's Republican-led Senate passed a bill on Wednesday that eliminates a special taxing district that allows Walt Disney Company to govern the land where its theme park is located.
The measure potentially delivers a blow to the company's operations in the state.
The Wall Street Journal reported the special district created in 1967 and known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District exempts Disney from a host of regulations and certain taxes and fees related to emergency services and road maintenance.
The report noted the special taxing district reportedly saves Disney tens of millions of dollars per year.
The bill now has the Florida's Republican-led House where it's expected to pass.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has already signaled that he will sign the bill into law.
Now, thanks to this policy, which was put in place back in the 1960s, Disney has been its own little fiefdom, literally its own kingdom, in the middle of Florida.
It essentially governs itself, and along with those privileges of autonomy came enormous tax benefits and breaks.
So DeSantis and his Republican counterparts in Florida want to take that sweet little deal, which has profited Disney to the tune of billions, and just toss it into the woodchipper.
Why?
Well, obviously because Disney is not interested in keeping to itself and being its own thing.
It wanted to use its vast resources to intrude into Florida politics and impact Florida legislation.
It wanted to craft Florida law, even while remaining exempt, largely, from Florida law.
And it wanted to do all this in defense of child groomers.
It came out fully in favor of and committed to the sexual indoctrination of children.
It proved itself to be an enemy of Florida parents and parents across the country and the world.
Why should it retain its special privileges in light of that?
Why shouldn't it be punished for what it's done?
Why shouldn't it be made to feel the pain?
Defense is simply stopping Disney's intrusion.
It's just saying, no, you can't do that.
Offense is punching back and punching back hard and making sure that they feel it.
Offense is making an example of them.
Offense is taking Mickey Mouse's head and putting it on a spike.
Metaphorically, of course.
And offense is what we need.
One of the great things about turning the tables and playing offense like this is that it exposes the utter vapidity and hollowness of your enemies, who usually spend their time, of course, crying about evil billionaires and corporations, but are now suddenly crying on behalf of evil billionaires and corporations.
One of the effects of this move in Florida is to essentially raise taxes on Disney, right?
And since when has the left ever been opposed to raising taxes on a billion-dollar megacorporation?
Well, since right now, this moment, because they are a bunch of dishonest hacks.
Speaking of which, here's Simone Sanders, who once worked for Bernie Sanders and is now on cable news bragging about the big and tough and cool Disney lobbyists.
Let's listen.
I know fashion corporations is popular left and right these days.
I'd be careful going.
Oh, my money is on the Disney lobbyists, honey.
My money is on the Disney lobbyists.
Do you think those state legislators down in Florida are going to bend to the will of the governor?
Did you see what Jared Polis said?
He'd love a Rocky Mountain Disney.
But by the way, the Florida legislature, the state Senate, just passed this bill to strip Disney of its special access.
So from eat the rich to yay, go Disney lobbyists.
A slight rebranding there, you might say.
If these people had any credibility to begin with, it would be burned to ash right now.
Yet some voices on the right are taking up This cause alongside these leftist hypocrites defending Disney.
For example, writing for the National Review, Charles C.W.
Cook calls the move to take away Disney's privileges grotesque and ugly.
He says there's no need for Republicans to punish Disney or, quote, take revenge or, quote, salt the earth.
We shouldn't be doing that, he says.
Well, on the contrary, Charles, that is exactly what we need to do.
Meanwhile, conservative radio host Eric Erickson tweeted, quote, kinda at the point of thinking this is where the right begins to overplay its hand on the woke stuff where GOP takes away the Disney tax district.
The left had been the bullies, the right won.
They risk looking like sore winners.
The voters hate bullies more than policies.
I once again disagree.
You're right, the left had been the bullies.
It's time for the right to be the bullies.
Rather than complaining, oh, you're being a bully.
Now see, you want the other side, you actually want the other side to accuse you of that.
You want to put them in a position where they're saying, you're bullying us!
Because that is a losing proposition.
That's literally a loser's talking point.
When you're stooping to having to accuse the other side of being bullies, That means you're losing.
Writing for a conservative blog Hot Air, Ala Pundit agrees, saying,
"No one believes that Disney would be facing this reckoning if it had sheer-led the 'Don't Say Gay'
bill, which means the action Florida is taking, although facially neutral, is textbook viewpoint
discrimination by the government." Now, notice how this person on the right, supposedly, in a
supposed right-wing publication, which has a pop-up on its home page asking the reader to
support conservative journalism, actually refers to the parental rights bill as the "Don't Say Gay" bill.
He adopts the absurd, farcical, far-left, straw-man talking point about this legislation as if it's a neutral fact.
That's a don't-say-gay bill.
And then he accuses Florida of viewpoint discrimination for taking away a special privilege that it did not have any legal right to in the first place.
And what viewpoint are we discriminating against?
The viewpoint that children should be sexualized?
Well, yeah, we should discriminate against that viewpoint.
The right, many on the right anyway, are used to losing, I think.
They've grown accustomed to it.
They're comfortable with it.
They actually prefer it.
You know, the good thing about being a loser is you never have to do anything.
There are no risks involved.
There's no tough calls, no hard decisions, no need for a plan.
You can't fumble a ball that you never have the guts to carry in the first place.
Some on the right have enjoyed playing the role of speed bump, lying there prostrate, you know, lumps on the ground, moderately slowing the left's advance, maybe, and then waving as the convoy drives right over them and toward the horizon.
That's an easy role to play.
It's simple.
It's safe, as long as you don't mind the tire marks on your face.
Not a lot of dignity in it.
But who cares about dignity?
I mean, they certainly don't.
Some of us do, though.
Some of us also, if you can imagine it, actually believe what we're saying.
We believe in the things we're fighting for.
When we talk about kids being groomed and abused and indoctrinated, we believe that.
We're not just saying it, we believe it.
That's another thing that I think a lot of people on the establishment, the old right, that's something they can't believe and don't understand.
Because they're so used to just sort of saying things whether they believe them or not.
And then they look at us over here and they say, you guys actually believe this stuff?
What?
You know, if we believe it, of course we want to exact revenge on the people who are targeting kids.
Of course we're going to punish them, take vengeance on them, salt the earth with their ashes.
Sounds good to me.
That's what you do when you really care, when you really mean it, when you really understand the stakes, when you actually want to win.
And we want to win.
If you don't, then lie back down, speed bump, And let the rest of us do what needs to be done.
We don't need your help.
And we don't want it.
Now, let's get to our five headlines.
All right, well, Jen Psaki will be moving to MSNBC in a few months.
No conflict of interest there at all.
I mean, she is the, still right now, the press secretary And she's supposed to field questions from the media, and there's supposed to be an antagonistic relationship between the press secretary of the White House and the media, because they're supposed to be holding you accountable.
Democracy dies in darkness, right?
Washington Post?
But Jen Psaki now is in the position of, she's doing these press conferences with people who are going to be her co-workers in a couple of months.
But no, no conflict of interest there.
And now she seems to really be sort of preparing for that gig.
Here she is crying, crying over the thought of kids not being drugged and castrated.
Just to reiterate that, she's crying over the thought of kids not being drugged and castrated.
The idea of, you know, the very idea that a 14-year-old girl might not have her breasts chopped off, the very idea that a 12-year-old boy might not be chemically castrated and sterilized for life reduces her to tears.
Watch this.
The political games and harsh and cruel attempts at laws or laws that we're seeing in some states like Florida, that is not a reflection of the country moving to oppose LGBTQ plus communities.
That is not what we see in data.
That is not factual.
And that is not where things stand.
This is a political wedge issue and an attempt to win a culture war.
And they're doing that in a way that is harsh and cruel to a community of kids especially.
I'm going to get emotional about this issue because it's horrible.
But, you know, it's like kids who are bullied.
And all these leaders are taking steps to hurt them and hurt their lives and hurt their families.
And you look at some of these laws in these states, and it is going after parents who are in loving relationships who have kids.
It's completely outrageous.
But it is a wedge issue, sorry.
This is an issue that makes me completely crazy.
But it is an issue that is a political wedge issue.
It is not a reflection of where the country is.
You see, this is what we're up against?
Why just playing defense is not an option when this is what you're dealing with?
Actually reduced to tears?
It's not just that she's Arguing for and trying to justify the chemical castration and mutilation and butchering of kids Which of course will be bad enough But that she's emotional about the idea that we would protect kids from that Just think about it and she's yeah, there's there's some acting involved in the crying but it's not all acting I Think we'd make a mistake to just assume that that's all performance.
That might be a part of it.
I But then you're, I think you're kind of doing her some favors in a way.
Because no, she really is, these people really are that deranged.
To not only be in favor of chopping the breasts off of 14 year old girls, but to be emotional about it.
She says we have to protect kids from bullying.
Well, I agree with that.
And there are no greater bullies right now who are targeting kids than the vultures in the pharmaceutical industry and the medical industry who are taking advantage of these kids and who are responsible for a 4,000% increase in gender dysphoria among kids.
Who are inculcating this identity crisis and then profiting off of it.
Making kids confused about who they are so that they can mutilate them and profit off it, monetize it.
So, those are the bullies.
And when there are laws put in place to protect kids, those are not laws against the kids.
Those are laws against what the adults are doing to those kids.
There's no compromising with people like this.
You know, there's no just like stopping their advance and then saying, OK, well, let's just stay right here.
Don't don't just stop.
Stop right there.
Don't don't try to go any further.
We can reach an understanding.
No, these people have to be destroyed.
And humiliated.
And shamed.
OK, that's what they need.
There's no other option.
What other option is there for someone who would be in tears, tearfully defending the mutilation of kids?
Staying on this note here, Nicole Wallace on MSNBC is so upset about the parental rights bills that we've seen in Florida and other places, that she actually compared the parental rights bills giving parents Rights over their own children and stopping government employees from talking to six-year-olds about sex.
She compared that to child rape and war crimes.
Listen.
And I worry that in covering Glenn Youngkin and his politics of parental choice, all the focus was on how well it worked.
And even in our conversations about DeSantis, it's about how well they're serving him.
The truth is, dehumanization as a tactic for politics is from war.
Dehumanization is a tactic that's being used right now.
The Russians get their soldiers to rape children by dehumanizing them.
Dehumanization, as a practice, is a tactic of war.
It's being deployed in our politics, and people like you and I sometimes lose the plot and admire its effectiveness.
It's not its substance.
But even the analysis of these tactics loses sight of what this speech brings us back to, which is that dehumanization has a cost right now, right now, as it's being deployed.
There are children, and Chastain Buttigieg made this point when Don't Ask, Don't Tell was introduced, kids will die.
Kids will die.
Kids will die if we don't groom, indoctrinate, abuse, and sexualize them.
That's what she's saying.
Because I think we should be very clear about what all this is.
The sexual indoctrination of children, the foisting gender dysphoria onto them, the transitioning quote-unquote of children, all of this is sexual abuse.
Quote-unquote transitioning a child Trying to turn a little boy into a little girl, that is psychological abuse, it's physical abuse.
It is also, at the deepest sense, sexual abuse.
And so what she is saying, what this freak, what this monster, this lunatic, this psychopath, this goblin is saying, is that kids will die if we don't sexually abuse them.
And she is comparing not sexually abusing kids to raping them.
How do you even make sense of that?
But that's what we're getting from these ghouls.
And if you didn't think it'd get any worse, it does.
Well, here's one fact that makes it worse for you, and I think this ties back to what we talked about in the opening with the, you know, the old right and the establishment Republican thing.
Nicole Wallace, just so you know, she used to work in the Bush White House.
She worked in the Bush White House, and she worked for John McCain.
So she's a Republican, historically.
And this is where she is now.
So what does that tell you about the Republican Party?
And then a little bit later in this conversation, Tim Miller, who also used to be a Republican, former RNC spokesman, here is his response.
Now remember, Nicole Wallace is saying that their side is being dehumanized or whatever, and here is Tim Miller's response to that.
with what Mallory was saying, right?
Carville, I think so, in this network yesterday.
Republicans are weird, and we need to call them weird, right?
And so I think there has to be a humanizing of your side, but plus going on offense a little bit
on the other side, right?
And if part of the reason why Glenn Youngkin was elected was 'cause parents were uncomfortable
with what some of the school board judgments are doing, Do you want the people that charge the Capitol deciding what the math books are going to be?
That's not popular, right?
Like these weirdos that are talking about Mickey and Pluto making love and all this sort of weird stuff they're talking about and all this sort of extreme stuff they're talking about.
Nobody wants them deciding what's in the math books either.
Right.
So I think that there is a way To push down and to limit the strength of their argument by pointing out just how odd and how extreme it is, and then by humanizing yourself as well, and by pointing out the families that are going to suffer from this.
Look, anybody who has a kindergartner, five-year-old, I've got a four-year-old, she's always asking, you know, what, Tommy has one dad, Tommy's grandma, what's the deal with that family?
Anybody who has a kindergartner knows you can't ban discussion of different families from a kindergarten classroom.
Oh, they're weird.
They're so weird is his answer.
Now, what he really wanted to say, and he kind of stopped himself, because he said, yeah, we have to humanize our side and then go on offense.
What he actually meant to say is, what he was trying to say, what he was clearly saying is, we want to humanize our side and dehumanize the other side.
That's what he was really saying there pretty clearly.
And that was in response to Nicole Wallace's whole speech about how Republicans are dehumanizing people.
Tim Miller responds by saying, well, we need to dehumanize them.
And she's laughing and nodding along.
Well, of course we're going to dehumanize them.
I mean, obviously.
No, they're not people.
They're not humans.
So we can dehumanize them.
Remember what I said yesterday, that anytime they make a statement about, you know, especially if they're decrying the way that people are treated, there's always the asterisk, there's always, you know, there's always that clause at the end, which is, it's wrong to dehumanize people, unless they deserve it.
It's wrong to be intolerant and hateful, unless they deserve it.
It's wrong to take away their human rights, unless they deserve it.
So, you see that yet again.
But he says that, well, Republicans are weird, they're weird for this.
Okay, give me some examples.
And by the way, I'm fine, Tim Miller, you pervert freak.
I am fine with having the conversation on this ground here.
It's what you want, right?
You want to throw accusations back and forth, have a contest over who's more of a weirdo?
Perfectly fine.
Because prior to this, the response usually was, like, if we accused you of being weird and bizarre, then what we'd hear from the other side is, well, you shouldn't call people weird and bizarre, and that's a bad thing to do.
You know, we should be accepting of people.
So it seems like you're tossing that out now, and you're saying, no, that's a legitimate charge to make against somebody.
And now it's just a contest to figure out who the weird ones are.
And I'm really excited to have that conversation.
We can have that conversation.
Tim, so, but give me some examples, because you didn't, you go on, you see, he goes on for a minute about, there are the weird ones, and he doesn't give any examples of the weird.
He says, oh, these are the people who charged the Capitol.
Actually, they're not.
Glenn Youngkin didn't charge the Capitol.
Ron DeSantis didn't charge the Capitol.
There's a tiny sliver of a minority, a relative handful of people, in comparison with everyone on the right, the millions of people who did that.
And so if you want to call them weird for doing that, then go ahead.
But we, you know, I didn't charge the Capitol any more than you, Tim Miller, invaded a police station in Minneapolis when BLM did and burned it to the ground.
I assume you didn't do that, so I'm not going to say that you did.
So that's not going to work.
Okay, so what's the weird thing?
Talking about Mickey and Pluto having sex?
No, that's... See, we're saying we don't want to talk about that.
What we're saying is we don't want sexual content in children's entertainment.
And we don't want our kids in school to be sexualized.
That's what we do not want.
You do want it.
See, you're taking the position that a little boy, that a little four-year-old boy can actually be a girl.
That if a little four-year-old boy who has no concept of reality whatsoever says, I'm a girl, not understanding what that statement even means, that we should actually put him in a dress and raise him as a girl.
And put him on a path to, when he's 12 years old, sterilizing him.
With drugs that we give to sex offenders to chemically castrate them, and then a little bit later after that, you know, chopping his penis into pieces and trying to turn it into a vagina.
That's what you support.
So, you want to have a weirdo conversation?
That's the weird stuff, and I could use a lot of words stronger than that, that you support.
I'd like to give the examples of what's the weird thing.
Oh yeah, we're such weirdos.
We think that Men are male, women are females.
You shouldn't talk to little five-year-olds about transgenderism or encourage them to cross-dress.
That's our whole position on this issue.
Bunch of weirdos we are.
Sure.
Speaking of weirdos, Kamala Harris yesterday, I don't know why they keep putting her in these positions.
I'm speaking somewhat rhetorically when I say I don't know why, but I mean, I do know why.
Is that nobody in the White House or in the Democrat Party likes her.
Because they could, before we play this clip, And this is not the worst Kamala Harris clip, but then the bar is very low, so it doesn't quite get down.
This is not when she was pontificating about the passage of time.
It's not quite there, but it's almost there.
But what you have to keep in mind when you listen to this clip is that she's giving a speech, and we have to assume that she's giving prepared remarks by people who are aware of her reputation.
For saying inane, ridiculous, meaningless things.
And so, they could give her things to say that are not that.
And yet, this is what we get.
Listen.
Space is exciting.
It spurs our imaginations.
And it forces us to ask big questions.
Space, it affects us all.
And it connects us all.
Yeah, those are definitely— Okay, yeah, she's got the teleprompters there.
Those are prepared remarks.
Space affects us all, and it connects us all.
Does it, though?
I mean, this— Once again, as always with her, it sounds like she was just thrown up to the front of the class to give a presentation on outer space and had not prepared for it at all.
And so this is what— Space is really interesting.
Space is space.
Space is big.
Space is dark.
But there are things in space, which is very big.
And it connects us all.
Does it connect us all?
In what way does space connect us?
In what way does space... In what way does it affect us?
Well, I guess in a certain way.
I mean, we're all on planet Earth, which is in space, orbiting around the sun, so in that way, I mean, if you didn't have... If you didn't have space, then there'd just be nothing, but space kind of is.
I don't know.
It's kind of mind-boggling.
Your mind boggles after a while, trying to make sense of this.
It probably would have been better just to give her something else to say.
But they are setting her up for failure every step of the way.
Speaking of... A lot of great transitions here.
Speaking of getting set up for failure, Donald Trump sat down for an interview with Piers Morgan, apparently, sometime in the last couple of days.
And I say sometime in the last couple of days because Trump sat down for a pre-recorded interview with Piers Morgan.
And here's how that interview was advertised.
Hey, Piers, I'm ready.
A former president in denial.
I'll be completely straight with you, to your face.
I think I'm a very honest man.
Much more honest than you, actually.
Really?
Yeah.
It was a free and fair election.
You lost.
Only a fool would think that.
You think I'm a fool?
I do now, yeah.
With respect... Excuse me.
With respect, you haven't changed the hard evidence.
Excuse me.
The most explosive interview of the year.
I don't think you're real.
I realize that I'm not like... Very dishonest.
Let's finish up the interview.
Morgan versus Trump.
Turn the camera off.
Very dishonest.
Okay, so they have him appearing to storm off, turn the camera off, but then we get this from Breitbart.
It says, audio provided by former President Donald Trump and his team to Breitbart News at the end of Trump's interview with Piers Morgan proves that Morgan and his team deceptively edited the interview to make it appear as though it was a contentious ending when it was not.
It says a 30-second promotional clip that Morgan released on Wednesday afternoon seemed to show Trump flying off the handle and walking out mid-interview as a righteous Morgan asked him tough questions about his views on the 2020 election.
But it turns out, and there's audio that he provided, the full audio, and I mean, you can hear in the audio, he just, the interview's over and Trump gets up and because the interview's over, he says, you can turn the cameras off now.
And then Pierce says to him, that was a great interview.
So it was a very friendly kind of ending.
And they cut it together to make it seem like he stormed out.
So just deceptive, dishonest.
That they're using in Piers Morgan.
I think he just started this new show after getting cancelled on a different show and now he's got a new show and Donald Trump was very nice to sit down for a pre-recorded interview to help Piers Morgan's ratings.
And that's what brings me to what I have to say about this.
And the right today has been, you know, defending Trump, and they've been saying, oh, Trump was treated unfairly by the media, which is, so in other words, it's like what, for four years of Trump in the White House, it's like what the right was focused on almost solely was defending Trump against unfair media attacks.
And so what I'm going to say about this, and I know that some of you, my sweet babies, think that I'm too hard on Trump, so you're not going to like what I have to say here.
And you also have to understand that I don't think it's possible to be too hard on a politician, especially a guy who was president.
It's not possible to be too harsh.
I don't think.
I blame Trump for this 100%.
And I think it shows some of the major problems we would have in 2024 if he's the guy.
I blame him because why in the hell Why, in God's name, take your pick, would you, as a man who has been in media and in politics, and who knows how the game is played, why would you make the decision to sit down for a pre-recorded interview with Piers Morgan?
Why would you sit for a pre-recorded interview with a corporate media hack?
Why?
I know what he benefits from it, because it helps his ratings, but... So, that's what you're doing?
You're trying to help the media with their ratings?
Be a nice guy?
Tell me why.
Now, I've been around for a much shorter time than Trump, and I have much less experience.
I would never in a million years do a pre-recorded interview with someone who I cannot 100% absolutely and totally trust.
And the number of people that I can absolutely and totally trust in this way is like, that number is almost non-existent.
Like, I would sit down for a pre-recorded interview with somebody here at The Daily Wire, And that's pretty much it.
That might be the entire list.
And I certainly wouldn't go into someone who disagrees with me politically and do a pre-recorded interview because then they can do exactly this.
They can edit it however they want.
Yet Trump decided to do that.
He stood to gain nothing.
What do you gain from it?
Nothing.
Yet he did it.
And it's the same old story over and over again.
I'm just so sick of it.
Like Trump puts himself in these positions for no reason.
Just because like he can't, someone offers him a camera and they flatter him a little bit and say, we'd love, it'd be a great interview and you'd help our ratings.
And he just, he can't say no to that.
But you need to be able to say no to that.
And he doesn't have anyone in his circle.
He hasn't surrounded himself with anybody who will tell him the truth.
And if there is anyone to tell him the truth, they get fired.
So there's nobody in his circle who would say, no, Mr. President, you cannot do this.
You want to sit down live with Piers Morgan?
Maybe.
But even then, why?
Why him?
What do you gain from that?
You're the most famous guy in the world.
You could do an interview with anybody.
Why Piers Morgan?
What does he give you?
And he decides to do it, and then the inevitable happens.
And then we have a whole new cycle where the right is focused on defending Trump.
And this is, like I said, for four years, this is what it was.
Every day it was, Trump's being unfairly attacked by the media again.
And meanwhile, what's the left focused on?
They're focused on furthering their agenda in education.
Getting more gender ideology, more CRT into the classroom.
They're focused on that.
It's actually not a coincidence That it wasn't until really the end of Trump's term and when he was gone that the right really honed in on these issues in education, gender ideology especially.
The school board movement actually paying attention to what's happening locally, that didn't happen until Trump was gone.
And the reason for that It's not that Trump tried to prevent us from focusing on this.
It wasn't his intention.
It's just that when he's around, it's just for the right, all they do is talk about him and defend him.
That's it.
While everything else is happening in the world that really matters.
This is a perfect example of it.
And I'm sorry, I'm just not.
Everyone else on the right today can say, oh, Trump swam fairly.
Sorry, that's your fault.
Don't do that.
I would say this to anybody.
I would say this to anybody on the right.
You sat down for a prerecorded interview with somebody you can't trust.
That's on you.
Like, what are you doing?
And now I got to defend you?
Because you made that dumb decision?
For the 50th time?
Come on.
And the other thing you see in that, by the way, is that, first of all, the media, they want Trump to run.
They desperately want this guy to run.
They love him.
That's the dirty little secret that should not be a secret to anyone.
They love him and they want him there.
That's why they talk about him so much.
He's great for their ratings.
And he knows that he's great for their ratings, and he likes that he's great for their ratings, and that's one of the reasons he does all these interviews, even though he stands to gain nothing from them.
So they want him to run.
The other thing that they want is they want to talk about 2020.
Here's what would be the best case scenario for them, for Dems in 2024.
It is that Trump runs and that the entire 2024 election cycle is a rehash and a re-litigation of 2020.
That's what they want.
Because what they absolutely do not want is to talk about Biden and his failures.
And how he destroyed the country for four years.
And what they don't want to talk about are these cultural issues.
Obviously, gender ideology, CRT, the school system.
They don't want to talk about any of that.
They can't talk about it.
They can't defend it.
They don't know how to talk about it.
They still haven't figured it out.
They want to talk about Trump and they want to talk about 2020.
And they want to talk about Trump's tenure.
That's what they want to make it about.
They want to make the 2024 election about 2016 through 2020.
And just erase 2020 through 2024.
That's what they want to do.
2020 and just erase 2020 through 2024.
That's what they want to do.
We cannot let that happen.
All right.
[END]
One other thing for them is we played way too much MSNBC recently, unfortunately, but I got to play just one more thing.
Here's a talking head doctor on MSNBC giving some masking advice.
Listen to this.
If people want to stay safe, the best thing they can do, high quality masks, and that when possible, carry some extra masks.
I know this sounds crazy, but if you tell someone next to you on a plane, pay a 95 and just say, or a surgical mask, and just say, I've got an elderly mother at home, I've got a child with cancer at home, will you please do me a favor?
Having the people at least closest to you in that row, protecting yourself and them, can be the best safety.
So carry some extra masks with you, carry some rapid tests with you if you're traveling.
Carry some tests and some masks.
She didn't say, are you giving them the tests too?
When you sit down?
Sorry, I don't mean to bug you, but could you just take this,
well, first I have a health questionnaire, could you just check yes or no on this box?
It's only 50 questions.
And then I'm about to do a little bit of blood work.
Here's a rapid test and here's three masks.
Would you mind just putting those on for me?
I don't mean to impose, I don't mean to impose.
Lord, dear Lord in heaven, please let someone try this with me.
Please, please try.
I am begging you.
Send someone to me next to me on a plane to try to hand me a mask and ask me to put it on.
I would love that.
I would love the opportunity to respond to that query.
And my response will be along the lines of, hell no, but maybe a little bit more colorful.
I'll probably have a little bit more to say than that, but that's going to be the thrust of it, really, is what it's going to be.
But of course, the left, they can't get over this masking thing, some of them anyway.
Here's Jerome Adams.
He now calls himself a health equity director.
He used to be a certain general under Trump, and he posted this today.
He says, flying today, a Delta pilot walked by me in the airport and said, take your mask off, man, breathe free.
Gotta love that pilot.
Why is it those who so strongly felt others were imposing their beliefs in health, wellness, and compassion on them feel so free to impose their belief on others?
Well, in what way is he imposing his belief on you by just saying, hey, take your mask off, breathe free?
He's concerned about your mental well-being.
He's concerned about you.
And then Dr. Emily Ricotta, who's an epidemiologist, she tweeted this, in defiance of the mask mandate removal, I'm double-masked and bringing some sass to the airport this morning.
And she's got her double masks on, and then she's got a shirt that says, trust me, I'm an epidemiologist.
Well, I'm glad to know you're an epidemiologist, but trust... I think I'm gonna go the other direction.
That's the red flag.
That signals to me that I cannot trust you based on the last two years of experience.
How are you in defiance of the removal of a mandate?
Nobody is saying that you can't wear the mask.
Now, I think that we should say that, actually.
Talk about going on offense, the theme here.
I would say it's actually not enough to just get rid of the mask mandates and move on.
We now need there to be laws put in place ensuring that no mask mandates can ever be passed again, especially in schools.
Every state in the country should be passing laws, every red state anyway, every alleged red state should be passing laws saying you cannot, you know, mask mandates in school are illegal.
And I would even go, because I am such a bully, I would go farther than that and I would also pass laws banning masking itself.
I would say you cannot wear a mask in public unless you have a specific health-related need.
So if you can obtain a health exemption, let's say you are going through chemotherapy, something like that, then you get a health exemption and you can wear a mask, but everybody else you can't.
Why can't you?
Because you look stupid, that's why.
If I was governor, that'd be my whole reason.
Just looks stupid, and so I'm saying you can't do it.
That's all.
If I have to give a better reason, there are better reasons.
One is that it's a public safety risk.
It is legitimately a public safety risk to have people walking around in masks.
Having masses of people walking around with anonymity, we've seen what happens over the last two years.
We've all seen it.
The mass looting, the crime wave, all of that is directly connected to the masking.
That's why when you watch all these videos of the looting sprees and everything else, whether it was during BLM riots or just these things that happen on their own now in San Francisco and Los Angeles and other places, they're almost always wearing masks.
And that was something that some of us, including yours truly, predicted early on, and was laughed at for saying.
We have everybody wearing masks, now we're gonna have shoplifting and everything left and right.
And people scoffed at that, said, what's the connection there?
So, public safety hazard, that's why.
That is, if I had to come up with a better reason than it looks stupid, my real reason would be it's a public safety hazard for people walking around in masks.
And, what's more, it's also a psychological health We care about mental health these days, don't we?
It is bad for mental health to walk around in a mask, and it's bad for other people's mental health to have to see you.
It is harmful to my mental health when I have to walk around seeing people in masks.
So those are my reasons.
Let's get now to the comment section.
Jack Walsh, no relation as far as I know, says, "A mascot is representation of your
group of people, whether it's your school or your team or whatever."
These kids are proud to be represented by Native American symbols and heritage.
Look at the reverence they're giving their performance.
Why is this offensive in the least?
Well, that's exactly the point with all these alleged offensive mascots, Indian mascots.
People are proud of the mascots.
That's why fan bases have tried to hold on to them, because they are proud of the mascots.
And when you make something into a mascot, you make a person into a mascot, that is you, that is reverence, that is you paying homage.
That's, you know, that's a sign of respect.
As I said yesterday, you don't make a mascot out of something or someone that you think is pathetic, inferior, weak, whatever.
Boyer says, "'Til We Have Faces' is the secret gem of C.S.
Lewis's works.
I read it every couple of years or so and every time walk away with something different."
Yeah, I kind of fluctuate between which C.S.
Lewis work is my favorite, but I do think ultimately, and I've always gravitated towards this purely apologetic I mean, everything he did is apologetic in a certain way.
Till We Have Faces certainly is, but it's also a novel.
It's a fictional story.
There's a lot of allegorical elements to it.
I've always gravitated towards things like, you know, the problem of pain, mere Christianity, stuff like that.
That's very clearly straightforward apologetics, but recently especially I've found myself connecting with Tawiyah faces, so right now I would say I think that's the best C.S.
Lewis book.
Tyler says, hey Matt, former infantry here, and I can honestly say people that go overseas into combat zones, politicians, photographers, etc., with little to no experience slash training, are extremely valuable, not because they're good at what they do, but because they keep our morale high by keeping us laughing.
At their expense, of course.
Okay, so that's the one advantage.
I was asking yesterday, guys like Malcolm Nance, these cable news pundits who are now going to Ukraine and LARPing as Ukrainian warriors.
The people on the ground there who are actually fighting, are they happy to see the cable news pundits show up?
Someone who's out of shape and 60 years old?
Were they hoping that somebody like that would come and help?
And this is the answer, apparently.
A little bit of a... I guess you could use that.
Being in that environment, high-stress environment, obviously, having a little bit of a... a little bit of a comedic break, I think, is good.
Aidan says, Matt, I've been crying all day since I heard this heartbreaking news.
Pooh Shiesty has been sentenced to five and a half years in prison.
I'm barely able to even type this message due to all the tears on my screen.
Hope you're holding up okay.
Yeah, you know, I saw this yesterday, and I wanted to talk about it, but it was too painful.
It was too much.
I needed time to process it and pray about it, and I still don't know what to say.
My man Pooh Shiesty is going to prison for five and a half years, and that means five and a half years without his music.
I mean, yeah, we have his classics.
We have what he has contributed so far to humanity, and he's going to contribute so much more.
But not having new Pooh Shiesty music, it's kind of unbearable for me.
Why is he going to prison?
Well, because of racism.
And because of anti-poo bias in the justice system, which is a problem that is not discussed nearly enough.
They jammed poo up on some phony charges, and now he, an innocent poo, is going to prison.
It's unconscionable.
But here's the good news.
If I know Pooh Shiesty, and I do, he's going to endure this hardship with great courage and dignity.
I mean, this is Pooh Shiesty we're talking about.
A man whose spirit will not be broken easily.
So that's the good message.
May we all be a little bit more like Pooh Shiesty.
And like his friend, Spottum Gottem.
Who actually, it just so happens, was shot recently, but I think he's okay, as far as I know.
Thank God.
One tragedy at a time.
So, prayers for Pooh.
Godspeed, my friend.
Come back to us soon.
You know, if there's one question I never thought I'd seriously be asking the general
public, it's what is a woman?
But here we are.
And not only am I asking the question, I've made an entire film and written an entire
book trying to answer it.
Both are called What is a Woman?
And the book is now available for pre-order at whatisawoman.com.
Also on Amazon, where it was number one on the bestseller charts in the women's studies
category before, of course, being removed from the list.
So help me find the answer to this elusive question.
Pre-order my book, What Is A Woman, at whatisawoman.com or on Amazon.
And go to whatisawoman.com also to see the trailer for the film, which will be coming out very soon.
Very excited about that as well.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
You know, one of my favorite pieces of extra content that we post on our YouTube channel are my Reddit relationship advice videos.
And this is when I comb through the relationship forums on Reddit to impart my wisdom to the confused and helpless souls who are so desperate that they're actually stooping to soliciting advice from the Reddit community.
Now, my advice may not be great from an objective standpoint, but it's better than anything that, you know, they'll get from Reddit.
So today, in that spirit, I'll be trying to help a young woman whose relationship quandary As posted to Reddit, went viral this week, I'll be helping her and I'll also be canceling her because that's what we do in this segment, nothing personal.
I mean, usually it is pretty personal, but never mind that.
A woman named Kate Whittaker on Twitter seems to be one of the first to have taken this post and amplified it, causing it to go viral.
She tweeted the screenshot along with a caption revealing her bias.
She says, what on earth is going on with men?
Ironically, though, the man in question is not on Earth.
He is under the Earth, where all men wish to be.
The Reddit post is titled, How Can I Get My Boyfriend to Stop Digging His Tunnel?
Now, we see the problem already from the way she framed the situation.
She says, how can I get him to stop, rather than, should I get him to stop, which is the real question you should be asking.
She's assuming from the outset that she should stop her boyfriend from digging his tunnel.
To her, it's self-evident that men should not dig tunnels, but to men, It's self-evident that we should, and we must.
I'm getting ahead of myself a little bit.
Here's her version of the story.
Let's read it.
She says, so I know this is a weird question, but my boyfriend likes to spend a lot of his free time digging a tunnel on some property that he inherited.
I haven't seen the full extent of it, but last I saw it was remarkably deep under the surface.
He spent roughly a year on it, and it's evident.
The front of the thing is deep, wide, well put together.
At the front, which is the only part I've seen, he's got cement beams, cement beams, electric lights, even chairs and a small table.
I haven't gotten into it.
I haven't gone into it, but it looked like the quality severely dropped as the tunnel went further, mostly becoming open dirt with some wood beams holding it up.
Now, pausing here for a moment.
It is baffling to me that her boyfriend has been digging this awesome tunnel and she hasn't even gone into it?
This is like if he had spent a year painting a masterpiece, or chiseling a beautiful sculpture out of rock, and you didn't even bother to look at it.
What if you were in the Sistine Chapel of Michelangelo in the year 1512, and he told you that he just finished painting the ceiling, and he's like, I just finished painting that whole ceiling, it took me forever.
And you're just like, oh cool, and you didn't even bother to look up and check it out.
This is shocking to me.
Especially when the thing in question is a badass tunnel.
She continues, my biggest concern is his safety.
I'm really worried that he's gonna dig too deep and it'll collapse on him or something.
I've tried voicing this concern to him, but he just laughs it off and assures me that he'll be fine.
Aside from safety concerns, there's also the fact that he doesn't really have a social life because of this thing.
I'm pretty much the only person he still talks to outside of his job, and he doesn't go out and do anything anymore.
It used to be that he'd occasionally head out and do some digging on the weekends, but now he spends almost all of his free time out there.
He still comes home, but he barely spends any time with me, and I know that he isn't doing anything but digging that damn hole in the ground.
This can't be good for his mental health, but I don't know how to convince him to stop.
He's always really happy when he comes back from digging, which is why I haven't seriously tried to stop him before, but I was talking to a friend about him, and she told me he might be going crazy.
Obviously, I don't think he's insane, but I hadn't considered the mental health aspect of this, and I just don't know what to do.
Okay, let's clear a few things up.
Now, yes, sure, there are some valid safety concerns here.
If the tunnel isn't properly built and supported or ventilated, you could, you know, die.
But let's just put the risk of death aside for a second.
That's a minor detail, frankly.
And also, I see no reason for us to assume, given the information provided, that this man is digging his tunnel in an unsafe way.
That would be, I believe, an erroneous assumption.
So, let's table the whole dying situation for a moment and look at the bigger picture.
First of all, Speaking to the woman who wrote this, your problem fundamentally is that you think you have to understand everything about the man you're dating, but you can't and you won't.
Woman will never fully comprehend man, just as man will never fully comprehend woman.
We are made for each other, and yet we are mysteries to each other.
That's the essence of romance.
The difference, though, is that man knows he cannot understand woman, and he's okay with that.
Woman, in fact, becomes very frustrated by just how okay with it he is.
So, you know, she'll say something cryptic and out of context to him, and he'll have no idea what she's talking about, but he'll just go, oh, okay.
Uh, okay.
And then get back to what he's doing.
And she'll stand there, stunned, and say, well, aren't you gonna ask me what I'm talking about?
And he'll say, okay, yeah, what were you talking about?
And he'll just hope it isn't a long story, but it always is.
On the flip side, man can say nothing at all.
He can simply walk into the room with a slightly abnormal facial expression, and woman will start interrogating and waterboarding him to extract every last piece of information she can about this facial expression.
What are you thinking?
She'll ask.
And she won't accept it when he says nothing, even if that really is the answer.
She must understand everything about him, but she won't.
And she can't accept that.
And even though she won't, I will now endeavor to lay out a few facts about men that may help women, especially this one.
The first is this.
Every man dreams of two things, often related.
Having a secret door in his house that leads to a secret room, and building a great tunnel.
This tunnel might connect one secret room to another, or it might simply go all the way down to the center of the Earth, where we hope and expect to find goblins and dinosaurs and Elvis hiding out or whatever.
There's something cathartic about digging.
We are called into the Earth, into the caverns.
We hear the siren song, just as our forefathers did.
Assuming our forefathers were meerkats or dwarves from Middle Earth or something.
You can't understand this.
We don't understand this.
And yet, this is just how it is.
The other thing about men is that we're prone to becoming randomly obsessed with very weird and specific things out of nowhere.
Again, we cannot explain this.
We shouldn't have to explain it.
For example, I recently decided that I want to get a giant aquarium with lots of rare and tropical fish in my house.
And I keep telling my wife about it, and she keeps wanting to understand why I'm obsessed with being a fish owner all of a sudden.
And I keep telling her that actually it's called fish keeping according to all the videos I've watched about it.
And she says, wait, you're watching videos about people who own fish?
And I say they're fish keepers, and yes.
And around and around we go.
A man becomes bizarrely fixated on some arbitrary thing.
A woman looks on, confused.
And it's the great dance of life.
Then we get to the biggest problem that I noticed in this story.
Needless to say, I noticed no problems with a man who simply wants nothing but to dig.
All of the problems, as usual, are with the woman.
Especially when she acknowledges that the man is happy when he digs, he's fulfilled, he's doing what he wants to do, what he's called to do, and yet she talked to her friend and decided that, though he's happy and seemingly mentally well-adjusted, he must be crazy.
Women, listen.
I know I'm not going to stop you from talking to your friends.
But just realize that if you, who spend every day with your man, still struggle to understand all of his ways, then what chance does your friend have?
What insight can she really offer about him?
What does she know?
Is she even in a healthy relationship herself?
Has she even seen the tunnel?
Or is she making judgments about the tunnel without all the facts?
A tale as old as time.
The meddling friend.
This is the scourge of men everywhere.
So, just stop that, ladies.
Let the man be.
Let him be a man.
Let him dig.
Let him get his $18,000 aquarium.
Yes, it's $18,000.
But it's worth the investment.
And it helps with equity in your home or something, maybe.
Anyway, let him live, damn it.
That's all I'm saying.
Otherwise, you're cancelled.
And we'll leave it there for today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
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, production manager Pavel Vodovsky, Our associate producer is McKenna Waters.
The show is edited by Robbie Dantzler.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina, and hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Heart.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2022.
Florida ends tax breaks for Disney, Jen Psaki cries at the prospect of not transing the kids, literally cries, and Elon Musk sets the stage for the next phase of his crusade to take over Twitter.
