Ep. 1388 - How The Left Is Using Lawfare To Get Revenge On Elon Musk
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Elon Musk has been public enemy number one ever since he committed the sin of allowing people to speak freely on the internet. Now, the Left is using lawfare to get revenge on him. The latest attempt is a major "toxic work environment" lawsuit from former employees of SpaceX. The word "frivolous" does not even begin to describe this thing. We'll discuss. Also, a political candidate in Texas is caught sending racist messages to himself. Chuck Schumer tries to prove that he's a normal red-blooded American, and it goes horribly wrong. And, LGBT activists in California tear down No U-Turn signs because the signs are homophobic.
Ep.1388
- - -
DailyWire+:
Get 10% off your tickets to Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot at http://angel.com/MATT
Get 25% off your DailyWire+ Membership here: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
PureTalk - Start saving on wireless! http://www.PureTalk.com/WALSH
Roman - For treatment that works fast and lasts long, grab the moment. Learn more at http://www.Ro.co/WALSH
Tax Network USA - Seize control of your financial future! Call 1(800)245-6000 or visit http://www.TNUSA.com/WALSH
- - -
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, Elon Musk has been public enemy number one ever since he committed the sin of allowing people to speak freely on the internet.
Now the left is using lawfare to get revenge on him.
The latest attempt is a major toxic work environment lawsuit from former employees of SpaceX.
The word frivolous does not even begin to describe this thing.
We'll discuss.
A political candidate in Texas is caught sending racist messages to himself.
Chuck Schumer tries to prove that he's a normal, red-blooded American, and it goes horribly wrong.
And LGBT activists in California are tearing down No U-Turn signs because the signs are homophobic.
What's that all about?
We'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.
For years people have been switching their wireless service to PureTalk to save money.
$20 a month for unlimited talk text and tons of data is a no-brainer.
But over the last few weeks, Pure Talk has reported a surge of new customers signing up to help them support a charity that is near and dear to their hearts, America's Warrior Partnership.
Many of my own listeners have chosen to step away from Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile to switch to Pure Talk and help this great charity.
It gets to do business with a company that shares their values.
That's why Pure Talk has decided to extend their support for AWP through Independence Day.
From now through Independence Day, Pure Talk will match every dollar donated.
Switch your cell phone service to America's most dependable 5G network with Pure Talk.
Visit puretalk.com slash Walsh to start saving on wireless today.
That's puretalk.com slash Walsh today.
Thanks to the flood of so-called workers' rights legislation and case law over the past generation, there are three words that are now music to the ears of every useless employee in the country.
Hostile work environment.
A claim for a hostile work environment isn't hard to put together, but it can result in millions of dollars in damages, often enough to destroy an entire company.
And for that reason, hostile work environment claims have become the weapon of choice for both workers who are really bad at their jobs, as well as workers who actively want to sabotage their employers.
The underlying idea behind a hostile work environment claim is that instead of having to show any single concrete injury, plaintiffs can simply Point to a series of minor incidents that occurred over time and each of these incidents in isolation may mean absolutely nothing.
It could be a harmless joke that causes no mental distress whatsoever, but in a hostile work environment claim, plaintiffs are allowed to add up all of those little incidents together and then make the case that offensive conduct in general was so pervasive in their workplace that they couldn't be expected to perform their jobs.
The exploring popularity of these claims has become a major tool of left-wing lawfare, and now it's having a noticeable effect on pretty much every major corporation in the country.
It's slowing productivity.
It's making everything more dull and uninteresting.
Companies that actually try to innovate and excel are especially vulnerable.
So you may have seen that eight former SpaceX employees are now suing Elon Musk in Los Angeles, alleging, among other things, that he operates a hostile work environment in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.
These are the same former SpaceX employees who, back in 2022, helped distribute an open letter that publicly called Elon Musk's behavior embarrassing.
And they were fired, unsurprisingly, because attacking your boss in public generally doesn't go over well.
But the employees, predictably, are back with a lawsuit against Elon Musk and SpaceX that every major mainstream outlet, from the Wall Street Journal to Axios, is hyping as a really serious piece of litigation.
Here's CNN, for example, interviewing one of the eight plaintiffs in the case.
Paige Holland Thielen is one of the plaintiffs in this case and she joins me now.
Paige, thank you so much for joining me this evening.
I do want to go through each of these allegations one by one because they are frankly extraordinary.
One is that people are evaluated on bra size.
What's happening?
Can you elaborate?
There was a very popular tweet from a little while ago where Elon claimed that he was starting a university with what he considered humorous acronym and I won't go into what that is but that got very popular and got repeated all over the workplace and one of the follow-up tweets was that
So it turns out that, according to this plaintiff, Elon Musk evaluates employees based on their bra size.
Pretty serious claim.
of the fake college.
So things like that were widely shared on all internal chat channels and
talked about in meetings.
So it turns out that according to this plaintiff, Elon Musk evaluates employees based on their bra size.
Pretty serious claim.
I mean, it sounds pretty outlandish actually, so you'd hope she'd have some proof to back it up.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
But instead of providing any real evidence for this claim, the employee points to a tweet that Musk sent out to his 180 million followers.
And instead of just not reading the tweet or unfollowing Musk on Twitter, she apparently couldn't avoid seeing this horrible tweet.
And conveniently, she says that she simply can't repeat the tweet on air.
It's just too shocking, apparently.
Too upsetting.
Now, if you read the complaint, though, you'll find the tweet she's talking about.
So, here it is.
I'm going to read it to you.
It's very traumatizing, but this is what he tweeted quote should I make the Texas Institute of Technology and Science
real?
It would of course have advanced social studies, too close quote
That's it That's the tweet.
So this is what's known as a joke, and millions of people who saw the tweet immediately understood that it's a joke.
The acronyms for Texas Institute of Technology and Science and Advanced Social Studies would be TITS and ASS, respectively.
So, that's the punchline.
And in a follow-up tweet, the complaint says that Musk wrote, D's would get degrees at his fictional university.
Now, from those two tweets, we're supposed to conclude that Musk and SpaceX evaluate employees based on their bra size?
It's a joke about D's getting degrees at a fictional university that he posted on Twitter.
Now, what we learned from the tweet, if anything, is that Musk maybe needs to hone his material a bit if he wants to pursue a career in stand-up comedy.
But we don't learn that he runs a hostile work environment, and we certainly don't learn that Musk conducts performance reviews that involve ranking employees by their bra size.
That's just a thing that is not happening at all.
This is the kind of frivolous complaint that now confronts SpaceX, a $200 billion company that is objectively doing more to make humanity a space-faring civilization than any other organization on the planet, including NASA.
A woman and her colleagues didn't like a joke that Musk made on the internet about a fake university, and the corporate press is promoting this aggressively as a major scandal.
Forget about how SpaceX landed a 400-foot-tall reusable rocket for the first time in human history.
Never mind the fact that SpaceX could use that technology to land on Mars in the near future.
They are very probably going to do something that has never been done.
They are on their way to achieving potentially the greatest accomplishment in the history of mankind.
Don't focus on that.
Focus instead on this particular joke.
A joke which, again, has nothing to do with Elon Musk evaluating employees by their bra size, which was the original accusation.
So I pulled up the full complaint to see if I was missing anything here.
There's a whole section devoted to the grievous injuries that fired SpaceX employee Rebecca Clark allegedly suffered.
Here's the part about evaluating women based on their bra size.
Quote, Clark attended the Falcon meeting with Vice President John Edwards and HR Representative Janet Fernandez.
She observed that Mr. Edwards acted in an angry and aggressive manner in response to employees' concerns about the hostile work environment.
Clark pushed Mr. Edwards to clarify whether Elon's tweet indicating that a woman is valued based upon the size of her breasts was the view of SpaceX.
Edwards ultimately repeated words to the effect of, SpaceX is Elon and Elon is SpaceX.
Simmons nodded his head in agreement with Edwards and repeated some of the things Edwards said, such as, the mission to Mars is the most important thing and there's no time to focus on these issues at work.
Can you imagine?
He said going to Mars is more important than like a boob pun that Elon Musk tweeted.
Where are this guy's priorities?
I mean, come on.
In other words, this woman was so offended by Elon's joke that she concluded that a woman is valued based on the size of her breasts at SpaceX.
That's the leap that she made.
In her own words.
And when the higher-ups told her to knock it off because they want to focus on important things like launching rockets to Mars, She, of course, became even more offended and added that to the lawsuit as well.
The rest of this complaint from these former employees is full of allegations like this.
Actually, it only gets worse, actually.
It reads like a parody of a lawsuit.
It's almost as if they intended to catalog Musk's greatest hits on Twitter, and then some lawyer got a hold of the document and pretended to be outraged by it.
So here's one of the allegations that's supposed to convince us that this workplace is extremely hostile, so hostile that these women couldn't get any work done.
They were so traumatized by all of it.
The complaint states that Elon Musk is guilty of, quote, mocking Bill Gates by creating a meme of him with a pregnant-looking belly, accompanied by the text, in case you need to lose a b***** fast.
So that's right.
Elon Musk on his public Twitter account made fun of Bill Gates, a billionaire who does not work at SpaceX.
It's a joke that millions of people thought was funny based on their documented reactions on the internet.
And it is pretty funny.
And this is mostly evidence that Musk created a hostile work environment at SpaceX and presumably every other workplace on the planet where this tweet was ever viewed.
In case you missed Musk's tweet, it's from April 2022.
Here it is.
So you can see it there.
So that's Bill Gates on the left.
If you need to know who's the emoji and who's Bill Gates, he's on the left.
And on the right, it's an emoji that Apple rolled out to depict a pregnant man.
So I'll explain the joke here, just in case any former ex-SpaceX employees are watching, looking slack-jawed at your screens, wondering what could possibly be amusing about this meme.
You see, back in 2022, both Bill Gates and the Apple emoji were being widely mocked.
Bill Gates wanted to tell the whole world how to live their lives in order to be healthy, but he's substantially overweight.
Meanwhile, Apple styles itself as a tech brand for intelligent, science-conscious consumers, but they're pushing the idea that men can get pregnant.
Elon Musk posted a meme combining these two absurd situations in order to maximize the humor.
It's supposed to be funny.
This is how jokes work on this planet that we call Earth.
Now, it's a minor aside, but also note that contrary to what the complaint says, nowhere in his tweet did Musk suggest that he personally created that meme as opposed to simply sharing it.
Nor is it clear why they're saying in the complaint that Gates' belly is pregnant-looking.
I mean, isn't that offensive to pregnant-looking women employed by SpaceX?
They're being compared to an overweight, unkempt photo of Bill Gates.
That's an outrage.
Maybe someone should sue these employees by complaining about Bill Gates and the pregnant man emoji.
They're clearly creating a hostile work environment for birthing folks.
But that lawsuit won't happen, and it's not a great mystery as to why it won't happen.
Musk committed this sin of permitting freedom of speech on the internet, so he's the target.
It seems that everybody from the DOJ to disgruntled SpaceX employees now want to bring him down by any means necessary.
What's more interesting about this case, though, is that it highlights the increased use of lawfare to enforce woke left-wing gender ideology.
Gender ideology is so unscientific and so arbitrary that it can't withstand any form of scrutiny whatsoever.
It certainly can't withstand mockery.
Proponents of gender ideology understand that very well, so in order to ensure that this incoherent ideology survives, they know that it's vital to enact blasphemy laws, essentially.
Parity and criticism aren't allowed.
That's pretty much what they're doing here.
Read further in the complaint, and that becomes very obvious.
For instance, here's another allegation in the complaint.
According to the complaint, he, quote, tweeted, pronouns suck.
Now, the tweet could be more specific.
In fact, pronouns don't suck.
Pronouns didn't do anything wrong.
Like, let's not blame this on the pronouns.
What sucks is the idea that people get to choose their own pronouns.
It's like, the pronouns themselves, there's nothing wrong with them.
It's how they're being used.
And that's obviously what Elon Musk was referring to.
Now, if a pronoun wants to sue him for slander, maybe it would have a case, but an employee citing it in a lawsuit is a joke.
It's an unintentional joke, unlike the jokes that they're suing over.
In fact, not only does this complaint seek to ban criticism or mockery of gender ideology, it also seeks to outlaw criticism or mockery of the tactics that these zealots are using to enforce their ideology.
Quoting again from the complaint against Musk, quote, in response to news about a sexual harassment charge against
him, Musk posted, "Finally we get to use Elon Gate as a scandal name. It's
kind of perfect."
Now you can practically see these former SpaceX employees with their arms crossed in their lawyer's office
explaining how offended they were by all this.
Not only was Musk making jokes that they didn't like, he was also mocking their attempts to slander him.
How dare he?
Indeed, Musk was even mocking some of their favorite buzzwords, and they can't stand that.
That's why the lawsuit also faults Musk for posting this meme.
This is another meme cited in a lawsuit.
It reads, Ladies, mansplaining is short for man-explaining.
You see, the joke is that he's mansplaining the definition of mansplaining.
This apparently contributes to a hostile work environment somehow, which forces me to mansplain to the people filing the lawsuit that making fun of mansplaining does not make your work environment hostile.
But the lawsuit doesn't stop there.
It also faults Musk for thinking that Monty Python is funny.
Quoting again, Musk posted a photo from Monty Python with the subtitle, Biggis Dickis.
Yes, he posted a photo from a Monty Python movie.
That's not allowed anymore.
Quoting, the life of Brian creates a hostile work environment.
So this is obviously a demented lawsuit.
It's a complete waste of time.
And I'm not cherry picking here.
The whole thing is this bad.
For example, here are some allegations by former employee Claire Mallon.
See if you can spot the problem here.
Quote, Malin also faced gender discrimination at work.
In her 2018 performance evaluation, her manager criticized her for being too coarse-slash-straightforward.
In her 2019 evaluation, Malin was told to absorb feedback cheerfully.
This was a double standard applied to Malin because of her gender, as Ms.
Malin never observed men criticized for being straightforward or for not taking feedback cheerfully enough.
In other words, this woman received negative feedback, And she didn't personally see men being criticized in the same way.
Therefore, it must never have happened.
Because obviously, nothing ever happens at SpaceX unless Claire Malin sees it herself.
Now, you might point out that performance reviews are conducted privately, so Malin couldn't possibly have any idea what anyone else has ever been told in their review.
But if you say that, you're mansplaining, and now you have victimized poor Miss Malin a second time.
Another ex-employee, Paige Holland-Thielen, who we heard from earlier, makes the same non-argument.
According to the complaint, Holland-Thielen, quote, expressed frustration about being routinely assigned rotations on the support or operations team within ground software.
Instead of development roles, lead Kyle Husford gave her the feedback that she was too aggressive.
This was a double standard because of Holland-Thielen's gender.
She never observed men being criticized for being too aggressive.
Again, if she didn't see it, it didn't happen.
That's the idea.
No man has ever been criticized for aggressiveness.
Did you know that?
Doesn't happen.
Never happens.
Because this woman didn't see it.
No, of course not.
falls in the forest and Paige Holland-Thielen isn't there to hear it, did it make a sound?
No, of course not.
In fact, the tree doesn't even exist if Paige didn't see it.
Now I'll admit that I'm not a lawyer, nor am I up to date on the finer points of California
labor laws, but after reading this complaint, I can make a few determinations with a fair
First of all, hostile work environment claims are completely out of control.
The law that permits these kinds of claims obviously needs to be reworked or abolished.
It's simply too easy to collect a bunch of jokes together and claim to be offended by them, and then file a multi-million dollar lawsuit, especially in a left-wing jurisdiction like Los Angeles.
Humor is not illegal in this country.
Criticizing pronouns and trans ideology is not illegal either.
But through lawsuits like this, humor and other normal workplace interactions are effectively being outlawed.
On its website, the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission explicitly states that offensive jokes can indeed constitute violations of the law.
So whenever Biden's administration is out of office, some changes need to be made there because this has obviously gone too far.
That's why we've seen this form of lawfare repeatedly in recent years.
Just a few years ago, or rather just a year ago, there was that lawsuit filed by a Fox producer, Abby Grossberg, against Tucker Carlson in Fox News.
Grossberg's complaint was full of jokes that she heard in the office, which she claims that she found offensive.
From Grossberg's interviews on left-wing cable news channels, it's apparent that One gag in particular that really bothered her was the pictures of Nancy Pelosi that she says were plastered around the office.
Watch.
I show up first day of work and I know that this is a popular one.
It's been widely publicized.
There are literally pictures like this big of Nancy Pelosi in a bathing suit in Europe plastered all over.
There was even one on my computer screen for the temporary computer I had to use and I had to take it down.
The picture of Pelosi that she's mortally offended by happens to be all over the internet.
In fact, it was broadcast on Tucker's show.
Watch.
America over this last 4th of July weekend went up on a private beach in Italy and we're going to go out tonight by singeing your retinas with a photograph of that event.
This is third in line from the presidency on a private beach in Italy.
Soak it in, ladies and gentlemen.
Close your eyes as you go to sleep tonight and try to get that image out of your head, if you can.
We'll be back tomorrow night, 8 p.m.
The best night with the ones you love.
See you then.
Oh, Jason Chaffetz is in.
For Sean, is that correct?
I'm sorry, I'm hearing that.
Tucker, what are you doing?
You put up that... Would you get every person in the country to turn off their televisions?
You throw that up on the screen?
I didn't mean it.
Someday I'm going to have a show before you, and I'm going to do that to you.
So if I had to explain this to the offended women, this is what's known as banter.
They're joking around about a picture that millions of people already were joking about.
But none of that matters because Grossberg says she was bothered by it.
And add that to a zillion other similar complaints and you get a hostile work environment and a settlement worth millions of dollars.
And as a side note, you may have noticed that it seems so often to be women who are behind these complaints.
SpaceX is trying to go to Mars and Elon has to deal with a bunch of women crying because their feelings were hurt by a tweet.
A bunch of women saying, I didn't find that funny.
That's not funny.
And the funny thing is that these women are ostensibly doing this in order to defend the rights of women in the workplace, but all they've really succeeded in doing is reinforcing every negative stereotype of women in the workplace.
Like, if you want to make it so that nobody wants to hire women or work with them, this is how you do it with stuff like this.
Every single negative stereotype is reinforced by a woman who's- everyone else is trying to get their job done, you have a woman sitting there, this isn't funny, I'm offended by this.
Um, the best thing you can do if you want to help the rights of women in the workplace is just, like, move on with your life and stop being offended by everything.
Anyway, these kinds of complaints are becoming more common in part because the media always pretends to take them seriously, even when they make no sense.
Take, for example, the complaint about a toxic work environment at Jimmy Fallon's show.
This complaint hasn't materialized into a lawsuit, at least not yet, but it was still present- presented by media outlets as evidence that Jimmy Fallon's workplace is hostile and oppressive.
Watch.
I'm very lucky I have the Tonight Show.
They were kind of walking around on eggshells.
It's a great show.
It's super fun.
It's loose.
Jimmy Fallon and the new Rolling Stone expose.
The bombshell report includes claims of erratic behavior, a toxic workplace, and nine showrunners in just the last nine years.
This morning, I spoke with journalist Christy Lee Yandoli.
She also reported on the toxic workplace claims at Ellen and the Kelly Clarkson Show.
In your estimation, in your opinion, what did you take away from your reporting?
The biggest takeaway from my reporting after speaking to two current and 14 former employees on the record is that they said that there were what they called good Jimmy days and what they call bad Jimmy days, where his behavior was allegedly erratic and inconsistent.
Now, not that this really needs to be said, but a boss having good days and bad days does not make the workplace hostile or toxic.
That's what, you know, that's because they're human beings.
And that's the way it's going to be until bosses are replaced by robots.
And I don't think that that kind of workplace, when it happens, is going to be any less hostile, I can tell you.
So this shouldn't even be a news story at all, but here the media is trying to sell these claims as proof that Fallon's show is dysfunctional or toxic.
So Fallon had to grovel and apologize.
And as you heard in that clip, there are many similar claims about many other shows.
This is one of the main reasons that corporations are all producing homogenous, uninteresting products now.
It's why comedy is dead.
It's why film, television, and video game companies are shoving diversity casting down our throats, along with social justice plot lines.
Any corporation that so much as makes a joke that a woman finds offensive could end up facing a multi-million dollar lawsuit.
The clear incentive is to be dull, unoriginal, and uninteresting.
This is how destructive lawfare can be.
It's not just about jailing your preferred presidential candidate.
It's also a cancer on every other aspect of society.
That's why this is happening all over the place, not just Fox or SpaceX.
Ask Activision, Blizzard, or Amazon, or Tesla, or McDonald's, or Blue Origin, or Google, or any number of other companies that have allegedly hosted a toxic or hostile workplace.
If you have a large enough company or organization, you're going to eventually hire left-wing activists and useless people, and then you're going to get these claims.
That's why even Jimmy Fallon is getting them.
Nobody is immune because none of the factual details really matter when there's a hostile work environment claim to be made.
The only thing that's important is for one person to say that she's offended by things that no sane person would actually be offended by, and the lawyers will just sort of take it from there.
If you own a business, you should be doing everything you can to ensure you're not hiring employees who will end up trying this dishonest tactic against you.
You have no other option, really.
In the meantime, if we want more companies like SpaceX, companies that take risks, actually accomplish things, Then the law needs to change.
And this lawsuit, and every lawsuit like it, cannot be allowed to continue.
Have you heard of RhoSparks?
This dual-action prescription merges the powerhouse ingredients found in generic Viagra and Cialis, Sildenafil and Tadalafil, into one formidable treatment.
But it's not merely about the ingredients in the medication, it's how you're taking it.
That's why RhoSparks are designed to dissolve under your tongue.
Huge, because dissolvable treatment hits your bloodstream faster than old-school pills.
Rose Sparks keeps you present with your partner instead of waiting for a pill to work.
Rose Sparks leverages the benefits of sublingual administration, meaning the tablet dissolves under your tongue.
This method allows for fast absorption directly into the bloodstream, bypassing the digestive system.
The result?
Quicker onset of action, reducing the wait time typically associated with traditional pills.
Plus, Tadalafil, the active ingredient in Cialis, lasts in the system for up to 36 hours.
For treatment that works fast and lasts long, connect with a provider at ro.co.walsh to find out if RoSparks are right for you.
ro.co.walsh.
Again, that's ro.co.walsh.
Compounded drugs are permitted to be prescribed under federal law but are not FDA approved and do not undergo FDA safety, effectiveness, or manufacturing review.
Only available if prescribed after an online consultation with a provider.
Let's get to our five headlines.
He's been the victim of racist harassment.
This poor guy has been targeted by absolutely vicious and bigoted comments.
Now, of course, the only very minor stipulation that you've already guessed is that, of course, he wrote the comments himself.
So here's a local news report about it.
...within the last hour about the charges against the challenger running for Fort Bend County Precinct 3 Commissioner.
Yeah, he is accused of creating a fake social media account to post racist comments directed at himself.
ABC 13's Rosie Wynn joins us live from the Fort Bend County Jail with new information, Rosie.
Eric and Gina, the Fort Bend County District Clerk just made those charging documents for Thoreau Patel available to the public.
More than 20 pages that we have spent the last hour sifting through and the allegations are alarming.
Here's what we know so far.
back in October, the DA's office.
Received a request from Precinct 3 Commissioner Andy Meyer to look
into who was behind several social media posts directed at his opponent,
which is Patel.
This came after Patel sent out a press release with a collage of
supposed racist social media posts that he claimed were directed at him.
Meyer told investigators he recognized one of the accounts behind the
comments as Antonio Scaliwag.
The documents then further detailed how they linked Antonio Scaliwag
to how they linked that account.
Back to Patel, including getting a subpoena
from Facebook and Google.
From there they were able to obtain account and payment information
matching Patel's credit card number, address, phone number and other personal data.
Patel now faces a third-degree felony of online impersonation and Class A misdemeanor for misrepresentation of identity.
The D-Day's office tells us this is the first time that they've charged someone with that specific election-related misdemeanor.
Now, we have made efforts all day to try to reach Patel, whether it was through Phone, social media, or even the address listed on his candidate filing.
We also reached out to his opponent, Precinct 3 Commissioner Andy Meyer, but a spokesperson tells us at this time they have no comment.
We're told that Patel did bond out of the jail here early this morning.
His next court appearance is on July 22nd.
Okay, so he wrote the racist comments to himself, which, by the way, doesn't mean that he isn't still a victim.
I mean, he still had to read the comments.
In fact, he had to read them.
If you think it's traumatic to read racist comments, imagine how traumatic it is to write them.
He's reading them while he's writing them, and then he reads them again.
And so, arguably, he's more traumatized than he would be if he didn't write them.
He's even more of a victim.
At least, that's the defense I would try.
You might as well.
Give that a shot.
Let's take a look at the actual posts.
There's a collage of racist messages that he wrote.
He made a little collage.
This is what he posted online.
So you can see there.
Commissioner Andy Myers is a red-blooded Christian against crime and against taxes.
Foreigners like you are trying to take away my freedom and guns.
How do we let you, how do we let you, King Pong, KP George, brainless, not Brian Middleton, who loves criminals and sorrows, demon-crats, take over Fort Bend?
You will not turn us into India or China.
Remember the Alamo.
You're just throwing it all in.
Did he write this or did he run this through some sort of AI generator?
What else have we got?
I'm against false gods and their worshippers winning office in Christian nation.
I'm with Myers all the way because he serves Jesus unlike Patel and his followers who worship monkey and elephant.
Keep in mind, he's writing this about himself.
Was he even born here?
Probably communist.
Can I say that?
This guy really doesn't like himself.
Like, he's got some serious self-esteem issues.
who smell like curry and filth in our country, go back to Bombay.
You are not and will never be a true American.
(laughs)
This guy really doesn't like himself.
Like, he's got some serious self-esteem issues.
That's what I'm worried about with this guy.
Trust me, Andy Myers is a true Christian.
Our first commandment orders us to denounce all false gods like the monkey and elephant.
Like, he really hates his own religion.
I think he's getting something out about himself and about his... He's working through some things, this guy is.
I don't know.
We don't need to pronounce your name.
Learn English, and if I see you wearing that dot on your head, I'll wipe it off myself.
Fort Bend is red.
He's a dirty Pakistani big who supports terrorists and turning God's USA into a s**t. Vote Myers!
Anyway, but then there's a positive comment.
Taral is like a breath of fresh air.
He needs to win.
That's a positive one.
So he threw in a couple positives, too.
So he was saying all these terrible things about himself, and I think it was really hurting his self-esteem, so he also threw in some positive comments.
For years, Indians have come to this country and have done their best to stay away from every other American.
I'm sure you're a good person.
I wish you all the luck.
Sadly, I will never support an Indian or an Asian.
What?
First of all, they've done their best to stay away from every other American?
No, they haven't.
I mean, they run, like, yeah, they run, like, convenience stores and stuff that regular Americans go into all the time.
I got no issue with that.
So, those are the comments.
Those are things he wrote.
So, I'm allowed to read all that.
Uh, because this person has written about himself.
So, what can I say?
The funny thing is that, you know, this guy could have easily gotten away with this if he had just claimed that these were emails that people sent him.
Now, it would have been obvious, it would have been obvious that it was fake, still, but...
Nobody could have proven it.
You'd have plausible deniability if you just post a collage of, look at these emails that I got.
Or you could even do the snail mail hoax if you wanted to, which is a popular one.
Or do the thing with probably maybe the most popular genre of this sort of, the most popular sub-genre in the overall genre of fake racist messages.
is the note left on a car windshield.
And he could have done that, because there's no way for anyone to ever prove
that you left it there, except unless there was like a security camera or something.
But he did it in a way where it could be proven.
Like this moron set up dummy social media accounts that can easily be proven to be dummy social media accounts.
And apparently these accounts linked back to his own phone number.
So he made up fake accounts with his phone number and then posted all these messages.
And on top of that, evidently he had previously used some of these dummy
accounts to attack his opponent.
And then he got this idea to do the fake racist messages and he didn't want to bother to make new accounts.
So instead he just used the ones that he'd already used and said, ah, you know, who's going to notice?
[BLANK_AUDIO]
It will never cease to amaze me.
It never ceases to amaze me that not only that these people keep faking hate crimes, but that they're so bad at it.
That's the amazing thing.
How could you be this bad at it?
How is it that the hoaxers have not evolved at all?
That's what I don't get.
People are more skeptical about this sort of thing than they've ever been, right?
You have people like me, many of us, who instinctively we just dismiss and don't believe pretty much all hate crime and hate incidents stories unless you provide evidence, like real evidence.
So we're at a point where, of course, I never heard about this story before this revelation, but if I had seen it, I would have said, yeah, it's definitely fake.
Like, he made that up.
Unless you can prove otherwise.
But until you prove otherwise, I'm assuming, I'm just going to assume out of the gate that it's a hoax.
Until you prove otherwise.
And that's the way that many people look at it now, and so you would think that the hoaxers Who are still hoaxing in this environment would be highly evolved, highly skilled, coming up with extremely sophisticated hoaxes.
But no, it's the same hoax over and over again.
They haven't even learned how to convincingly mimic the speech patterns and tone of voice and writing styles of the people they're trying to frame for these incidents.
Like, he's obviously going for a...
You know, kind of conservative boomer vibe with these posts, right?
The random punctuation, the capital letters, all this kind of stuff.
Things like demon crats.
So he's going for the boomer vibe.
I get why he's going that direction with the hoax, but it's so exaggerated, so over the top that it just doesn't land.
So I would rate this hoax, it's like a two out of ten on the hoax scale.
And they're always twos and threes.
When's the last time we saw even a four?
When's the last time a hoax got over five on the scale that I just invented right now?
Meanwhile, what does it tell you that this guy, this non-white guy named Taral Patel, can run for political office in Texas?
And the only way he can get himself targeted by racist comments is if he writes them himself.
Like, what does that tell you?
I mean, even if one or two actual real human beings posted comments like, hey, you're Hindu, go back to India, you damned foreigner, or whatever, you know, even if like one or two real people really said something like that.
It wouldn't mean that racism is rampant.
It wouldn't really mean anything.
That's the other amazing thing about these kinds of stories is that there are billions of people on the internet and people say horrendous things on the internet all the time.
Right?
So you would think that you, if you want to find an example of someone being racist against you, and you go to the internet, you could find one or two genuine examples.
Because you can find an example of anyone, just think in your head of the most horrific thing anyone could ever say.
You could go to the internet and find people saying that thing.
So, and yet, In spite of all that, apparently he could not find one single genuine case of anyone saying anything racist to him, even on the internet.
And we can assume that because if that example existed, he would have just used those examples rather than making them up himself.
But he couldn't even get that, he couldn't even get one or two.
So he resorts to this instead.
Which just tells us that, of course, it tells us what we all realize, that this kind of racism is very, very rare.
We live in a society where white racism against non-white people is extremely rare.
There's just not a lot of it.
That's what it tells us.
And especially white racism against people from India?
I don't think I've ever even heard of that.
I've never encountered a white person on the internet or otherwise who has that form of racism.
He could just be happy with that.
That's always an option.
Another option is to say, oh, I'm an American of Indian descent.
I mean, this country, people accept me.
It's not an issue.
It's not a problem.
I can run for political office and, like, nobody even brings it up.
It's fine.
He could be happy about that.
But no, he has to find a reason to be a victim, of course.
All right, another, well, okay.
I guess.
I don't know why I'm doing this again.
So there's another Caitlyn Clark-related controversy.
I swear to God I'm going to stop.
This will be the last time.
There's so much WNBA talk.
This can't continue.
It cannot.
It just can't.
But I feel like I need to bring this one up just because, you know, for the sake of being fair, of being non-biased or whatever, to reclaim my journalistic credentials, even though I'm not a journalist.
Over the weekend, there was more footage from a WNBA game on, I believe, Saturday that went viral, and all the people are talking about it.
And here we see Katelyn Clark getting fouled.
I'll show the clip in a second, but lots of people online are very upset about this.
They say it's another example of Clark being targeted.
It was assault.
It was a vicious attack.
This foul has been headline news on Fox News and New York Post.
Conservative media has made a thing out of it.
And I'm seeing multiple people online say that this is criminal assault and that the person responsible for it should be arrested.
Like, there's that level of outrage over it.
So let's take a look.
This is Angel Reese fouling Kaitlyn Clark.
Let's go ahead and play this.
Yeah, that's right.
All right.
There it is.
Let's see it again.
Slow motion.
Yep.
Right in the back of the head.
Across the head, and they will go to the monitor.
Okay.
So, that was the foul.
And I gotta call these as I see them.
I do think that Caitlin Clarke has been a target.
Talked about it on the show a week or two ago.
But not every foul against her is some kind of crime against humanity, okay?
And this one is just a foul?
And I guess the real reason this jumps out at me is that all the people pretending to be super angry about this particular thing that I just played, I have to assume you're all, you're engaging in performance and you know it.
You know that that's a foul.
It's a basketball foul.
It happens all the time in basketball.
It really does.
It's not, without any, look, but this way, with no context.
You show a basketball fan that clip, they're not going to say, what was that?
Oh my gosh!
How could that have happened?
Criminal investigation immediately!
No, they're like, oh, that's a hard foul.
I think they ruled it a flagrant foul.
And yeah, it's that.
OK, fine.
But those things happen in basketball.
They're pretty routine.
You can even see she's making a play on the ball.
She's looking up.
And she smacks him in the back of the head.
It's not anything unprecedented.
It's not a crime.
It's not assault.
Oh my gosh.
And yet this foul, this pretty standard basketball foul, has been the subject of analysis and outrage and claims of assault and everything else.
Again, I do think that Kailyn Clark has been the target of anti-white racism.
We've talked about that.
I do think some of the other players don't like her because she's white.
That's obvious enough.
Not every foul against her is now suddenly a scandal.
And we can't, I cannot endure, I mean I have to be on social media for my job so I have to see this stuff.
I can't endure a whole, how long is the WNBA season?
I don't even know.
I thought it was like two weeks.
But it's been two weeks since it started.
I think it started recently.
And is it months?
Dear God, is it months long?
Does this go on for months?
We have to deal with this.
Is this going to be a weekly thing for months?
There's a new Caitlyn Clark.
Look, she got fat.
We can't do it.
We just can't.
We can't do that.
And there has to be It's possible to call out the anti-white racism, which is important.
The call thing, the double standards, you call all that out, as I have.
But at the same time, we don't have to become dorks crying and calling a foul in basketball an assault.
Now, it's possible that you could commit it.
I mean, if somebody walked up to her and punched her in the face, Yeah, that's assault.
That's actually assault.
It's not as though the field of play in sports is the purge, you know, and all criminal laws don't apply.
We're not saying that.
But someone, you know, a hard foul in the course of playing the game is just that.
It's just a foul.
And I think everybody understands that.
But this is a thing now.
It's a thing on the internet.
And it's content.
So I think this is good.
It's going to be every week.
It's like once a week we're going to get the Katelyn Clark thing on Twitter.
And we're going to hear so much about the WNBA in the coming weeks.
I'm terrified by the prospect.
All right.
One other quick thing.
Much more important, Chuck Schumer has been in the Senate for 672 years, but he's still just a normal guy.
He's a normal guy.
He hasn't lost touch with the average man.
He is an average man.
He's an everyday American, as the politicians would say.
To prove that, he did what many politicians have done before him.
He posed for a picture in front of a grill.
And this photo op went about as well for him as it has for every other politician.
So many politicians have tried this exact photo op, and somehow they fail at it.
It's the simplest thing to do, you would think.
You also don't need to do it.
You don't really gain anything by posing in front of a grill.
We're not actually impressed.
That you know how to grill.
Like, we know you probably don't know how to grill, but even if you did know how to grill, it wouldn't change our perception of you at all.
But if you're going to do it, you would think... Have someone on your team who knows something about grilling.
It's not a difficult subject.
And have them look it over real quick before you post it.
But they don't, so they always fail at this.
So yesterday he tweeted, we have the tweet, don't we?
Okay, here's the tweet.
Our family has lived in an apartment building for all our years, but my daughter and her wife just bought a house with a backyard and for the first time we're having a barbecue with hot dogs and hamburgers on the grill.
Father's Day heaven.
First of all, no.
Before we even look at the picture, we've already got so many problems.
No man, Father's Day Heaven?
What kind of man would ever say that?
What kind of man is standing at the grill, grilling up some burgers and dogs, saying, this is Father's Day Heaven, I tell you what.
All right, so how many problems do we have in this picture?
We kind of have to narrow it down, because the whole thing, leaving the creepy expression out, Yeah, he looks like a, he looks villainous somehow.
He looks like, what are those hamburgers made of?
Is that human flesh?
I mean, he looks like he's doing something evil with that grin, but we'll leave all that stuff out.
And even the burgers themselves, I don't know what color, those look like they've been sitting in the fridge for three and a half weeks.
Those, don't eat those burgers.
That is not what, that is not what ground beef is supposed to look like.
It's not supposed to be gray.
What is it, like brownish gray?
We should have like a reddish tint to it.
So don't eat those.
Those things... Those have been sitting in his fridge since he first got into the Senate 672 years ago.
Anyway, but we won't even talk about that.
So there's like four big problems here.
The first problem is that only one burner is on.
So you don't have to use one burner at a time, that's not how it works.
You can actually use all of them at once, and it's a lot more convenient that way.
But you don't have to use one burner at a time.
That's not how it works.
You can actually use all of them at once.
And it's a lot more convenient that way.
He also, what else do we have?
So the hot dogs are done and the burgers are raw.
The burgers are very raw and the hot dogs are already done.
So he's timed this terribly.
What you want to do is you want to put the burgers on first, because the hot dogs cook a lot quicker.
It doesn't take long for the hot dogs.
They're already cooked.
So what you're doing is you're really just singeing them, right?
So you want to put the burgers on for a couple of minutes, and then you throw the dogs on.
And if you're only doing six of each, you should be able to get it all done, time it perfectly.
This is some people who really grill.
We pride ourselves on the timing.
It's all about timing with grilling.
So that's a problem.
The burger's raw, he's already flipping it.
Like, what are you flipping it for?
It's not cooked at all.
So he looked down at that and said, well, that one's done on that side, flipped it over.
But then the biggest problem of all is the burgers are raw and he's got cheese on it already.
He put cheese on a raw hamburger patty.
Even if, look, I know he said he lives in an apartment all his life, really explains a lot.
He's never had a backyard, again, really explains a lot.
I actually think to be a man at his age and to have never had a yard at all, like, that does, it warps your mind, it does something to your brain, I really believe that.
To live in a city apartment your whole life, it has this warping effect on the human soul, I believe.
So, and you could say, well, he's admitting that, so let's not be too hard on him.
He kind of admits in the thing that this is the first time he's grilled.
So fine, but even if it's the first time you've ever done it, maybe you don't know how to turn the burners on, maybe you don't have the timing down perfectly.
We can understand all that, but even then, wouldn't you know not to put the cheese on a raw hamburger patty?
What's the plan here?
When you flip that burger over, the cheese is gonna land on the grate and just gonna get stuck to the grate?
Like, what do you think's gonna happen?
You think you grill the cheese, too?
Have you ever had a cheeseburger?
Even if you've had one, you should know this is not how it's done.
It's infuriating.
It really is.
Anyway.
So, that's four strikes against him, and he will now be, according to the law, deported for this.
Are you still struggling with back taxes or unfiled returns?
This year, the IRS is escalating collections by adding 20,000 new agents and sending millions of demands letters.
Now that tax season is over, collection season has begun.
Handling this alone could be a huge mistake and cost you thousands of dollars.
In these challenging times, your best offense is with Tax Network USA.
Upon signing up, Tax Network USA will immediately contact the IRS to secure a protection order,
ensuring that excessive collection activities and aggressive activities such as garnishments,
levies, or property seizures are halted, providing you with peace of mind and financial security.
If you haven't filed in a while, need amended returns, or are missing records,
Tax Network USA's expert tax preparers will update all of your filings,
eliminating the risk of IRS enforcement.
Tax Network USA will evaluate your financials and create a settlement strategy to reduce or eliminate your tax debt, putting it behind you for good.
Don't wait any longer and call my friends at Tax Network USA today for complimentary consultation.
Call 1-800-245-6000 or visit tnusa.com slash Walsh.
or visit tnusa.com/walsh.
That's 1-800-245-6000, or visit tnusa.com/walsh today.
If you haven't heard, Jeremy Boring announced an exciting partnership with Angel Studios
and Daily Wire Plus to bring you a brand new film called "Sound of Hope, The Story of Possum Trot."
It's coming to theaters this July 4th.
Last year, Angel Studios' movie Sound of Freedom made a profound impact by shining a powerful light on the child trafficking crisis.
Now, Angel Studios is back continuing their fight for kids and Daily Wire is joining with them.
Sound of Hope is the true story of 22 families from a rural church Who adopted 77 kids from the foster system, sparking a movement to save vulnerable children everywhere.
We have a trailer for you guys so you can get a feel for what this movie is all about.
Take a look.
Are you sure these people want us?
I know they do.
You can call me Mama.
It's hard to feel like I'm the only one who sees these things.
70% of the kids in the system are there because of neglect.
The other 30% are put through hell.
We need your help.
Can you imagine our kids on their own?
We can't just look away.
The state ain't no family.
Are you sure these people want us?
I know they do.
You can call me Mama.
Oh, Lord.
No!
No, no, no!
If we can't wrap our arms around the most vulnerable, then what do we have?
Noise!
And the children can't take the noise anymore.
This is something that we must do.
22 families want to adopt.
The whole town wants kids now.
That's about right.
What's happening with Possum Trot could mean a huge change for the system.
We want the ones that nobody else want.
Who hurt you, baby?
I'm not giving up on you.
You can't give up on me either.
What we gonna do?
Everybody's falling apart.
I'm doing the best I can!
A real world hits hard.
I don't wanna be here!
I can't give him back.
We gotta work on this together.
We your people now.
And love never gives up.
(dramatic music)
I watched this film myself.
I have to say it's incredibly moving, and it places strong family values at its core.
It's more than just a movie.
It's a call to action.
Right now, there are over 100,000 children in foster care that need homes.
They need our help.
Raising awareness is how you can help today.
The best way to do that is by seeing Sound of Hope in theaters.
It's exactly how we started a movement to change culture.
Sound of Hope is coming to theaters July 4th, and tickets are on sale right now.
So you gotta get them, and you can get showtimes at angel.com slash Matt.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
We talk about it all the time casually, but I don't think we've really stopped to consider what it means.
We don't take it as seriously as we should.
We haven't thought about the implications of this crisis, and the crisis is this.
The left has transcended satire.
We cannot satirize these people anymore.
We cannot make a parody out of them.
They've descended so far and so fast into madness that there's simply no way for the satirist to stay in front of them.
Inevitably, any satire of the left will be satire for maybe like three days before it becomes reality, and that's in the best-case scenario.
But more often, satire of the left isn't even satire at all, even at the moment that it's created, because it's actually tamer than reality.
The right's satirized version of a leftist is very often more normal, more sensible, more coherent than an actual leftist.
This is a problem.
It's a problem we face.
And there may be a way around it, but we're going to have to start getting very innovative if we want to keep satire alive.
The old methods just don't cut it anymore.
We have to go farther.
We have to be more creative, more daring.
That's what it will take because of things like this.
So here's a very real news report out of Los Angeles.
This just happened last week.
Again, not a joke, not a skit.
Real thing.
Happened in real life.
Watch. [Applause]
LA City Council members Hugo Soto-Martinez and Nithya Raman were on hand today to help remove the signs.
They say the no cruising and no U-turn signs were put up in the 1990s to prevent people in the gay community from meeting up with other gay people.
I was also surprised that these U-turn signs were still up.
And at first, you know, they seem a little, oh, okay, it's just a no U-turn sign.
But when you learn the history of it, and you realize that these were used to profile gay people, it's so important that we have these removed.
The L.A.
City Council members say the signs were put up after the gay community began to grow and because there was a gay bar in that area.
So there you have it.
A crowd of people came together to remove no U-turn signs because no U-turn signs are homophobic.
That's where we are now.
No U-turn signs are bigoted against the gay community.
Topping it all off, the city council member who led this rally goes by the name, again not making it up, goes by the name Maybe A Girl.
Council member Maybe A Girl.
is leading the charge and finally sparking the long-needed conversation about the homophobic legacy of traffic enforcement.
But why are no U-turn signs homophobic?
And if we're looking for anti-gay implications in traffic signs, why start with U-turns?
Some people have speculated there might be some homophobia in, for instance, exit-only signs.
Now, that's not a gay joke on my part, to be clear to the YouTube censors.
I would never engage in such things.
In fact, I find it frankly objectionable.
I read those comments saying, exit only as a gay.
And I said, that's objectionable.
I object to it.
In fact, I said that out loud to myself.
I really did.
I'm only telling you what other people have said.
And maybe they have a point, like, why wouldn't you start with that?
But they haven't started with those signs.
Instead, it's the U-turn signs.
Why?
Well, Council Member Maybeagirl explained in a very long video, which we will, you know, try to cut around to get to the point of, here's the history lesson, here it is.
No U-turn signs are homophobic in Silver Lake, and here's why.
So in 1997, let's fast forward a little bit, almost 10 years later, LA Times puts out another article detailing how neighbors on Griffith Park Boulevard are fed up with gay men cruising in the area for gay sex.
And so signs were installed, no cruising signs and no U-turn signs between 12 a.m.
and 6 a.m.
Okay, never mind.
I actually don't care that much.
I had the same question everyone did, like, what is this even coming from?
And then this person posted, it's like a five-minute video, and you get two minutes in.
It's like, I don't care that much anymore.
Never mind.
It doesn't matter.
It really doesn't.
Maybe a girl apparently went to school and majored in the study of homophobic street signs.
We're getting an explanation that stretches back like 900 years.
I felt like I was watching a Putin interview.
Except with a lot more cross-dressing, of course.
This is one of the many problems with the LGBT left.
On top of the fact that they're wrong about everything, you know, everything, and their fundamental worldview is hopelessly confused and incoherent.
On top of all that, they also spend their time learning the most useless possible information.
I guarantee that maybe a girl, or any of the other people involved in this decision, could not pass a second grade level American history test, and yet they could deliver a 10,000 word dissertation on the history of gay cruising in Los Angeles County.
Like, they couldn't tell you who wrote the Declaration of Independence, but they can point to any random inanimate object and explain why it's actually a monument to homophobia.
And in spite of their extensive knowledge of these utterly pointless subjects, They're still wrong, even about the subject.
According to the explanation we just heard, if you didn't fall asleep in the middle of it.
What you take from that is that they put the signs up in order to stop gay cruising in the 90s.
Gay cruising, as we saw in the newspaper clip that was briefly flashed on the screen, means that gay men were going out and looking for other men to have sex with in public.
The news article mentioned two men caught having sex in a stairwell.
So, if the no U-turn signs were connected to the effort to stop this kind of public lewdness, it must be because it was somehow effective in preventing gay men from cruising around on the street looking for sex.
So if these signs had anything to do with the gay community, quote-unquote, and that's a big if, it's because they were behaving inappropriately in public and the signs somehow helped to get that problem under control.
Again, I'm not exactly sure how the U-turn, like, I don't know, you had a gay man that was driving down the street, and then he saw on the other side of the street another gay man who thought, oh, maybe I could have sex with that guy, and then he just cuts a U-ey real quick to go, is that what was happening?
And that was why they had, I don't know.
I'm not sure.
There's only so much I want to know here.
I already know a lot more than I want to.
But this is how self-absorbed and oblivious these activists are.
If the no U-turn signs are connected to them in any way, that should be a source of embarrassment.
It's only because they kept having sex in public, and other people in the community didn't want to be forced to witness it.
Rather reasonably, I would say.
So the true history of these signs, if that is the true history, should be something that these people don't want discussed.
They should be ashamed of it.
They should just treat the signs like normal signs and go on with their lives.
Instead, they go out of their way to remind everyone that the county had to put up new traffic signs to stop them from treating public roads like gay brothels.
This, again, is a subject they have brought up.
You know, conservatives have generally responded to this story by saying, well, that's ridiculous.
U-turn signs have nothing to do with gay people.
Which is an understandable reaction, but the truth is something even more absurd.
Actually, these signs really might have something to do with the behavior of some gay people in that community.
Behavior that is objectionable and that the city was right to crack down on.
But rather than LGBT activists having any shame that they had to come up with new traffic rules just to stop all the public sex that was happening, instead the activists are calling attention to it themselves.
That's what happens when you have no capacity for shame.
And that is ultimately why these activists are today cancelled.
