Ep. 1347 - Leftist Activist Threatens To Murder Government Officials, Immediately Regrets It
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, as Iran launched an attack on Israel over the weekend, anti-American left wing activists in our own country have become more and more emboldened. One activist even threatened to murder her city council if they didn't call for a ceasefire in Gaza. Though she became a lot less bold when they put her in handcuffs. Also, a proposed change in California will make it a felony for pedophiles to purchase children to abuse. Isn't that already a felony? Not in California, apparently. And Bill Maher makes an argument for abortion that shocks and horrifies his audience. It's a deranged argument, but it's also honest. Which is more than we can say for most pro-abortion people.
Ep.1347
- - -
DailyWire+:
Upgrade to your BRAND NEW 2nd Generation Jeremy’s Razor here: https://bit.ly/3VPYOTo
Get 35% off your DailyWire+ Membership here: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month when you make the switch! https://www.puretalk.com/Walsh
PreBorn! - Help save babies from abortion: https://preborn.com/Matt
Courage Under Fire - Join me at the Courage Under Fire Gala! Use code DAILYWIRE for exclusive access to your tickets at http://www.courageunderfiregala.org
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs
Today on the Matt Wall Show, as Iran launched an attack on Israel over the weekend, anti-American left-wing activists in our own country have become more and more emboldened.
One activist even threatened to murder her entire city council if they didn't call for a ceasefire in Gaza, though she became a lot less bold when they put her in handcuffs.
Also, a proposed change in California will make it a felony for pedophiles to purchase children to abuse.
Isn't that already a felony?
Well, not in California, apparently.
And Bill Maher makes an argument for abortion that shocks and horrifies his audience.
It's a deranged argument, but it's also honest, which is more than we can say for most pro-abortion people and their arguments.
All that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.
[MUSIC]
20 bucks barely gets you anything these days.
You can't get a burger and fries for less than that anymore, but do you know what $20 will get you?
From the cell phone company I use, PureTalk.
You can get unlimited talk, text, and plenty of 5G data for just $20 a month.
PureTalk gives you the same quality of service as your current cell phone provider, but for half the cost.
The average family saves almost $1,000 a year, all with no contracts and no activation fees.
You can switch to Pure Talk and keep the phone and phone number you currently use, or you
can take advantage of their great deals on the latest iPhones and Androids.
Make the switch, and it's incredibly easy to do.
Their US customer service team can help you join Pure Talk in as little as 10 minutes.
Choose to spend your hard-earned money with a wireless company that shares your values,
supports our military and veterans, creates American jobs, and refuses to advertise on
fake news networks.
Stop spending ridiculous amounts on your phone plan.
Go to puretalk.com/walsh.
Right now, our listeners can get an additional 50% off their first month.
That's puretalk.com/walsh.
It's difficult to predict exactly what World War III might look like, but this weekend
we got a preview of how a lot of people will react if and when it does break out.
And what we saw wasn't exactly encouraging.
It was sort of like a scene out of Doctor Strangelove, crossed with some parts of Dumb and Dumber, with grainy videos of drone swarms added in, playing out all over the country.
This was a spectacle that, unless you were glued to cable news or social media over the weekend, you might have missed, and if so, consider yourself lucky.
As you've probably seen by now, Iran launched a swarm of drones and missiles towards Israel on Saturday, and for several hours as the attack unfolded, there was pandemonium online.
There were reports of huge explosions in Tehran, suggesting Israel had already launched a massive counterattack.
That wasn't true.
There were Austin Powers steamroller memes mocking the extraordinarily slow travel time of the Iranian drones, which apparently take several hours to make the trip to Israel.
And there were even dramatic photos of flight tracking radar data of a so-called doomsday plane leaving Israel, supposedly carrying Israel's cabinet away from a potentially catastrophic attack, which also wasn't true.
It was all a very strange mixture of false information and hysteria.
Now, not to be outdone, there was also evidently pandemonium in the White House.
First, reporters said that Joe Biden would interrupt his vacation, imagine that, on the beach to address the nation.
And it's a big deal when Joe Biden does something like that because normally it takes the release of a special counsel report proving that he's completely demented.
But in this case, they said he was going to address the nation.
And then the White House announced that actually, Joe Biden's not going to address the nation after all.
He's not going to say anything.
And they called a lid for the day and that was it.
So, we really had no guidance whatsoever from our supposed commander-in-chief as any of this was going on, and that was a deliberate choice.
Turns out that as this attack on Israel was unfolding, the White House had a pretty good idea of what was coming and how it was going to play out.
And that's because for about two weeks, Iran had been promising to retaliate against Israel for its military strike in Damascus on April 1st, which killed several Iranian military commanders.
And Iran says that the commanders were Inside an embassy, but they also concede, according to New York Times, that they were talking about military strategy for the war in Gaza.
Quote, a member of the Revolutionary Guards, which oversees the Quds Force, told the Times that the strike had targeted a meeting in which Iranian intelligence officials and Palestinian militants were discussing the war in Gaza.
Among them were leaders of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a group armed and funded by Iran.
Well, embassies aren't generally the place for strategic conversations like that.
You kind of forfeit diplomatic protections when you use the building for military purposes.
But in any event, Iran maintained that the Israeli strike was unlawful, and they vowed a response.
But here's the thing, they apparently cleared that military response with Western powers.
As the Jerusalem Post reports, quote, Iran informed Turkey in advance of its planned operation against Israel, a Turkish diplomatic source told Reuters on Sunday, adding that the U.S.
conveyed to Iran via Ankara that its operation must be, quote, within certain limits.
That means that the White House, I guess, greenlit some sort of Iranian military response.
Seems like a pretty big story.
But as of now, we don't know what exactly those limits might have been or whether Iran complied with them.
But let's assume the story is accurate.
The upshot is that for now, Iran's response, rubber-stamped by the White House, reportedly, Doesn't appear to have done a significant amount of damage.
Right now, Israel says that with the help from the United States, Britain, and apparently several Middle Eastern countries, including Jordan, it intercepted 99% of the drone and missile launches from Iran, which is not entirely surprising since the drones were traveling at slow speeds.
At the same time, some ballistic missiles did land in Israel, particularly around a military base, causing some damage.
There were reports of several injuries, including a seven-year-old girl who was seriously hurt by missile fragments.
That's where things stand now, but of course, further escalation is possible.
It's difficult to say what will happen next.
What we do know is that the response in this country has been pretty revealing.
It tells us a lot about the priorities of our leaders and the level of insanity that normal, level-headed people are up against.
For example, the Seattle Police Department announced yesterday afternoon on social media that, quote, SPD is closely monitoring the conflict between Israel and Iran.
Now this is a city where everyone's high out of their minds all the time, people are afraid to walk alone after dark, or even in daylight.
But don't worry, residents and vagrants of Seattle, your police department is closely monitoring a conflict 7,000 miles away from your city.
Now that announcement on social media came with a link to the Seattle police blotter, and the slightly longer explanation raises more questions than it answers.
Here's what it says, quote, The Seattle Police Department is closely monitoring the conflict between Israel and Iran and are working with local and federal agencies to ensure the safety of Seattle community members.
As a precaution, we will proactively increase patrols around infrastructures and sensitive areas.
SPD's community liaisons are working with community leaders as a prevention measure.
Currently, there are no specific or credible threats.
As always, SPD is committed to the safety of Seattle community members.
So what What are they concerned about exactly?
Are they concerned that Iran might attack Seattle next?
Given how long it took Iran to get drones to Israel, I guess we can expect the attack on Seattle to happen sometime in the year 2027 or something.
Or not at all, because there is of course absolutely no reason why any government official in Seattle, much less law enforcement officials, should be concerning themselves with a war halfway across the world.
That's what's happening.
Elsewhere on social media, immediately after this attack commenced, activists and the pundit class divided themselves up into teams.
And it was, you know, it's disconcerting to watch, but it's exactly what you expect.
On one side, you had the Nothing Ever Happens crowd, who dismissed this attack as yet another non-event.
On another side, there were some sober, serious commentators.
They were a distinct minority, but you know, you have some of them sometimes.
And on the much larger third side, you had people treating this like a sporting event, basically.
And as usual, when you're dealing with a sport, some people inevitably take it far too personally.
They turn these events into their identity.
They lose all perspective.
They become determined to make the events in the Middle East about themselves.
And they become very confused, even threatening, when other people don't agree with them.
And for most people in this camp, they kept their frustrations on social media.
But this phenomenon is not remotely limited to social media.
There are now an increasing number of activists who are willing to appear in public and act on this insanity.
Of course, a few weeks ago, as we all recall, an active duty member of the U.S.
Air Force set himself on fire outside of the Israeli embassy in Washington.
He was screaming, free Palestine, as he killed himself.
And then on Friday, there was a slightly less dramatic act of protest that took place at a city council meeting in Bakersfield, California.
This is a woman named Reedy Patel, who was apparently born and raised in Bakersfield, according to one of her online biographies.
And she stood up at this meeting.
To urge the City Council to endorse a ceasefire in Gaza.
Now, as you may know, geographically here, Gaza is also many thousands of miles away from Bakersfield, and the City Council in Bakersfield has precisely no ability to influence the government of Israel or any other country.
The Bakersfield City Council has no... No one involved in the conflict in the Middle East is looking to Bakersfield for their guidance.
On this.
Their authority is, you know, mostly about fixing potholes and things like that in their own town.
But that didn't stop Patel, who has a degree in neuroscience somehow, by the way, didn't stop her from stepping up to the podium and saying this.
Watch.
Hi there, my name is Riddhi Patel.
I'm here to speak in support of the City Council introducing a ceasefire resolution, specifically the one United Liberation Front has drafted.
I don't have faith that you'll do this.
You guys are all horrible human beings and Jesus probably would have killed you himself.
The thing is though, it's very clear to me as someone who's been an organizer for the past couple years, that none of you care because you guys don't care about anything happening in Palestine or any other country where oppression occurs, because you don't care about the oppression occurring here.
And I understand that you guys are all horrible people, But the thing is, 2,300 people being evicted in the last year, those are votes.
And you guys, those are votes to win here in Bakersfield.
And while you guys parade Gandhi around, as a Hindu holiday called Chaitra Navratri starts off this week, I remind you that these holidays that we practice, that other people in the Global South practice, believe in violent revolution against their oppressors.
And I hope one day somebody brings the guillotine and kills all of you m********.
Okay, now, so a ceasefire resolution she wants from the Bakersfield City Council, which, I mean, who knows?
Maybe that's what the Middle East is missing.
Maybe that's why there's been centuries of conflict, is just that they're waiting for Bakersfield.
Maybe the resolution for Bakersfield comes in and that'll solve it.
Who knows?
But so far in that clip, she stops short of saying that she's going to kill the mayor of Bakersfield or any of the city council members herself.
She kind of stops short of that.
She just says that Jesus would have killed them and that other people should kill them.
So she's walking right up to the line, but isn't quite crossing it, at least not clearly.
But that's not the interesting part of what she says in the clip.
I mean, it's crazy, but it's not interesting.
The interesting thing is how she ties the number of evictions in Bakersfield to what's happening in Gaza.
This would have been a great moment for Rita Patel to go into detail about the homeless problem in California, what solutions she might have, what she wants the city council to do that they're not doing to address the problem.
That's a topic that would actually have direct ramifications for the lives of Americans in her own community.
But instead, here's what she says next.
Watch.
And so there's no need to continue.
In the last five years I've attended city council meetings, there's never been metal detectors, there's never been more cops.
The only reason you're doing it is because people actually don't care if you guys don't like them, and they're actually resisting, so you want to criminalize them.
So regardless of whether you elect people into office, they'll backstab you, they'll let you die, and for that reason, you guys want to criminalize us with metal detectors?
We'll see you at your house.
We'll murder you.
Next speaker, please.
Lance, followed by Kev, followed by Valeria.
Ms.
Patel, Ms.
Patel, that was a threat, what you said at the end, and so the officers are going to escort you out and take care of that.
Now, you can kind of tell from the total lack of reaction right after the death threat that nobody really pays attention in these city council meetings.
You'd expect at least one person who's paying attention to, you know, gasp.
Like, it should be kind of a shocking thing to hear.
But nobody's really watching.
It takes them a few seconds, a delayed reaction to it.
Fortunately, the internet got a hold of the clip and everyone was able to see the humor in this moment, as unsettling as it is.
But still, it's kind of incredible how she threatens to murder the entire city council in such a casual, kind of like, oh-by-the-way sort of tone.
She notices her time is running out and so she just drops the, oh yeah, well I'm also going to murder the city council at their homes.
Have a nice evening.
And of course, the irony in that, in the second clip, is that she's speaking in protest of metal detectors at city council meetings.
She's upset that they're setting up metal detectors because she's saying that we're not a threat to you.
They're not necessary to have metal detectors.
And she's going to prove metal detectors aren't necessary by murdering the people who requested them.
So that's the logic here.
Now, a couple of years ago, you'd expect someone like Reedy Patel to probably get away with all that.
After all, leftist activists have torched small businesses and churches with impunity in the past few years, and the only response by Democrats has been to cheer them on.
And that's probably what Patel expected to happen.
In fact, you could tell that she was just getting her stuff in her purse, and she was just going to walk out.
She didn't think there was any issue.
But she was surprised when they stopped her and said, oh, by the way, you threatened to kill government officials right in front of everybody.
You're going to be arrested for that.
She was surprised.
She had no idea.
And she wasn't.
She seemed legitimately shocked to discover that openly threatening to commit first degree homicide against government officials is a crime.
She was also deleted from the website of the activist group where she worked on environmental issues, so she's apparently lost her job as well.
And Patel now faces several counts of making terroristic threats.
And when she appeared in court shortly afterwards, suddenly her demeanor had changed quite dramatically.
to the police.
We'll have more on this story in just a few minutes.
Stay tuned for more on this story on KTVU.
# # # A deputy public defender entered
not guilty pleas on Patel's behalf to eight counts of
threatening a public official and ten counts of making
terroristic threats.
She's been charged with committing a crime of
intimidation and a crime of intimidation.
She's been charged with committingting a crime of
She's due back in court later this month.
Not so confident now, is she?
And I know, look, I know they enter the not guilty plea.
I mean, it's a public defender.
It's what they're going to do.
That's a tough case.
That's going to be a tough one.
I mean, she's on video.
She says, and I quote, we're going to come to your house and murder you.
That's as explicit as you could possibly be with a threat.
Now, it's not hard to watch that footage and wonder what would happen if we decided to enforce the law against all of these unhinged left-wing activists who think they can commit crimes with impunity.
Would all of them buckle as easily as this deranged Indian-American woman did?
Probably.
The disturbing part, obviously, is that we're importing a lot of people into this country who openly despise us, to the point of using violent threats to get what they want.
Instead of discouraging conduct like Patel's, we're doing everything we can to get more of it.
Last week, I spoke at length about the Death to America chants that broke out at a rally in Dearborn, Michigan.
And if you didn't see that as a reminder, here's what that looked like.
I love the America!
He loves the Africa!
He loves the Africa!
Malcolm X said, and I quote, "We live in one of the rottenest countries that has ever
existed on this earth."
It's not Genocide Joe that has to go.
It's the entire system that has to go.
Any system that would allow such atrocities and such devilry to happen and would support it, such a system does not deserve to exist on God's earth.
And so when these fools ask us if Israel has the right to exist,
the chant "Death to Israel" has become the most logical chant shouted across the world today.
So these of course are people who voluntarily live in the country that they say is the rottenest on the planet.
They're agitating for the murder of Americans and Jews.
To the extent any of these people are non-citizens, which quite likely describes many of them, they should be removed from this country immediately.
And, but that won't happen because Michigan's top Democrats endorse all this.
They've refused to condemn those chants.
In fact, Rashida Tlaib just snapped at a Fox News reporter who dared to ask her whether she condemned those chants.
Let's watch that again.
Congressman Tlaib.
I don't talk to Fox News.
I don't talk to Fox News.
At a rally in your district, people were chanting death to America.
Do you condemn?
I do not talk to Fox News.
But do you condemn chants of death to America?
I don't talk to people that use racist tropes.
Why can't you just say whether or not you condemn people chanting death to America?
Why are you afraid to talk to Fox?
Fox News is not, not, listen, using racist tropes towards my community is what Fox News is about.
I don't talk to Fox News.
Is death to America racist?
Is chanting death to America racist?
I'm talking about your guys' racist tropes.
You know, you guys are, you guys know exactly what you do.
I know you're Islamophobic, but you guys gotta go deal with it on your own selves.
You're not gonna use me.
So it's using a racist trope to air footage of a large crowd in Dearborn, Michigan, saying, death to America and death to Israel at the international Al-Quds Day rally.
So if we, once again, it's the crime of noticing.
So if you notice that this is happening, then you are racist just for noticing it.
That's according to Rashida Tlaib, and apparently the governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer, who has refused to take questions about the incident, airing footage of what the diverse residents of Dearborn are doing is Islamophobia, apparently.
Which, if you read between the lines, is quite an omission by Rashida Tlaib.
She's saying that death to Israel and death to America is, what, a core teaching of Islam, is what she's claiming?
Because if you criticize the chance, then you're criticizing Islam.
You're Islamophobic, is what she's saying.
That might not be what she meant to say, but it is, of course, the implication.
Because what she could have said was, no, everyone should criticize people who say death to America.
That's not Islamophobic, because that's not what Islam is about.
Those people are not with us.
They're not part of us.
I condemn that.
I condemn what they said.
I mean, she could have said that, but she didn't.
What's become clear, even as Democrats like Rashida Tlaib want to pretend otherwise, is that the rally in Dearborn is just one part of a much larger picture.
So here, for example, is footage from a Teamsters conference in Chicago on Saturday, which was obtained by the Free Press.
This is the largest private sector union in the country.
Hundreds of activists attended.
And they were quickly told how to chant, Death to Israel and Death to America in Farsi.
Watch.
So I'm going to teach you a chant in Persian that you can use if you ever encounter those Zionist freaks, whether they be Iranian or whatever, alright?
Now, I don't drink margaritas, but we all know what a margarita is.
We all know what a bar is.
So you're going to say, Marg Bar.
Mark Bar Israel!
Mar Bar Israel!
Thank you.
[applause]
Oh, so, it has two meanings,
depending on who says it.
It can mean depth to or down width.
Can we get a Maribar Amrica?
We can get a Maribar Amrica, yes we can.
Maribar Amrica!
My bar, America!
Thank you.
Once again, everybody in that room should be deported.
I don't even care where they came from.
Just deport them somewhere.
I don't care if they're citizens.
I don't care.
It doesn't matter.
Just deport all of them.
Get them out of the country.
Or throw them in prison, you know, because that is treasonous behavior.
So, that and then deport them.
I mean, we could talk about the order of events here.
Now, there are a lot of stock anti-union arguments you hear a lot, and they're pretty much all valid.
Yes, unions reward inefficiency.
They protect incompetent employees while also siphoning money away from them.
They result in higher prices and worse products, worse teachers, worse infrastructure.
And these arguments are all familiar because they're true.
What's less well-known is how many unions, including the largest one in the country, are now openly preaching genocidal rhetoric against the United States and Israel.
I'm not talking about genocidal rhetoric in the abstract kind of leftist sense.
You just heard it.
I'm talking about, they're actually saying, death to America.
This is a threat that, unlike whatever's happening in the Middle East right now, is already here.
And instead of recognizing it, both parties seem completely uninterested in doing anything about it.
The Teamsters just donated $45,000 to the Republican National Committee, as well as the Democrats.
Why did the Republicans accept that donation?
Why haven't they returned it?
Why is the GOP courting the support of organized labor?
Why aren't any Republicans calling out what the Teamsters just did in Chicago?
Like, why isn't that video everywhere?
Those are all good questions.
Unless we want a lot more Reidy Patel showing up at city council meetings, it's not a rhetorical question either.
The next Reidy Patel might actually follow through on her threats.
And if so, she'll have a lot of accomplices.
In 2020, we saw just how easy it was for a mob to torch entire city blocks in the name of racial justice and BLM.
It's not especially difficult to imagine what mobs motivated by outright genocide could be capable of.
And as drones get shot down over Jordan, this is the threat that's barreling towards America.
The choice is simple.
We can either get people like this out of the country, or we can allow them to destroy it from within.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Preborn covers all the bases for soon-to-be mothers, particularly ones considering abortion.
Preborn meets women with compassion, encouragement, and understanding, providing them with the tools they need to choose life.
A lot of people who are upset about the pro-abortion movement are asking what they can actually do to fight back.
This is what you can do.
You can support organizations like Preborn because Preborn is out there on the front lines helping women to choose life.
You can sponsor one ultrasound for just $28 and save a life today.
Or if you have the means, please consider a leadership gift of $5,000.
This tax deductible gift will sponsor Preborn's entire network for 24 hours and help rescue 200 innocent lives.
To donate securely, dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby.
Let's start with some news out of California, because every time you think that the state can't become any more of a godforsaken wasteland, it proves you wrong.
So in California this week, state lawmakers are going to begin debating a proposed change to state law, and this change would make it a felony.
To purchase a child for sex.
That's what the change would be.
So after this change, pedophiles who buy children to rape them will be charged with felonies.
Now, if you're a normal person and you hear this, you'll think to yourself, well, hang on a minute.
What do you mean after a change in the law?
Isn't that already a felony?
Well, it's not, apparently.
In California, as of right now, and until this new law is passed, it is and has been only a misdemeanor to commit this heinous act.
And if you think that that's some kind of egregious, terrible oversight, like some kind of mistake that they just forgot to... I don't know how that mistake could happen, but if you think that's what it was, well, you should know that liberal groups in the state are actively opposing this change.
Here's the report from KCRA and California Watch.
A lot of the survivors are lived experience experts were saying you got
to go after the buyer it's just a misdemeanor and I thought there is no
way if you buy I thought they were mistaken. Opponents of this measure
includes several criminal justice reform groups including the Californians for
Safety and Justice, Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and the California Public
Defenders Association.
That association, in its opposition, has said that current law already addresses the issue.
It also said, in part, this bill punishes some defendants more harshly, felony punishment and sex offender registration, even when those persons do not have the intent to have sex with a minor.
Similar proposals have been blocked at the state capitol since 2014, according to legislative documents.
We'll see what happens with this version of the bill when it has its first hearing next week.
Well, that's an exceedingly weak explanation for why they oppose it, but it isn't like there could be a strong explanation.
The reasoning is totally ridiculous.
And by the way, if this story feels like a deja vu, it's because you may recall a similar controversy last year in California over a similar issue.
And when I first heard this story, I had to go back and say, well, didn't we go through this already?
Well, in that case, this same lawmaker, Groves, tried to change the law to have child sex trafficking classified as a serious felony.
This was last year.
And that is, so the sale of a child was to be classified as a felony.
And up until that point, that was a misdemeanor also.
And as you may or may not remember, Democrats in the state blocked that proposed law.
They shut it down.
Until the public pressure became so much that they relented and then the law was passed.
So again, this was not some sort of oversight.
This was not some kind of weird glitch in the law, which would be already impossible to understand how that could happen, but it wasn't even that.
This was Democrats actively wanted it to be a misdemeanor and it would still be a misdemeanor if not for public pressure and social media and everything.
People outside of California becoming aware of this and then they had to because it was indefensible.
It's like no Democrat now the Democrats might want to shut that down as they did.
To keep child sex trafficking misdemeanor, but none of them want to get on TV and actually explain why they want it to be misdemeanor.
So, when that became the situation, they'd have to actually explain their decision.
They said, well, never mind, we'll just change it.
And so, this is what they wanted.
They wanted these child sex traffickers, both the buyers and the sellers, to be given a slap on the wrist.
They want these people back out on the street.
It's what they want, very clearly.
And there's obviously a certain self-serving nature to this.
You know, how many of the people speaking out against these laws to make child sex trafficking a felony are pedophiles themselves?
How many are just trying to protect themselves from going to prison?
We can't know for sure how many, but we can be sure that there's some of that going on at least.
And I think the rest of them, the ones opposing this, who are not themselves pedophiles, However few may fall into that category, they really do empathize more with monstrous criminals and predators than they do with victims.
It's as simple as that.
We have to understand how deep the spiritual sickness is with these people.
Their souls are twisted, like deformed, because for a spiritually healthy person, a normal person, When you hear about a child being preyed upon in this way, you are filled with rage at the predators, because your compassion for the child and your desire for justice makes you furious.
You have a furious, wrathful anger at the predator, and you want to see them punished severely.
You want to see them suffer.
And that's out of love.
Out of love do you desire the suffering of these monsters.
Out of love for the child, out of love for the victim.
But these leftists who want to go easy on child rapists and murderers and all other types of scumbag criminals, they just don't have that compassion and that love for the victims and for the innocent.
I think even at some fundamental level, they despise innocence.
You know, it's not a coincidence that the same side that wants to go easy on child rapists also, this is also the side that endorses the Holocaust of the unborn in the womb.
I mean, they really do, they endorse it and quite passionately support.
Things like Drag Queen Story Hour and teaching kids about all kinds of grotesque sexual things in elementary schools.
I mean, it's all wrapped.
They despise innocence.
They therefore despise children especially.
And you see that come out in moments like this.
All right.
This is a story from a few weeks ago, but it's worth mentioning because most people, I think, never heard about it, and I didn't hear about it myself until this morning.
But it's especially relevant now in the wake of the Dexter Reed case, with the BLM set trying to have the officers in that case thrown in prison for an obviously totally justified police shooting where the cops were being shot at by Dexter Reed, they returned fire, and he died.
Well, on that note, here's the New York Times.
A New York State trooper was acquitted of manslaughter charges on Wednesday in the killing of an unarmed man in downtown Buffalo after a high-speed highway chase.
The trooper, Anthony Nigro IV, was found not guilty of first- and second-degree manslaughter charges by Judge James Bargnessi of Erie County Court following a bench trial.
New York's Attorney General, Letitia James, charged Trooper Nigro last June in the fatal shooting of the man, James Huber, 38, of Northeast Pennsylvania.
Trooper Nigro, 40, of Eden, New York, had faced up to 25 years in prison if convicted.
Charles W. Murphy, the president of the New York State Troopers Police Benevolent Association, said in a statement that the union was pleased with the verdict.
Mr. Murphy said, quote, We commend the judge for his decision, as it is clear the charges were not applicable to this case.
A spokeswoman for Ms.
James, Letitia James, said in a statement that the office remains committed to conducting thorough and transparent investigations of every case following the facts of pursuing justice.
The spokeswoman then continued, we offer our sincerest condolences to Mr. Huber's loved ones.
Nicole Frye, Huber's sister, said, my brother didn't deserve to die that way.
So the family's upset, as you'd expect.
Okay, well, so that's the case.
So this state trooper, Anthony Nigro, Was charged with first and second degree manslaughter, as you heard.
Facing 25 years in prison.
Just found not guilty in the shooting.
The suspect, James Huber, was pulled over after driving erratically and going over 100 miles an hour on the highway.
And, in fact, he led the police on a high-speed chase.
And he then got off on the local roads, and they called off the chase for some reason, I guess because, for safety, they didn't want to, you know, whatever the policy is.
But then he was pulled over anyway a short time after that.
And that's when Nigro pulled him over and the shooting occurred.
So let's go back to the body cam footage, which was released back in 2022.
And we can see how this unfolded.
And so here's the footage along with an explanation of what you're seeing from the YouTube channel Law and Crime Network.
Let's watch it.
A New York State Trooper of the Year is now charged with manslaughter after he allegedly shot and killed an unarmed man who refused to get out of his vehicle.
What's up Jones?
I shot him.
I got the camera.
Law and Crime Network first brought you the story last year, when body camera video was released of the February 12th, 2022 shooting.
At the time, officials responded to a call for an erratic driver.
Officials say the driver, 38-year-old James Huber, was speeding at more than 100 miles per hour
along Interstate 90.
When Huber crashed into a state police squad car and headed for downtown Buffalo, the search was called off.
But trooper Anthony Nigro IV later caught up with Huber in the city's downtown.
Body camera video shows Nigro approach Huber's vehicle, telling him to get out.
Get the f*** out!
Get the f*** out!
Get out!
Get out!
Next, Huber appears to reach for something in the center console of his vehicle.
Seconds later, Nigro opens fire.
Go away!
Dude, get out!
Get out!
Get out!
Get the f*** out!
The vehicle then takes off and crashes on its side near a parking ramp.
Okay, so Huber was going 100 miles an hour.
Cops tried to stop him.
He fled.
Eventually, he is stopped.
Nigro approaches the vehicle.
Gun's already drawn.
His gun's already drawn, which makes sense, given that they were just involved in a high-speed chase with this guy, so they have reason to be very wary.
And he tells Huber to get out of the car.
He tells him multiple times he refuses.
Doesn't comply.
And then, we can see in the video, Huber turns and reaches for something in the center console, and that's when he gets himself shot.
And as you can see in the video, this is not subtle.
This is not one of those things where he just, like, kind of vaguely moves his arm, and then the cop says he was reaching.
This is not a gray area, like it's on the line, he could go either way.
This is, he turns very deliberately, very clearly, turns away from the officer, and reaches over.
So, obviously a justified shooting by Nigro.
In fact, it isn't just a justified shooting.
I mean, we should not be calling stuff like this merely justified.
We should be giving medals to cops like Nigro.
We should be applauding and rewarding them for their courage.
Because simply walking up and approaching a vehicle with some erratic lunatic behind the wheel, that takes real courage to do that.
And look, I know that people these days roll their eyes when we talk about cops being heroes and being courageous.
And not all of them are, obviously not.
There are bad cops.
And whenever I see a case of a bad cop doing something bad, I'm never hesitant to call it out.
I have no problem with that.
And if you watch this show, you know that.
But it's also true that it takes real bravery just to do some of the stuff that we consider normal for cops.
And if you don't believe me, then I ask you, like, put yourself in this same situation.
A guy's been driving erratically.
He's going 100 miles an hour.
The cops are chasing him, he's not pulling over.
He's finally stopped.
He's sitting in the car.
You're alone.
You have your gun.
That's all you have.
Would you want to walk up to the car in that case?
With that suspect inside?
Even with a gun?
Would you want to do that?
How much would I have to pay you?
To walk up to that car in that situation, with that guy inside there, just involved in a high-speed chase, 100 miles an hour, driving erratically, some lunatic behind the wheel, you know, anything else about him.
Like, how much would I have to pay you to approach that car and try to, not even just approach it, but try to get that guy out of the car?
Because, I mean, you could easily die in the process.
The guy behind the wheel, the suspect, if he has a weapon, which he very easily could, it only takes him one second to pull it out and shoot you in the face, and you're dead.
So, how much money would I have to pay you to approach the car under that circumstance?
I'll tell you this, for me it would take a lot.
It would take a lot of money.
In fact, I don't know if there's any amount that would be enough.
But this is the kind of situation that cops are in.
While getting paid a lot less than it would take for me or you, probably, to walk up to that car in that situation.
And that's only taking into account the physical risk.
The physical risk is already substantial.
And now we have to add another risk.
So put yourself in Nigro's shoes all over again.
The erratic suspect is pulled over.
You're walking up to the car.
He could be armed.
In fact, you have every reason to think that most likely he is.
You know, because he's obviously already engaged and he already seems to be desperate to evade justice.
And on top of that, so there's the physical risk, but on top of that, you realize that if you don't walk the tightrope perfectly, Right?
In this life-or-death situation, if you act a little too quickly, you'll go to jail forever.
So this is the spot you're in.
If you're too slow, you die.
If you're a little too quick, prison forever.
So there's two different ways that your life could be over after this.
So I ask you again, how much would I have to pay you to approach the car in that situation?
I think for me, again, I mean, you could say $10 million.
You could offer me $10 million, I wouldn't do it.
I wouldn't do it for 10 million.
50 million, I wouldn't do it.
Because the risk is so high.
It's like, I might easily die, or maybe even more so, I could end up in prison.
I don't want to risk that.
I got a family.
And then we add a third situation.
Because even if you do handle it perfectly, even if you're entirely by the book, if you do everything exactly as you should, you might still be charged with a crime.
And then you're at the mercy of a judge or jury or both.
And who knows what happens then?
It's at best a toss-up.
So that's what happened to Nigro.
He did everything right.
He did everything by the book.
Totally, perfectly blameless.
Every step of the way.
And they still arrested him.
They still tried to put him in jail.
And so, I mean, you want me to hate cops?
I just can't.
I mean, I think you're a fool.
You are a moron if you cannot recognize the situation these guys are in, and also the fact that we still need people like to do these kinds of jobs.
I mean, you can't have someone driving down the highway at 100 miles an hour.
He's gonna kill somebody.
We need people who will stop someone who's driving 100 miles an hour and being erratic on the highway.
Like, we need people in that role.
To stop people like that.
And I think we all, unless you're totally brain dead, you recognize that.
You recognize that if you want to have a civilized society, you need laws.
And then if you want to have laws, you need law enforcement.
So unless you're completely brain dead, you recognize at least those two things.
If you don't recognize those two things, then I'm not interested in talking to you.
You're not a serious person.
We can't have a conversation anymore.
But if you recognize those two things, then it's like we need people to do this job, but then we've now created a scenario where it's just, it's a lose-lose every single day they're facing.
And in fact, a cop approaching a vehicle like that, That exact, and again, this is a relatively normal kind of situation for a cop to be in, so I'm not even taking some extreme scenario.
This is just approaching a car where there's a guy that's been doing something erratic and dangerous.
Happens all the time.
Cities all across the country.
But a police officer approaching a vehicle like that in this environment is in a more difficult situation in that moment than you will ever be in your entire life.
Like you will probably never in your entire life be in a situation where both your life and your freedom simultaneously are on the line to that extent.
He's juggling more things with more at stake in that one single moment than you will probably ever have to in your whole entire life.
And he's doing it for like $85,000 a year.
He's getting paid what a Home Depot manager gets paid to do it.
It's just, it's not, the disincentives are so incredibly high now for people to do this absolutely necessary job.
It's just, it's not a sustainable situation.
And we hear so much about teachers and, oh, the teachers are underpaid and, you know, the public school teachers.
Well, yeah, you know, First of all, we don't need public schools.
We could get rid of the entire public school system.
We'd be better off for it.
You can't get rid of police officers.
Get rid of police officers and society is gone.
You no longer have society.
You no longer have a civilized society without law enforcement.
You can't.
It's impossible.
Get rid of public school and you can still have a society.
In fact, a more thriving society.
And on top of that, it's like, could you pay me a certain amount of money to teach social studies to sixth graders?
Sure.
I mean, it's difficult.
I mean, there's difficulties with it.
But with these cops, I'm telling you, the situations they're in every day, you could not pay me any amount to put myself in that situation.
And all of that The only time when I could be incentivized to be in a situation like that is if my own life or my loved one's lives are on the line, in which case you wouldn't need to pay me anything.
But doing all that at the same time in service to a community of people, most of them you don't even know and aren't related to you, and on top of that, a community that hates you.
The more you think about it, the more miserable it becomes for these guys.
Quick report here from Deadline.
It says, A24 is calling Civil War at a $25.7 million opening, largely fueled by Democrat and liberal moviegoers, but with overperforming business in some red state regions like the South and Southwest.
So this is the report of the new movie, Civil War, open to $25 million.
And pretty big hit at the box office.
Lots of reviews, and if you're not familiar with the movie, it portrays a fictional scenario where a civil war has broken out in the United States, in the modern United States.
Lots of reviews saying that it's a disturbing, kind of terrifying glimpse in the near future.
It's a warning, sort of a premonition of what's to come.
Now, I haven't seen the movie yet myself.
I'll probably watch it, not in theaters.
But, you know, I'm interested to see it.
So I can't offer any analysis of the film or the quality of the film.
The claim is that this is a movie about a fictional civil war, and yet it's non-political.
That's what I'm reading anyway.
It's a lot of the reviews are saying that.
Supposedly the filmmaker didn't choose a side or paint one side as liberal and the other as conservative.
I find that extremely hard to believe, but who knows?
Maybe it's true.
I haven't seen it.
What I can say without having seen the film.
Is that for all the talk about how this is a look into our future, it is almost certainly not that.
We are not headed towards a civil war, especially not one where Texas and California are on the same side, which apparently they are in this movie.
But no matter the sides, it's just not happening.
And I've always said this.
That I think we are more divided now than we've ever been, even more divided than we were in, you know, the 1850s in the lead up to the Civil War, the actual Civil War.
So we are more divided than that.
I think that that's not hyperbole to say that.
But at the same time, probably a civil war has never been less likely than it is right now.
And the reason is that There are several reasons, many, you know, myriad reasons, but the main reason is that fighting a civil war takes a certain commitment, a certain seriousness of purpose, a certain sustained focus that I think we're just incapable of these days.
And I don't mean that as a lament.
I mean, I do lament the fact that we're unserious and not committed and not able to pay attention to anything.
I lament that, but I don't lament that we're not going to fight a civil war.
I mean, that's good.
Civil war is a terrible thing.
So, mainly I'm just observing the reality here.
It is what it is.
And, you know, there's obviously been a lot of analysis, hundreds and hundreds of volumes of analysis about what led to the first Civil War, the actual Civil War, the Civil War.
But the one factor that's usually missed, or at least not mentioned very often, is that leaving aside the politics of it, back then, men were just cut from a different mold.
They fought and died for what they believed in.
They willingly accepted deprivation and suffering.
Especially on the Confederate side, many of the soldiers were marching into battle long, long marches without shoes, without coats, without much food.
They were dying from disease and from exposure, not to mention from battle, from the violence in the battle.
And they fought on both sides out of a sense of honor.
And that kind of mentality just doesn't exist anymore.
We're distracted.
We're overfed.
We're way too comfortable.
We can't focus on one topic for more than 45 seconds.
Most people just want to scroll their phones and they want to binge whatever the latest show is on Netflix or HBO Max.
And yeah, we argue about all kinds of stuff on Twitter.
But the idea of actually putting your life on the line for any of this stuff is Absurd to most people they would just never do it.
So we are too lazy and uncommitted for a civil war is what I'm saying So for that reason alone, it just it won't happen.
We're not we are not the kind of people who do that anymore And unfortunately not not for good reasons I mean, I'm not saying we're not the kind of people who do that because we're so peaceful and united I wish that was the reason but it's no it's because it's out of the Again, inability to focus, inability to take anything all that seriously.
Now, riots and civil unrest are a different matter.
The BLM riots of 2020, that's kind of more our speed now, because that's something you can run out and you can participate in it and probably you'll suffer no consequence and you won't even get arrested.
You're not really putting yourself in a whole lot of physical danger.
It should be a dangerous thing to be involved in rioting, but it's not.
So you can run out and do it, and then you can be back home to watch Shogun on Hulu, you know?
And you're back in your air-conditioned house in the apartment or your mom's basement, and that's more our speed.
So I think that's what we can look for in the future, just kind of more of what we've seen.
Regina Chaley Academy is an accredited pre-K through 12 classical homeschool hybrid academy for Catholic families in cities across the U.S.
They provide in-classroom lessons two times a week and in-home lesson plans that support parents the other three days a week.
Regina Chaley Academy, with your support, has provided nearly half a million dollars
in student tuition assistance for the 2023 to 2024 academic year.
Your participation in the Courage Under Fire Gala, a significant event in our mission to evangelize,
will help us continue to provide tuition assistance in the future.
Come and join me on May 24th in Nashville, Tennessee for a night of encouragement and camaraderie.
I'll be speaking alongside Dr. Abby Johnson and Father Callaway on how to have courage
and stand up for the truth.
No matter what adversity you face, we'll be joined by some of the most influential leaders
in the conservative movement night of connection and inspiration.
VIP tickets will have access to an exclusive meet and greet with all speakers, and if you can't attend, please consider donating today to support families and continue to train the heart, mind, and the soul.
Every dollar counts.
For tickets, visit CourageUnderFireGala.org and use code DAILYWIRE at checkout.
That's CourageUnderFireGala.org and use code DAILYWIRE.
Can't wait to see you there.
It's been two years of fighting the left and building the future with great products, and we're only getting better.
Jeremy's second-generation razors are here.
Same mission, better razors.
You'll immediately notice the totally reconstructed ergonomic handle for superior durability and improved coated stainless steel blades that last longer.
Plus, you can enjoy more flexibility for a close shave without nicks or cuts.
For those who meticulously craft their masculine look, introducing Jeremy's new Precision 5 razor, completely transformed With a precision trimmer and enhanced comfort thanks to the improved lubrication strip.
Experience an exceptionally smooth and close shave with added durability to withstand those accidental drops.
And if shaving feels more like a chore, meet the brand new Sprint 3 with open blade geometry for a swift, clean shave.
Allowing you to get back to your manly pursuits in no time.
Razors not made in China.
Razors made right.
Progress that isn't progressive.
Head on over to jeremysrazors.com to upgrade to your new second generation razor today.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
[MUSIC]
Well, there's been a lot of debate about abortion in this country recently, and
for the past 50 years, of course.
And these debates tend to be, as you may have noticed, rather unproductive.
In your own life, you may have been involved in, or present for, a hundred different arguments about abortion, and yet, most likely, you've never seen a breakthrough.
You've never, or rarely, witnessed anybody change their mind, or even acknowledge that someone else has made a valid point.
It's like we're screaming at brick walls all the time.
Granted, every debate is like that these days, but abortion most of all.
And one of the reasons for this dynamic, the reason why the debate seems so futile, is that one side of the discussion refuses to be honest about what they actually believe.
The so-called pro-choicers, quote-unquote, make a lot of arguments, or statements they pretend are arguments, but they're unable to convince you with their arguments because they have not even convinced themselves.
They make weak, irrelevant arguments, and they, the smart ones anyway, among them, they know that the arguments are weak and irrelevant.
They say that the unborn child isn't a human being, but that's absurd, and they know it.
Of course the unborn child is a human being.
Like, what other species would it be?
Of course it's a human.
They say the woman has a right to do what she wants with her body, but they of course realize that the body at issue here is the child, not the mother's.
They say that women have the right to choose, but they would be the first to admit that there are all kinds of choices that they don't think a woman or a man should be allowed to make.
They're not really pro-choice, because nobody is pro-choice.
Nobody is in favor of all choices generally.
I'm in favor of choices.
Well, what do you mean?
It's like, there are a million choices you think people shouldn't be allowed to make.
So, everyone knows that.
Nobody thinks that choices should be legal simply because they are choices.
All of these arguments are incredibly stupid and laughably weak, and the intelligent pro-abortion people understand that quite well.
But the weakness of these arguments doesn't bother them, because none of these arguments have anything to do with the actual reason why they support abortion.
They do have reasons.
Real reasons.
It's just that they won't say them out loud.
Most of the time.
Now, every once in a while, though, somebody on that side breaks the vow of silence and says out loud the things that they usually only think but never articulate verbally.
That's what happened on Bill Maher's show over the weekend, when Maher himself, during a conversation about abortion, did the thing that people on his side almost never do.
He decided to be honest.
Listen.
Europe, for example, by comparison, the 60 countries of Europe.
Actually, there are many countries in Europe where it's completely illegal to have an abortion.
Poland, Malta, you know, places like Andorra, you know, so... And if you look at Germany and France and countries like that, it can be 10, 12 weeks is the term limit that you're allowed to have an abortion legally, so...
America is not such an outlier.
It does go to the states.
I think a lot of Americans on the left do think that this is somehow a really unique American problem or an issue that only pertains to them in terms of the legality of abortions.
Actually, comparative to Europe, it's not massively dissimilar.
But the thing that's crazy is at a time when America is facing so many huge geopolitical threats, where there's a huge tech revolution going on, where the economy is faced with all kinds of challenges, the idea that you're fighting an election around this issue seems to be, you know, just strange.
back to the 19th century.
None of you believe it's murder.
You know, that's why I don't understand the 15-week thing.
Or the Trump's plan is, let's leave it to the states.
You mean, so killing babies is okay in some states?
Like, I can respect the absolutist position.
I really can.
I scold the left when they say, oh, you know what?
They just hate women.
People who aren't pro-life, pro-choice.
They just, they don't hate women.
They just made that up.
They think it's murder, and it kind of is.
I'm just okay with that.
I am.
I mean, there's 8 billion people in the world.
I'm sorry, we won't miss you.
That's my position on... What?
That's quite harsh, Bill.
Yeah, exactly.
Is that not your position if you're pro-choice?
Isn't that mainly because you don't like children?
I mean... No, no.
I mean... But if you are... You said you're pro-choice.
That's your position, too.
Now, what Marr said there is horrendous.
I mean, it's truly barbaric and evil.
The idea that murder is okay because we have a lot of people on Earth already is the logic of a psychopath.
You're treating human beings like consumer products, like objects whose individual value decreases if there's a surplus.
You're also making an argument that could just as easily justify the murder of any born person.
I mean, by Bill Maher's own logic, why should anyone care if someone walked up to Bill Maher and put a bullet through his head?
There are 8 billion people on Earth.
We won't miss him.
In fact, arguably, his death would be less of a tragedy because at least he's already had a chance to live for almost 70 years.
Isn't that enough time?
He had his chance.
Human beings only become less productive and more of a burden as they age anyway.
What's the point of keeping elderly people around when they aren't contributing anything?
And they won't contribute anything in the future.
And have already had a chance to live for so many years.
I mean, this utilitarian argument for killing babies could not only apply to people Marr's own age, but would much more apply to his age demographic.
At least we can say that the child in the womb might go on to cure cancer if we give him the chance.
We already know that Marr didn't do that and never will, so why don't we just grab the hook and pull him off stage already?
Time's up, Bill.
You had your chance.
No reason why you should continue existing at this point.
What good does your existence really do for mankind?
What difference does it make?
If you die tomorrow, it's not really going to affect anything.
Now, you might say that Bill Maher should be allowed to keep living and babies should be killed because Maher has a conscious self-awareness that we assume very young babies in the womb don't possess.
Now, let's accept that claim for the sake of argument.
Well, okay.
So what?
Who cares?
Why should I care that Bill Maher is a conscious being?
If you kill him quickly, he's not going to suffer.
His consciousness will just be extinguished.
I mean, by his own way of thinking as an atheist, he'll just cease to have any conscious experience at all.
It'll just be it.
If he's dead, it's dead or alive.
If he's alive, if he's dead, he's not going to be around by his thinking.
He's not going to be around in his death to be troubled by it.
So, who cares?
And anyway, it's going to happen anyway in the next several years.
So why shouldn't we speed up the process?
Why shouldn't we kill him now and just get it over with?
Before it becomes a burden on the healthcare system, dying slowly over the course of many years, like most old people do in the modern age.
We have 8 billion people on Earth.
We have 8 billion other conscious agents.
Why does this one little bucket of consciousness matter?
Why does Bill Maher matter?
Why does anyone matter?
Why do you matter?
Why do I?
Now, Maher's argument very quickly devolves into pure, unadulterated nihilism, as you can see.
If the unborn child has no inherent meaning or value, then none of us do.
We are all only as valuable as we are useful to other people, by that way of thinking.
And really, none of us are that useful.
You know, we might be useful to a comparatively few people, but if you died right this moment, the vast majority of people on the planet would never know you existed.
Much less would they be harmed by your absence.
I know we like to think of the butterfly effect and everything I do reverberates through the... Yeah, but I mean, if you just cease to exist, almost everyone on the planet will never even know.
They'll be perfectly fine.
Even most of your friends and acquaintances would move on very quickly and be perfectly happy without you around after a while.
Only your family and closest friends would really care.
But that's a small handful of people compared to the 8 billion on Earth.
So, comparatively speaking, comparatively speaking, Basically, nobody on Earth will care that you die or know that you ever lived.
So, if human life has no inherent value, then it really has no value on an individual basis, certainly.
Doesn't matter.
You die, other people are born, you're replaced.
Who cares?
Life and death are states of equal meaninglessness.
This is where Maher's pro-abortion argument leads.
And not by some extraordinary sort of tortured extension of his underlying logic, but simply by extension, by logical extension.
And it leads there naturally, and quickly, and inevitably.
So, the argument is very bad on moral grounds, but it does have a certain logic to it.
And it is honest.
I mean, as long as you're willing to take it all the way, And maybe Bill Maher would do that.
Maybe he would say, yeah, you know what?
No human's life is really all that meaningful.
It doesn't really matter.
Okay.
I mean, I think that's wrong, but at least that's consistent and it's honest.
And as disgusted as I am by Maher's claim, I at least respect that he's willing to say it out loud.
And that's more than could be said for the vast majority of pro-abortion people.
They all feel exactly as Bill Maher does.
Okay, this is what they all believe.
The ones with IQs above room temperature, anyway.
They all realize that the personhood argument, the choice argument, the pro-lifers hate women stuff, all of that is absurd.
It's totally meaningless.
Not only is it wrong, but it's also irrelevant.
Even if it was true, even if it was true that pro-lifers just hate women.
It's not, but who cares?
It's got nothing to do with the substance of the argument.
It's like, is abortion killing babies or not?
Isn't that the question here?
Well, they know that.
It's a smokescreen.
Their arguments are untrue, but it's beside the point.
Of course abortion violently kills a human life.
Of course it does.
Of course it's murder.
What else would it be?
And they're okay with it.
That's their real argument.
It's their only argument.
And it's the one argument they usually won't say out loud.
Which makes all of our arguments about this topic pointless.
And that's why I'm not cancelling Bill Maher, even if his reason for supporting abortion is monstrously evil.
It may be that.
But again, it's honest.
Instead, all the other pro-abortion people who won't just come out and say this are today cancelled.
