Ep. 1404 - After Almost Getting Trump Killed, The Secret Service Cries About Mean Tweets
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, only a few days after the extreme incompetence of the Secret Service (or something more sinister than that) nearly got Donald Trump killed, the Secret Service is focused on what really matters: mean comments about their female agents. The agency isn't trying to figure out how and why they failed to prevent an assassination attempt. Instead, they're busy valiantly defending their own diversity initiatives. Also, JD Vance delivers his speech at the Republican convention. We'll play one important moment from that speech. And, now hosts on MSNBC are floating the idea that the Trump shooting was staged, in spite of how incoherent that theory is. And, the calls for Biden to step down have reached a fever pitch. I will do something unexpected today and make the case that Biden should stay in this race. I'm Ridin' with Biden.
Ep.1404
- - -
DailyWire+:
We are giving you a presidential discount. Get 47% off annual memberships now with code FIGHT: http://dailywire.com/subscribe
Get 10% off your tickets to Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot at http://angel.com/MATT
SWEET BABY GANG IS BACK. Buy the shirt: https://bit.ly/3zfUbZE
- - -
Today’s Sponsor:
PureTalk - Get 50% Off Your First Month! http://www.PureTalk.com/WALSH
Helix Sleep - Get 30% off your order + 2 dream pillows. https://helixsleep.com/WALSH
Hallow - Try Hallow for 3 Months FREE at https://hallow.com/MATTWALSH
- - -
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, only a few days after the extreme incompetence of the Secret Service, or something more sinister than that, nearly got Donald Trump killed, the Secret Service is focused on what really matters, mean comments about their female agents.
The agency isn't trying to figure out how and why they failed to prevent an assassination attempt.
Instead, they're busy valiantly defending their own diversity initiatives.
Also, J.D.
Vance delivers his speech at the Republican Convention.
We'll play one important moment from that speech.
And now hosts on MSNBC are floating the idea that Trump Staged the shooting himself in spite of how incoherent that theory is.
And the calls for Biden to step down have reached a fever pitch.
I will do something unexpected today and make the case that Biden should stay in this race.
I am riding with Biden.
We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Wall Show.
One thing is clear in the 2024 election, the fight for America's core values is more important
The Daily Wire is on the front lines of that fight, but we can't win without you.
Join us right now.
We're offering 47% off annual memberships.
Go to dailywire.com and use promo code FIGHT at checkout.
You've heard me say for a long time that cell phone service with Pure Talk is half the cost of Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mobile.
You might be thinking, what's the catch?
There's no way Pure Talk can offer unlimited talk text and plenty of data for just $20 a month.
Well, I say, just ask the thousands of my other listeners who have already switched.
They are loving America's most dependable 5G network.
They love Pure Talk's U.S.
customer service, their selection of premium phones, and the money that they're saving month to month.
So what are you waiting for?
It's time to start supporting companies who share your values, like creating American jobs and supporting our veterans.
It's time to switch your cell phone service to Pure Talk.
Plus, with no contract and a 30-day money-back guarantee, you've got nothing to lose.
Visit puretalk.com slash Walsh to upgrade your cell phone service to America's most dependable 5G network and save an extra 50% off your first month.
That's puretalk.com slash Walsh today.
I'll begin today with some breaking news.
The Secret Service has finally come out and explained in detail how they allowed Donald Trump to get shot in the head on Saturday.
They've released a thorough explanation for why exactly the slope of the roof 140 yards away from the stage was in fact insurmountable for even the most skilled Secret Service sniper or special agent.
They articulated very clearly why they didn't pull Donald Trump off the stage even after they saw the shooter behaving suspiciously, equipped with a rangefinder, before they somehow lost track of him several times over.
It's now abundantly clear exactly why the DHS Secretary says that he has 100% confidence in the Director of the Secret Service even after all of this happened.
All of our questions have been answered.
Or maybe not.
Actually, they still haven't explained any of that.
But on the bright side, the Secret Service did come out and address the most important issue surrounding Saturday's assassination attempt by far.
And that issue is that people have been very mean to the Secret Service on the Internet.
People have even put out tweets that are critical of the fact that the Secret Service had female agents, quote-unquote, protecting Donald Trump, despite the fact that they weren't tall enough to cover his head.
Can you imagine the indecency of it all?
The Secret Service, they can't.
I mean, it's one thing for a guy to shoot a presidential candidate on live television, but for people to say rude things on social media?
Well, I mean, that's just a bridge too far.
And that's why the Secret Service just sent a statement to NBC News explaining, quote, We stand united against any attempt to discredit our personnel and their invaluable contributions to our mission, and are appalled by the disparaging and disgusting comments against any of our personnel.
As an elite law enforcement agency, all of our agents and officers are highly trained and fully capable of performing our missions.
It is an insult to the women of our agency to imply that they are unqualified based on gender.
Such baseless assertions undermine the professionalism, dedication, and expertise of our workforce.
Yes, this is the priority of the Secret Service just three days after they allowed the leading presidential candidate to get shot in the head during a political rally that they were in charge of securing.
This is what they're concerned about.
The feelings of their female agents.
They're not appalled by their unprecedented security failures, which very nearly changed the course of U.S.
history.
They're not appalled by their completely incoherent excuses about a sloped roof and a lack of manpower.
They're not appalled by the total destruction of the Secret Service's reputation as a competent federal agency.
None of that appalls the Secret Service.
What really bothers them are mean tweets about their female agents.
Now, a couple of things about this.
First of all, every criticism of the female agents on Trump's security detail is accurate.
These are all fair criticisms.
On the day of the assassination attempt, as I've covered before, one female agent cowered behind the pile of agents protecting Trump.
Another female agent clearly struggled to cover Trump's head as he stood up because she wasn't tall enough.
And none of the male agents have this problem, but the female agent clearly can't cover Trump's face even if she wanted to.
It's painful to watch.
And then, of course, as the SUV carrying Trump pulled away, the female agents had trouble holstering their weapons.
They started messing with their sunglasses.
They were looking around frantically.
They had no idea what they were doing.
None of them appeared to have any idea what they were supposed to do.
It was like they were cosplaying Secret Service agents.
It looked like they had been pulled off the street that morning and recruited into Trump's security detail without any prior training at all.
Now, I've shown all this footage before, but it bears repeating because the Secret Service is now pretending that none of this is an issue.
They're saying that you're a bigot if you notice the problem.
Now, they clearly don't believe that.
They know that female agents aren't as effective.
That's why when Trump appeared at the RNC in his first public appearance after the shooting, he was surrounded by men who were actually tall enough and strong enough to protect him.
There were no short females in his detail anymore, or any females at all, because they understand that women can't do the job as well as men, period.
But the Secret Service is choosing to use the shield of identity politics anyway, because, as always, it helps distract from their own failures and their own mediocrity.
This is always the reason that identity politics is deployed, and especially by government agencies, and this is no exception.
They would rather accuse their critics of hating women instead of reckoning with their own incompetence, which appears more and more to be willful and malicious with each passing day.
And the corporate press, of course, is doing the Fed's bidding.
The Financial Times reported, quote, Secret Service target of misogynistic backlash after Donald Trump assassination attempt.
The New York Times added, quote, The Washington Post complained, Well, you know, I thought that a former president getting shot was pretty bad.
opposition among Republicans to diversity efforts and hiring.
The Washington Post complained, "Right-wing influencers use Trump
assassination attempt to attack DEI."
Well, you know, I thought that a former president getting shot was pretty bad.
But if it leads to attacks on DEI, then it's way worse than I thought.
Now, the Post did single me out in their article with this paragraph, quote,
"Far-right influencer Matt Walsh posted a video."
featuring female secret service agents gathering around Trump after the attack with the caption,
"There should not be any women in the Secret Service. These are supposed to be the very best,
and none of the very best at this job are women." According to the Post, which cited experts,
experts in what? I don't know, experts in mean tweets, I guess. These experts say that tweets
like mine are an attempt to "generate social media attention and outrage."
page.
They also say that I'm trying to, quote, undermine DEI.
And that part is true, I admit.
What's interesting about these attacks is that, of course, they're commenting on my motivations.
They're pretending they can read my mind and that they've determined that my outrage, outrage over a presidential candidate getting shot, can't possibly be genuine.
So that's that.
They're not actually addressing what I said because they know that I'm right.
They know that all of us raising this concern are right.
Here's what none of these articles and valiant defenses of the female agents have done or can do.
Actually defend the proposition that Trump was safer with females in his security detail than he would have been if it was only men.
Now, to be clear, I'm not suggesting that if one woman agent on stage had been replaced by a male agent that Trump would not have been shot.
I'm not saying that more men would have definitely prevented this from happening, although it's quite possible.
I'm saying that these female agents constitute an obvious security vulnerability, one among many.
And because the Secret Service put them out there on the stage on Saturday, it raises obvious questions about their ability to competently protect Donald Trump or anyone else.
I'm not going to just ignore a glaring sign of incompetence that's front and center on live television.
If there is glaring incompetence, if it even is incompetence, by the way, which not something more sinister again, but if there's glaring incompetence to that degree, there's glaring incompetence at every other layer of the agency too.
That's a pretty safe assumption and the Secret Service has done absolutely nothing to dispel that assumption in the days since the shooting.
Here's the crucial point.
The fact that they are going out of their way to recruit women in the name of diversity shows where their priorities lie.
It only makes them less capable of doing the job they're supposed to do, but even more to the point, it means they are fundamentally focused on the wrong things.
Consider, for example, what the director of the Secret Service, Kimberly Cheadle, has been saying since Saturday.
She's best known for her promise that 30% of the Secret Service's workforce would be female by 2030.
At first she came out and said that the roof was too sloped for agents to stand on top of, which makes no sense for a million reasons.
And by the way, she's really not helping her case for including women in the agency when she says stuff like that.
Like, looking up at a roof and deciding that you can't put snipers on it because it's slightly sloped and somebody might slip is the kind of thing that your mom might do.
Hey, you boys come down from there and put those guns away.
You're gonna hurt yourself.
Then in an interview yesterday, Cheadle defended the security plan that left the roof completely exposed.
She also refused to explain how exactly the agency had supposedly beefed up security after an alleged threat against Trump from Iran.
Watch.
Was that perimeter too small?
The perimeter encompassed the area that we needed to secure for the event that we had on that day.
What happened is a terrible incident and should never happen and we are obviously going to make sure that moving forward we take whatever lessons we that come out of this and adjust accordingly.
Was every element, every part of his, from the intelligence to the counter-assault team, to the detail agents, the shift agents, I mean every element, top to bottom, of the advance and the operation, was every element increased after you learned of this credible threat?
What we increased was what we felt was appropriate for the former president and for that particular event on that day.
We have been increasing the assets and the resources and the staffing that we have been providing to the former president since he was a presidential candidate.
And then the presumptive nominee, that's what I can tell you.
That sounds like a no.
I am not saying a no at all.
I'm saying that we have continued to increase the resources that we've been providing to the former president.
The perimeter encompassed the area that we needed to secure for the event that we had on that day.
That's what she said.
That's her response when she's asked why the secure perimeter didn't include a building directly across from Trump.
But obviously the perimeter didn't encompass the area they needed to secure because a gunman managed to climb on the roof and fire several shots without anyone stopping him.
Then she goes on to completely fail to explain how the agency supposedly stepped up its security following this supposed Iranian threat.
And that's probably because security was not stepped up in any way.
But for a moment, let's give this woman the benefit of the doubt, which she obviously doesn't deserve.
Well, let's pretend that the security was indeed stepped up to the max.
And let's recap how exactly this stepped-up security failed, since the details get crazier with each passing hour.
So now we're learning that the shooter was at the rally a full three hours before he shot Trump.
He was at the rally and on the radar of the security team three hours ahead of time.
And then at 5.10 p.m., authorities identified him as a person of interest.
That's their phrasing.
At 5.30 p.m., he was spotted again with a rangefinder.
He was then observed, quote, furiously checking his phone and operating the rangefinder, according to the Daily Mail.
The Secret Service noticed this and kept an eye on him.
But apparently they lost track of where he was.
And multiple times, in fact, through this whole process, they kept seeing him and said, this guy's weird.
And then he would leave and they would lose track of him.
And then they'd see him again, lose track of him again.
And then the shooter was caught on film an hour before the assassination attempt, casing the building that he would later climb to shoot Trump.
Watch.
[MUSIC]
So you can see the guy's clearly by himself acting strangely as he cases the building.
And then 40 minutes before the shooting, law enforcement spotted the shooter appearing to crawl on the ground while scouring the area.
This was suspicious enough that they took a photograph, they circulated the photograph, tagging him as a suspicious person.
But again, they apparently lost track of him.
And again, that wasn't the end of it.
The Secret Service also, and listen to this part because I think this is the newest detail that is
just mind-boggling. The Secret Service saw the gunman on the rooftop at 5.52 p.m.
At 6.02 p.m. Trump took the stage.
Shots were fired at 6.12 p.m.
In other words, as ABC News reported, quote, 20 minutes passed between the time U.S.
Secret Service snipers first spotted the gunman on a rooftop and the time shots were fired at the former president.
So, to reiterate here, this is a suspicious person who's already been identified as a person of interest with a rangefinder Who is on top of a roof looking down directly at the stage where Donald Trump is about to speak.
And still they didn't secure the roof or delay the rally.
Like, even if you ignore the three hours prior to this, when they could have detained the shooter, you know, on dozens of different occasions, you know, they had three hours to detain him and they didn't.
Well, even if you pretend none of that happened.
They still had 20 minutes when he was on the roof, and they did nothing.
In fact, this guy, who'd already been identified as a person of interest again, was on the roof 10 minutes before Trump even took the stage.
So, at a minimum, it would have taken them no effort at all, and there would have been no risk involved.
Quite the opposite.
It's a mitigation of risk.
If they had just delayed Trump coming out until they investigated, they could have at least said, hmm, there's a guy on the roof.
That's strange.
What's he doing up there?
Hey, let's keep the former president from taking the stage while we go over and check this thing out.
But they didn't do that.
Then shortly before the shooting started, people in the crowd saw the man on the roof.
I've played several of those videos before.
The crowd began calling to police officers nearby.
Now we're learning exactly when that happened in the chronology of events that day, as the Washington Post reports, quote, the shots began 86 seconds after the first audible attempts to alert police, according to the analysis, which synchronized several clips based on the sound of Trump's voice over the public address system.
So I'll say that again.
The shots began 86 seconds after the first audible attempts to alert police.
All that needed to happen in those 86 seconds was for the officer to get on the radio and say there's a suspicious person on the roof, get Trump off the stage.
Or he could have directed the counter snipers to look for the person and identify the specific roof.
Instead, once again, nothing happened.
No one stopped the shooter until Trump was shot first.
The only explanation for these events, outside of the possibility that the Secret Service deliberately intended for Trump to get shot, which is not by any means a crazy thing to believe, outside of that, the only other explanation is incompetence of a staggering, historic degree.
The only conceivable way this assassination attempt happens, excluding malice, Is if people who have no idea what they're doing, who were not chosen based on merit, were put in jobs they can't possibly perform.
And through its explicit DEI policies, the dramatically lowered physical fitness standards for women, the hiring quotas, the special push for more LGBTQ agents, and so on, the Secret Service has made it abundantly clear that it doesn't care about merit.
Instead, the agency cares about politics and appearances.
That's the reason for the DEI hiring.
That's the reason they're appalled by mean tweets like mine.
And it's the reason Donald Trump was just shot in the face.
And why U.S.
history very nearly changed forever.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
My days are incredibly full between the show, being a dad, and
various other responsibilities.
I can't keep up with my day if I don't get a good night's sleep, which is why I appreciate my Helix mattress.
Helix harnesses years of mattress expertise to offer a truly elevated sleep experience.
The Helix Elite Collection includes six different mattress models, each tailored for specific sleep positions and firmness preferences.
If you're nervous about buying a mattress online, you don't have to be.
Helix has a sleep quiz that matches your body type and sleep preferences to the perfect mattress, because why would you buy a mattress made for somebody else?
Helix knows there's no better way to test out a new mattress than by sleeping on it yourself at your own home, and that's why they offer a 100-night trial and a 10- to 15-year warranty.
They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it, but you will.
Helix's financing options and flexible payment plans make it so that a great night's sleep is never far away.
For a limited time, Helix is offering up to 30% off all mattress orders and two free pillows.
For my listeners, just go to helixsleep.com slash Walsh.
This is their best offer yet and it won't last long.
That's helixsleep.com slash Walsh.
With Helix, better sleep starts now.
Let's begin with the Republican convention.
And by the way, let me just say, because I've been asked this a bunch of times actually, Daily Wire is at the convention this week.
I'm not there only because I'm at the lake with my family this month.
And if the convention was any other month, I'd be there.
Can't miss family time, though, and also my kids would, you know, murder me if I said I was leaving to go to a political convention this week.
Maybe not murder me, but they'd be really sad, and I'd feel guilty.
So that's why I'm not there.
But anyway, the convention continues, and even without my presence somehow.
J.D.
Vance spoke last night, and I want to play... I thought it was a good speech.
I want to play one clip in particular from that speech that I thought was pretty important.
Listen to this.
Now that's Kentucky coal country, one of the ten... Now, it's one of the ten poorest counties in the entire United States of America.
They are very hard-working people, and they're very good people.
They're the kind of people who would give you the shirt off their back even if they can't afford enough to eat.
And our media calls them privileged and looks down on them.
But they love this country not only because it's a good idea, but because in their bones they know that this is their home.
and it will be their children's home and they would die fighting to protect it.
That is the source of America's greatness.
I As a United States Senator, I get to represent millions of people in the great state of Ohio with similar stories, and it is the great honor of my life.
Now, in that cemetery, there are people who were born around the time of the Civil War.
And if, as I hope, my wife and I are eventually laid to rest there, And our kids follow us.
There will be seven generations just in that small mountain cemetery plot in eastern Kentucky.
seven generations of people who have fought for this country, who have built this country,
who have made things in this country, and who would fight and die to protect this country
if they were asked to.
[applause]
Now that's not just an idea, my friends.
That's not just a set of principles.
Even though the ideas and the principles are great, that is a homeland.
That is our homeland.
That's about two minutes, and this section of the speech was four or five minutes.
It's worth going and watching the whole thing if you didn't see it.
His point, as you heard, is that America is not just an idea, which is something that we hear a lot, that America is an idea, but it's not just that.
It's not just an abstraction.
It is our home, and we should love and cherish it for that reason, and our leaders should put America first for that reason.
This is a very simple point.
That he's making, but it's incredibly important.
And it's the kind of simple but important point that you don't often hear from politicians.
You don't, I mean, you don't hear it from Democrats at all ever.
You don't hear it from Republicans very often either.
But there's a, there's a certain power just in that statement alone.
America is our homeland.
Calling it that.
It shouldn't, it should not be Even notable for a politician to say something like that.
For a politician to say, America is our home.
Right?
This is where we were born and raised.
This is where our families are from.
This is where our ancestors are from.
Right?
America is our home.
There should be nothing surprising about a politician saying that.
It should be really boring to hear them say things like that.
But that's not the case in modern American culture.
Because we have been There's this idea that's been ingrained in so many people for so many years that America is not really anyone in particular's home.
It's just that.
It's an idea.
It's not even an idea.
It's something that anyone, even to call it an idea at this point, is too solid of a thing for a lot of people.
So the idea is that America is just It's a place, at most.
And it's a place that anyone can come, and once they come to that place, they are there, and they're there in the same way that anyone else is there.
But that's not the case.
It is a home, and it's important to hear him say that.
And, you know, these convention speeches are not meant to be necessarily insightful and interesting.
They are rallying cries, you know.
These are the kinds of speeches, as you heard, where people interject with applause every five seconds.
And that's all great.
That's the style.
That's the genre.
That's what these conventions are for.
But even if the speech is going to mostly be red meat applause lines, it's still important to say something, and Vance said something here, which I really appreciate.
And it's one of the reasons why I'd say that J.D.
Vance is... He's certainly the best VP pick of my lifetime, hands down.
It's a low bar, granted.
I mean, who's he competing against?
Mike Pence, Paul Ryan, you know, Sarah Palin.
That's just this century.
Dick Cheney.
Just counting the Republicans.
And not only is he the best VP pick of all of them, but he has the chance of being the first of that bunch to actually become president.
I'll say that.
So, I thought it was an excellent speech.
And as I said, I think a few days ago, this is also the first time in my life when I can, when I think we can say that the Republican Party has a bench.
You know, there's people waiting on the bench.
There's J.D.
Vance, there's Ron DeSantis, Vivek, and not just them, but, and maybe more to come out of the woodwork, but it's the first time when you can point to several people and say, okay, well, here are people that we could pass the torch to.
Now, we talked about the left-wing conspiracy theories surrounding the shooting, that it was staged somehow, that Trump was in on it.
And it isn't just the crazies on TikTok that are floating this idea.
It's also crazies with cable news shows who are suggesting this.
For instance, we have Joy Reid.
Let's watch.
We still don't know for sure whether Donald Trump was hit by a bullet, whether he was hit by glass fragments, whether he was hit by shrapnel.
We don't have those details.
We actually have no details from his physician, even though this man is still a Secret Service protected presidential candidate.
We knew almost nothing.
Why?
Why don't we know that much?
We know that three people were shot.
One person, unfortunately, was killed at the rally.
We don't know where they were sitting or standing relative to him.
We don't know why, for nine full seconds, Donald Trump was allowed to stand back up.
During an active shooting, an active shooter situation, even though they at that point had said the shooter was down, how would they have known if there were more shooters or not?
Nobody knew.
There could have been five shooters for all they knew, yet they allowed him to stand up in the middle of that crisis and pose for a photo.
and fist pumped the air so he could get the iconic photo.
And then they allowed him to stand up again outside of the SUV instead of just
shoving him into the SUV. That seems really unusual. What is the
actual injury to Donald Trump's ear that's under that bandage?
Shouldn't we know that by now?
It's weird.
And there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of curiosity about it.
You know, in the sort of media world, you know, my profession, it's weird, right?
Where are the FOIAs?
Why isn't the New York Times, like, aggressively pursuing his medical records?
It's just weird.
Just a strange thing that I've noticed.
And I don't know if you guys have noticed it, too.
But it's weird.
Yeah, it's so weird.
What's under the bandage?
We have no idea.
Except for the approximately 10 billion photographs of it?
You know, all the photos that we all saw of his bleeding, injured ear?
Aside from the fact that this might be the most documented injury of all time?
The injury to his ear might be the most widely viewed injury ever in history.
And except for that, we have no idea.
We don't know.
What's the injury?
It's a bullet.
It's a wound.
You can see it.
What do you mean?
What else do you need to know?
There's not a lot to say about it.
Aside from what you saw.
Fortunately, it did just hit his ear.
It's not one of those things where like, okay, if he had been shot in the stomach, God forbid.
And survived, then it wouldn't be enough to just say, oh, he was shot in the stomach.
There's organs, there's all kinds of stuff.
We need to know how bad is the injury, what's the extent of the injury.
So it's a much more complicated injury.
An injury to an ear, thank God, ends up being much more minor and more simple.
And, you know, they tell us his ear was injured.
We all saw the photograph.
I don't know what more information you need.
What else do you need to know about it?
So she's doing the classic coy conspiracy theorist thing that people like her usually complain about.
Hey, I'm just asking questions, man.
I'm just asking questions.
That's all.
And there's nothing wrong with asking questions.
Right?
We have no problem with asking questions.
But you obviously are implying certain possibilities.
So just come out and say it.
You're implying certain things.
Have the guts to say what you mean.
Joy Reid thinks the shooting might have been staged.
That's what she's saying.
She's too cowardly to just come out and say it, but that is what she's saying.
Now, I believe that there could be conspiracies related to this shooting.
Not that Trump staged them.
It's not conspiracies Trump was involved in.
He was the target of the conspiracies, if there was a conspiracy.
And I believe that, but I have no problem coming out and saying it.
I think it's possible the Secret Service and or other agencies and entities in the federal government were in on it.
I think it's possible that they weren't directly in on it, but were intentionally lax in their security because they hoped that this might happen.
I don't know that, but that's one theory that I am entertaining, many of us are entertaining, and we will say it.
We're not being coy about it.
We're saying, hey, what if this is the case?
Are we sure that it isn't?
The other thing about our theories, along with the fact that we will say them, is that they make sense, given the facts on the ground.
Joy Reid's theory makes no sense.
Now, if she's simply suggesting—because there's kind of two theories that she's—not just her, right?
But there are two theories that they're kind of floating while being too chicken to actually say them out loud.
And one is that he was hit by broken glass or something.
But Trump doesn't want to tell us that because it's not as dramatic of a story.
And so he wants everyone to think that he was hit by a bullet, but he really wasn't.
Now, I don't think that's true at all.
I think that's nonsense.
It's at least a relatively coherent nonsensical theory.
You can... It's a coherent theory.
We understand what the theory is.
It doesn't work.
I mean, if he was hit, it doesn't work for a lot of reasons.
But let's start with this.
Like, what we can see of the injury... We saw the ear injured, and now there's the bandage.
And all that makes sense.
Hey, why is he wearing a bandage?
What are you trying to hide under there, huh?
I don't know.
He was shot in the ear, like, four days ago?
You want him to not wear a bandage?
But anyway, that is more consistent with a bullet wound than it is with shards of glass.
Because if he was hit by flying shards of broken glass, you would expect more visible injuries than the bullet.
A bullet can graze your ear, that's a thing that can happen.
Which is what happened.
Flying shards of glass, if they hit your ear, they're probably going to hit the whole side of your face.
Like, how would shards of glass only hit the tip of your ear?
So, it doesn't really work.
But she goes beyond that, obviously.
She's clearly suggesting that the whole thing may have been staged in some way.
Which is totally bonkers.
Although she is right about one thing.
The reaction from the Secret Service is weird.
We can agree on that.
It's very weird.
Both before and after.
We've talked about the issues before, even after.
It took them way too long to get them out of there.
Why?
Well, again, whatever conspiracy theory that leads you to, it cannot be one where Trump is the mastermind.
Because, to begin with, this is Biden's Secret Service that we're talking about here.
This is the Secret Service under Biden.
So what, is the Biden administration conspiring with Trump to elect him president?
What kind of a ridiculous excuse for a conspiracy theory is that, exactly?
Now, if you want to go this route, you have to ask, who stands to gain from Trump getting hit in the head with a bullet?
Trump only gains from it on the very insanely small chance that the bullet hits one of the very few little portions of your head that won't kill you if you're hit with a bullet.
That's what happened, but the chances are so low that it obviously couldn't have been his idea to do this.
Like, 99 times out of 100, if you shoot a guy in the head and make contact from 450 feet out with an AR-15, You're going to kill him, or at least you're going to cause a significant incapacitating injury.
So, who stands to gain from shooting Trump in the head?
Who would say to themselves ahead of time, you know it would be great if Trump was shot in the head?
Trump isn't going to say that.
I don't think that's something Trump's going to say to himself.
There's really no conceivable universe where Trump is standing up on stage delivering a speech, hoping that someone shoots him in the head, much less arranging for that to happen to him.
So, if we are speculating about forces beyond just the shooter being involved in this thing, then, again, the first thing you have to ask is, well, who would want that?
Who are the people?
You arrange your suspects.
Just like any, you know, it's like in any murder investigation, right?
You don't know who all involved, who all was involved.
Well, the first thing the detectives are asking themselves is who has a motive?
Who would want to do this?
Let's start with them.
Doesn't mean they're all guilty, doesn't mean any of them are guilty, but we got to start with who would conceivably want this to happen to this person?
And if you do the same thing with this, it leads you in directions, but they all point to, you know, Joy Reid's side of the aisle.
All right, here's something extremely depressing for you.
Just what you were hoping for.
I'm going to read now from MSN about the first euthanasia pods set to be rolled out in Switzerland very soon, okay?
And just listen to this and keep in mind that this is real.
You might have your doubts about that as I read, because the dystopian horror is so on the nose, you might think this is something from a sci-fi novel, but it's not.
It's real.
Okay.
An assisted dying group expects a portable suicide pod to be used for the first time in Switzerland, potentially within months, providing death without medical supervision, it said Wednesday.
The space-age-looking Sarko capsule, first unveiled in 2019, replaces the oxygen inside it with nitrogen, causing death by hypoxia.
It would cost $20 to use.
The last resort organization said it saw no legal obstacle to its use in Switzerland, where the law generally allows assisted suicide if the person commits the lethal act themselves.
The Last Resort's chief executive, Florian Willett, told a press conference, quote, since we have people indeed queuing up asking to use the Sarco, it's very likely that it will take place pretty soon.
I cannot imagine a more beautiful way to die of breathing air without oxygen until falling into an eternal sleep, she added.
He added, rather.
The person wishing to die must first pass a psychiatric assessment of their mental capacity, a key legal requirement.
The person climbs into the purple capsule, closes the lid, And has asked automated questions such as who they are, where they are, and if they know what happens when they press the button.
If you want to die, the voice says in the processor, press this button.
Once the button is pressed, the amount of oxygen in the air plummets from 21% to 0.05% in less than 30 seconds.
And one of the guys in charge of this company says, once you press that button, there's no way of going back.
So once you press it, you can't.
If you change your mind, too late.
Couple of other important notes here.
First of all, the article mentions that the pods can be reused.
So that's a cost-saving measure.
If you want euthanasia on a budget, then you can always get a hand-me-down euthanasia pod.
Head over to the consignment shop and grab one on clearance.
Lightly used.
Lightly used euthanasia pod for sale.
Also, if you're wondering what sarco means, it's short for sarcophagus.
So, nothing creepy about that, of course.
It's not like this is deeply, deeply unsettling at all.
Now, as it says in the article, this is supposed to make the process much more peaceful and welcoming.
And the problem with that is that, to begin with, that's the opposite of what we should be trying to do.
If somebody is at this point mentally, and emotionally, psychologically, where they would be considering something like this, the issue for them isn't that the process of ending their own life is uncomfortable.
The issue is that they want to end their life in the first place.
Making it more comfortable for them to do it is not the solution.
The solution is to help them.
Help them not to die, but to live.
This is a very basic concept.
The number one reason why I'm against euthanasia.
It's the wrong kind of help.
We need to help people to live, not to die.
And also, if the goal is to make ending your own life more appealing, which is an awful, evil goal to have, but if it is, how the hell is a sarcophagus pod that you can't escape once you go in, that's more peaceful?
How does that accomplish the goal of making this all seem more pleasant?
In fact, of all the ways to go, to me this sounds like maybe the most terrifying.
And this is what happens the more you try to sanitize this kind of thing.
In our culture of death, this is what we do.
We sanitize death.
Rather than embracing life, finding meaning in life, helping others to find meaning, we try to make death seem more appealing.
But you can't really make death seem appealing because death is an ugly, brutal thing, right?
Dying is an ugly and brutal thing no matter what.
It just is.
So instead they settle for, rather than making it appealing, which you can't, they settle for something sterile and sanitized and medicalized.
Which, if anything, makes the whole matter more terrible than it was before.
But this is what they're rolling out.
It starts in Switzerland, then it's going to end up in Canada, and then from there, the rest of the Western world eventually.
We can be pretty sure of that.
Alright, CNBC has this article.
The evidence linking smartphone use with mental health harms in children is growing, and one grassroots organization in the UK is supporting parents who are refraining from giving their kids the devices.
Smartphone Free Childhood, founded by Daisy Greenwell and Claire Feniho in February, Fenihoff probably, I don't know, set up various group chats for parents locally across the UK and grew to over 60,000 members in a few weeks, according to its website.
Interest in the movement is driven by concerns about the normalization of children with smartphones.
By the age of 12, 97% of children in the UK have a mobile phone.
of children in the UK have a mobile phone, 97% by 12.
Meanwhile, in the US, 42% of children had a smartphone by the age of 10, climbing to 91% by the age of 14.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Parents are giving their children smartphones in an increasingly online world for various reasons, including entertainment purposes, to keep track of their location, to stay in touch with them when they leave the home.
However, studies and experts highlight this as opening up the door to possible mental health harms.
So now there's this movement away from it.
There's one portion of this that I wanted to read.
It says young people reported worse mental health outcomes the earlier they acquired a smartphone, according to a Sapien Labs study published last year.
The study used data from 27,969 18- to 24-year-olds, which was obtained between January and April 2023 across 41 countries.
This is what it says.
Some 74% of female respondents who got their first smartphone at age 6 reported feeling distressed or struggling, per the study.
However, this decreased to 61% for those who acquired their first smartphone at age 10 and 52% for those who were aged 15.
For male respondents, the percentage feeling distressed or struggling reduced from 42% for those who got their first smartphone at age 6 to 36% for those who got their first smartphone at age 18.
Okay, now, it's no surprise that kids who get their first smartphone at age 6 would report negative mental health outcomes.
And I will say that You know, there's more to that story.
A child who gets a smartphone at six years old has terrible parents in general.
So the fact that they, you know, have poor mental health is partly due to the phone, and it's partly due to the fact that their parents are awful across the board, right?
And kids with awful parents tend to suffer mentally and emotionally.
So that's part of what's going on.
Because just think about that.
I know this is not the majority of kids getting smartphones at six, but six years old?
Six?
You're giving your kid a smartphone?
We need to shame parents who give children smartphones at that young of an age to the same extent that we would shame them for giving a six-year-old, you know, a shot of whiskey or a loaded gun.
Because you're giving them something that can only harm them.
And anytime a parent does that, that's abuse.
You're doing something to your child or you're providing them with something that can only cause harm.
That's the only possibility here.
That's abusive.
That's a form of abuse.
There's just no world where they grow up and become adults and end up in a better place and are better and happier people Because they've been using a smartphone since they were six years old.
That just can't happen.
It can only harm them.
And why are you doing it?
Why are you giving a child that young a smartphone?
Well, the article suggests some reasons that want to keep in touch with them.
Right, you got to keep in touch with your six-year-old?
Is it that difficult to stay in touch with your six-year-old child?
You want to know where they are.
Again, It should not be difficult to know where your six-year-old child is without a smartphone.
But that's not really it, right?
That's, that's the, because, you know, when parents are asked for this, so why'd you give your kid a smartphone?
That's what they're going to say.
Because they're not going to give the honest answer, which is that if you give your kid a smart smartphone at six or even older, you're doing it because you don't want to deal with them.
Right?
You just don't want to deal with your kid.
And that's why you're doing it.
And this is the kind of terrifying truth about some parents out there, and not just a few, that they just don't want anything to do with their own kids.
They don't want to raise their kids.
They don't want to spend time with their kids.
They don't want to play with their kids.
They don't want to talk to their kids.
They don't want to read to them.
They don't want to do anything.
They don't want to engage with their kids.
They just don't want to.
So they want the kid to go away and be occupied by something else.
You know, why even have kids, if that's the case?
If you have no desire to actually raise a child, then why do you have kids to begin with?
Good question.
Fortunately, there's this movement in the opposite direction, too, and it's a movement that every parent should be a part of.
And we, you know, there's a, there's a gray area here.
I'll admit that it's, um, you're probably not going to bring your child all the way into adulthood without, without them ever owning a smartphone.
Certainly they're going to own a phone of some kind before then.
And, uh, it is true that you want to, the difficulty here is that you want to introduce them If you don't introduce them to this technology, then they'll be introduced to it on their own out in the world, and you'd rather introduce it yourself to maybe help train them to have good habits related to this technology.
And so you could have some discussion about when is best to start that process, but six years old ain't it.
Ten years old, not it.
Right?
Pretty clearly.
Like many of you this summer, I intend to spend more time with my family, getting outside, traveling, letting go of some of my routine.
But one routine I won't be letting go of is my prayer routine.
I'll continue my daily habit of prayer with HALO, the number one prayer app in the world.
This month, HALO will be launching a new challenge, Witness to Hope, the life of St.
John Paul II.
Guided by Jim Caviezel, my senior Shea and Jackie Angel, This challenge walks through the life of this incredible saint from his childhood in Poland, living through Nazi occupation, to his religious life during the Cold War and his papacy at the turn of the millennium.
Learn what St.
John Paul II meant when he said, You can download the app for free at hallow.com slash Matt Walsh.
Set prayer reminders and track your progress along the way.
that Christ has not already conquered.
There is no cross to bear that Christ has not already carried for us,
does not bear with us now.
Be not afraid.
You can download the app for free at hallow.com/mattwalsh.
Set prayer reminders and track your progress along the way.
Hallow is truly transformative.
We'll help you connect with your faith on a deeper level.
So what are you waiting for?
Download the Hello app today at hello.com slash Matt Walsh, hello.com slash Matt Walsh for an exclusive three-month free trial of all 6,000 prayers and meditations.
The left is actively trying to destroy everything that makes this country great and the 2024 election is our last chance to stop them.
At The Daily Wire, we're not just complaining about it, we're actually doing something and now we're giving you a chance to join the fight.
Here's the deal, 47% off annual Daily Wire Plus memberships.
Why 47%?
Because in a few hours, the guys who's going to be our 47th president is accepting the GOP nomination.
Connect the dots.
That's where we get the number from.
This is your ticket to content that actually tells the truth.
A concept that mainstream media abandoned years ago.
With this membership, you get shows that don't bow to the woke mob, podcasts that challenge leftist insanity, and news that isn't filtered through a socialist lens.
Go to dailywire.com, use code FIGHT at checkout to get 47% off with our presidential deal.
Let's be clear, while you're deciding, the left is plotting their next move to undermine our values.
We cannot afford to sit on the sidelines.
Go to dailywire.com, use code FIGHT and save 47% and join us as we fight the left and build a future.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
[MUSIC]
There are some people who might consider me to be slightly right of
center in my politics.
I admit that.
But even so, today, in the name of bipartisanship, a value that, as you know, I hold near and dear to my heart, I feel called to defend President Joe Biden.
Unlike so many others, I think Joe Biden should stay in this race.
He should soldier on, and I want to explain why.
Now, as you probably noticed, this has been an incredibly bad week for Biden, which is a change of pace from last week, which was extremely bad for Biden.
And that, of course, was a major shift from the week before, which was stupendously bad.
It's been different flavors of bad for quite some time.
This week, Biden tried to turn things around with a few public appearances and interviews, but it didn't help much because, according to many of his critics, he performed poorly, mostly due to his inability to say, you know, words.
On Wednesday, High-ranking Democrat Adam Schiff joined the chorus calling for Biden to drop out of the race on the same day, according to a report by ABC Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, also privately urged Biden to step aside.
And this comes in the same week when a major poll finds that half of Democrat voters don't believe that Biden is mentally fit to be president.
And then with the other half, only half of them are extremely confident in his mental fitness.
The other half of that half are only somewhat confident.
So to them, he might be mentally fit, or he might have the sentience of a sea sponge.
They aren't sure.
To make matters worse, last night it was announced that Biden is now suffering through his 97th bout with COVID.
He, I guess, skipped his weekly booster shot again.
This is what happens.
Coincidentally enough, the COVID announcement comes just hours after an interview was released where Biden conceded for the first time that the only thing that would make him drop out of the race is a medical condition.
Will this be the medical condition that does it?
Some are speculating.
There's no question that it's a serious medical crisis.
COVID can, after all, make you very sniffly.
It leads to many, many sniffles.
I had some sniffles a few weeks ago myself, and I don't know if it was COVID because I didn't take a test because it's the year 2024, but the sniffles were bad.
It was almost as bad as being nearly assassinated, in fact, and they made that exact point on MSNBC last night.
Watch.
Here's the question that I have on that.
These two men are both elderly.
Donald Trump is an elderly man who, for whatever reason, was given nine seconds to take an iconic photo op during an active shooter situation.
Weird situation, we'll figure that out one day.
But his survival of that and bouncing right back and going right to his convention is being conveyed in the media world as a sign of strength.
This current president of the United States is 81 years old and has COVID.
Should he be fine in a couple of days?
Doesn't that convey exactly the same thing?
That he's strong enough, older than Trump, to have gotten something that used to really be Fatal to people his age.
So if he does fine out of it and comes back and is able to do rallies, isn't that exactly the same?
It should.
I mean, it's not exactly the same.
It's not the same incident, but it's an elderly man coming through out of an illness.
It should.
Well, they're right.
You know, getting a cold is exactly the same as getting shot in the head.
It's no different.
I mean, I make this point to my wife every time I get a cold.
I've basically been shot.
For all intents and purposes, this cold is the same thing as getting shot, is what I say to my wife.
And she always says, stop being a wimp.
You're exaggerating.
And I say, well, that's a really insensitive thing to say to someone who's just been shot.
Anyway, the point is this.
All of the people telling Joe Biden to drop out of the race are wrong.
Many conservatives on my side of the aisle also claim that Biden is unfit and should step down.
But I really think that you all should stop saying that.
Seriously, stop saying that.
Can you please stop?
What are you doing?
I for one believe that Biden needs to keep running and take this thing all the way to November.
I am rooting for Biden to conquer COVID once again, as he has thousands of times in the past, and stay in this race no matter what.
Don't drop out.
Don't pass the torch to anyone.
Stay in, Joe.
I believe in you.
Now listen, Joe, all these people telling you to drop out, they're all a bunch of elitists.
They've always looked down on working class guys like you.
Normal, everyday Americans like you who've held national political office since the 1870s.
They've always doubted you, Joe.
Don't listen to them.
It's ageism is what it is.
They say you're too old to be president?
Please!
I mean, my great uncle Fred was sharp as a tack until he was 94.
He walked around on his own, fastened his Velcro shoes by himself.
He was a great Parcheesi player, even into his 90s.
So why can't you still be president?
The people are with you, Joe.
They believe in you.
They're excited about you.
I hear it all the time.
Every time I go out in public, I hear people buzzing about Biden.
Just yesterday, I was having a conversation with my mailman, and he looked at me and said, old Joe is a fighter.
We'll never force him out of the race.
And I nodded my head and said, oh, you mean fighting Joe?
Ain't no man pushing him around.
That's when a guy walking by stopped and said, are you guys talking about Joe Bulldog Biden?
Man, oh man, that guy's something else.
I sure hope he stays in the race for the sake of democracy.
And just then, someone driving past stopped their car.
They hopped out and said, hey, are you folks chatting about Scranton Joe from Scranton, Pennsylvania?
Gee whiz, that old dog knows how to get things done.
And then we all laughed and gave each other high fives.
That's a real thing that happened in real life.
And that's what this is all about.
Joe Biden needs to stay in the race to protect democracy.
He's the only one who can do it.
Because he's the only one who can beat Trump.
Forget what literally every poll says.
The polls are ageist too.
Of course they're bigoted against the 81-year-old in favor of the 78-year-old.
Joe, you can beat Trump.
And you must.
Because we all know that if people democratically elect Trump, it will be an assault on democratic elections.
If anyone but you wins, Joe, it's the death of democracy.
You know that.
I know that.
And that's all that matters.
Don't give up now, Joe.
Stay in.
Keep going.
Keep running.
Why give up when you're so close to the finish line?
Sure, you're not as young and spry as you used to be, but that doesn't matter.
Remember, slow and steady wins the race.
And that's you.
Maybe not steady, but, you know, the first part anyway.
Slow.
Slow wins the race.
Don't listen to the critics.
Stay on course.
Unless Kamala Harris would really replace you on the ticket, in which case, yeah, you should step aside.
Don't be racist.
But if you'd be replaced by anyone else, anyone who can, like, speak and think, then you should stay exactly where you are.
I believe in you.
Most importantly, you believe in yourself.
And that's all that matters.
Which is why all the people calling for Joe Biden to drop out of the race are today cancelled.
