Ep. 1466 - FBI’s Shocking Crime Cover-Up Exposed. It's Worse Than You Think
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the Kamala Harris campaign has been telling us that violent crime declined under her watch. That's what the FBI data showed. Well, it's just been revealed that the FBI data was completely wrong. This is a major scandal that isn't getting the attention it deserves. Also, Kamala was interviewed by Bret Baier on Fox yesterday. Her performance was atrocious, even by her standards. And, Jerry Seinfeld has had an epiphany. He now says that, actually, the woke scolds aren't ruining comedy, as he'd previously claimed.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4bEQDy6
Ep.1466
- - -
DailyWire+:
My hit documentary “Am I Racist?” is coming to DailyWire+ on October 28th! Head to https://dailywire.com/subscribe to become a member today.
Make The Daily Wire your hub for election coverage and tune in November 5th for live, real-time poll results and analysis! Join now at https://dailywire.com/subscribe
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
American Financing - Call American Financing Today at (800) 906-2440 OR visit https://AmericanFinancing.net/Walsh Disclaimer: NMLS182334, https://nmlsconsumeraccess.org
Grand Canyon University - Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University: https://www.gcu.edu
Helix Sleep - Get an exclusive discount at https://helixsleep.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 Walsh Show, the Kamala Harris campaign has been telling us that violent crime declined under her watch.
That's what the FBI data had showed.
Well, it's just been revealed that the FBI data was completely wrong.
This is a major scandal that isn't getting the attention it deserves.
Also, Kamala was interviewed by Brett Baer on Fox yesterday.
Her performance was atrocious, even by her standards.
And Jerry Seinfeld has had an epiphany.
He now says that actually, the woke scolds aren't ruining comedy, as he had previously claimed.
We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Walsh Show.
The wait is almost over.
On October 28th, my hit comedy, Am I Racist?
It's finally coming to Daily Wire Plus.
That's right, the number one documentary of the decade will be available for streaming exclusively on Daily Wire Plus.
If you're not a Daily Wire Plus member, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code DEI for 35% off new annual memberships right now.
Let's talk about the economy.
It's still a dumpster fire for many of us, thanks to the incompetence of our leaders.
But here's a rare bit of good news.
The Fed has finally dropped interest rates.
So if you want to put your family in a better financial position, now is the time to act.
Listen up, homeowners.
If you've been forced to put everyday expenses on credit cards just to get by, American Financing has a solution for you.
They're helping thousands of families just like yours get out from under that crushing debt by tapping into their home's equity.
It's your money and you should be able to use it.
American Financing is saving their borrowers over $800 a month on average.
That's like getting a $10,000 raise at work without having to learn any corporate newspeak.
And it costs absolutely nothing to find out how much you can save right now.
They're moving fast, too.
They're closing some loans in as little as 10 days.
And if you start today, you might not even have to make next month's mortgage payment.
Imagine that, keeping your hard-earned money away from the banks for a change.
There's no better time than now to turn your financial situation around.
Don't wait for the government to fix things.
We all know how that goes.
Take control yourself.
Call American Financing today at 800-906-2440.
That's 800-906-2440.
Or visit AmericanFinancing.net slash Walsh.
NMLS 182-334 and NMLS ConsumerAccess.org.
Do it now before the next economic crisis hits.
NMLS 182-334 and NMLS ConsumerAccess.org.
There was a claim that the toothpaste company Colgate used to make all the time on television.
You probably are familiar with it.
They said that 80% of dentists recommend Colgate.
Now, technically, the figure was accurate.
Colgate did send around a survey, and when they got the survey back, 80% of dentists had indeed indicated that they recommended Colgate.
But ultimately, the advertising regulators came down pretty hard on Colgate and forced them to pull the ad off the air.
And they did that because Colgate left out an important piece of information, which is that The survey allowed dentists to recommend multiple brands.
So yes, 80% of dentists did recommend Colgate, but 80% of dentists also recommended Colgate's competitors.
Now we're bombarded with misrepresentations like this so often from politicians, advertisers, and so on, that pretty much everyone understands that statistics are very often misleading at best.
That's why we have the famous quote, there are three kinds of lies, lies, damn lies, and statistics.
But Even given that baseline of skepticism that we all have, it's still very easy to fall into the trap of assuming that some statistics are reliable.
So take the murder rate, for example.
That's the number of murders that occur divided by the population.
And you'd think that it'd be pretty hard for the government to fudge that kind of data.
After all, if somebody gets murdered, the odds are very high that someone's going to notice it and file a report, unlike crimes like shoplifting or assault, which often go unreported, and for shoplifting oftentimes undetected.
And also people know that the DA won't do anything about it, so they don't report it.
But murder is still prosecuted, even in places like San Francisco or New York for now.
So when the FBI declared last month that violent crimes, including murders, had declined for two years in a row, it was natural for a lot of people to take that claim seriously.
Democrats immediately used it as a talking point.
They said that it was proof that Donald Trump was wrong when he said during the debate that this country has become more dangerous under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
Here's that moment one more time.
Watch.
Crime is down all over the world except here.
Crime here is up and through the roof.
Despite their fraudulent statements that they made, crime in this country is through the roof.
And we have a new form of crime.
It's called migrant crime.
And it's happening at levels that nobody thought possible.
President Trump, as you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is actually coming down in this country.
Excuse me, the FBI defrauded.
They were defrauding statements.
They didn't include the worst cities.
Now, when I covered this at the time, I didn't take any issue with the FBI's actual data.
They claimed that they had finally incorporated the vast majority of police departments into their calculations, and we kind of took them at their word on that.
Instead, I pointed out that the FBI's data, by its own terms, is incomplete and therefore misleading.
It's a bit like the Colgate ad.
It tells you something that's technically true, but it doesn't tell you anywhere near the full story.
Specifically, the FBI's data only counts crimes that are reported to law enforcement.
And there's a lot of evidence that people don't report most crimes to law enforcement.
In fact, that evidence comes directly from the DOJ. According to the DOJ survey of crime victims last year, less than 50% of violent victimizations were reported to the police.
Less than 33% of property crime victimizations were reported.
Only 43% of robberies were reported.
Now, a relatively large number of auto thefts were reported, more than 70%, presumably because people needed to file those claims in order to get an insurance payout.
Otherwise, we can assume that no one would have reported those crimes either, because no one expects prosecutors or law enforcement to do anything about it at this point.
But the DOJ's survey of crime victims doesn't include murder victims for the obvious reason that murder victims can't answer the survey.
So last month on this point, I conceded that the FBI's murder data and only their murder data was probably accurate.
After all, how could the FBI and local law enforcement agencies possibly be undercounting the amount of murders that are being reported?
These are not easy crimes to cover up.
Well, it turns out that I shouldn't have conceded even that point.
Because even on this basic, straightforward statistic, which measures how many people are getting killed in this country, our federal government has been cooking the numbers.
And they've been doing it in a way that makes it very clear that they're trying to hide information from the public.
This is not an innocent error.
It is deliberate and purposeful and malicious.
Real Clear Investigations has just reported that, without alerting anyone, The FBI has just revised its violent crime statistics for 2022.
And the new data shows that thousands more rapes, robberies, and murders occurred in that year as compared to what they previously had told us.
The FBI's original claim, which was that violent crime had fallen by more than 2% in 2022, has now been revised.
Now they say that violent crime actually increased by 4.5% that year.
Specifically, somehow the FBI now says that it missed nearly 8,000 rapes, 33,000 robberies, 37,000 aggravated assaults and 1,700 murders in 2022.
How did that happen exactly?
I mean, these are massive revisions.
But the most incredible one is that last figure.
How do you miss 1,700 murders?
I mean, we're not talking about one or two cold cases that slipped through the cracks.
These aren't people who just disappeared and the FBI found their body six months later or whatever.
People were killed and the police were alerted.
And then they just weren't included in the initial count we received from the FBI. The same count that was used to discredit Donald Trump as a liar during the debate.
Well, here's how Real Clear Investigations explained what happened.
Quote, The FBI's crime stats revisions reveal how much guesswork is involved and even the final numbers often seized on by politicians.
The FBI doesn't simply count reported crimes.
Instead, it offers estimates by extrapolating data from police departments that report only partial year data.
The Bureau also makes estimates for cities that report no data.
The FBI's method of generating these estimates changes over time and it affects the figures they report.
Yes, you heard that correctly.
The FBI extrapolates from partial data, and they also just make up estimates from cities that report no data at all.
According to Jeffrey Anderson, who ran the DOJ's Bureau of Justice Statistics from 2017 to 2021, quote, the FBI's processes, such as how it tries to estimate unreported figures, has long been a black box even to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Department of Justice's actual statistical agency.
Now, we're meant to assume that this is one of those innocent mistakes that only ever goes in the same direction, coincidentally.
It's like that jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics just a few weeks ago, the one that overestimated job growth by about 800,000 jobs.
We're supposed to conclude that these statistical errors aren't deliberate and that the federal government isn't trying to cook the books in order to help Kamala Harris's failing campaign.
But there's a very clear reason to doubt that explanation, especially in the case of this FBI revision.
And that's because the FBI's revised data, which shows all the violent crimes they missed, wasn't announced anywhere.
The FBI did a stealth edit on their own report three weeks ago.
Didn't tell anybody about it.
And it's only coming to light now because the investigative journalists at Real Clear Investigations noticed this line at the bottom of the FBI's data, quote, The 2022 violent crime rate has been updated for inclusion in CIUS 2023.
Now, nowhere did the FBI explain what the update showed exactly.
They didn't hold a press conference and explain why they undercounted tens of thousands of serious crimes that impacted very real victims.
Instead, on a hunch, real clear investigations had to pull up the charts and the graphics and do a comparison.
Even when the FBI released a press release last month claiming that violent crime had fallen again in 2023, they didn't mention that their statistics from 2022 were completely wrong.
So obviously this looks a lot like malice.
And of course we have no reason whatsoever to trust that their data from 2023 is remotely accurate either.
We could probably wait another year and then we'll get the update on those numbers.
So we're at the point now where the government can't be trusted to tell us anything.
Even information as basic as the number of Americans who are being murdered every year.
And if they can't get that right, or if they're willing to lie about it, Then there's absolutely no reason to trust what these people say on anything.
To trust what they say when they say that the earth is getting too hot or that illegal immigrants don't really commit that many crimes or anything at all.
We are ruled by people who are constantly finding new ways to discredit themselves.
Now, if there's anything amusing about this whole situation, it's that there is one crime statistic that, according to the FBI, keeps going up, like clockwork.
And that is the number of hate crimes in this country.
When I looked into the hate crimes reporting system earlier this year, I found that it's completely meaningless.
There are no standards at all.
The reported incidents don't even have to be crimes in some cases.
And yet the figure always manages to go up.
It's never undercounted.
And we all know why that is.
The federal government can use hate crimes as a political tool.
They want to report more hate crimes so they can punish all those dreaded MAGA Republicans who are beating up Asians at 2am in San Francisco.
But in an election year, they want to say that violent crimes generally are going down.
So they just make up those numbers too.
That means, among other things, that the so-called fact-checking industry...
It should just be disbanded immediately.
It's no use citing government reports when they're worse than useless.
We should never have another fact check during a live presidential debate ever again.
It also means that if Democrats really care about misinformation, as they so often claim to, then they should demand the immediate dismantling of these government agencies that are apparently incapable of telling the truth.
The misinformation, as always, is coming from inside the House.
Now, to be very clear about this, they just tried to memory hole the murders of nearly 2,000 Americans.
That's what they were just caught doing.
And even if you think that it was unintentional, it's still very clear that they tried to cover up their alleged mistake.
That's how little they care about American citizens.
They'll deny you police protection, and then they'll lie to the public about your death if you're murdered.
Some people might call that depraved.
They might call it immoral, even treasonous.
But for the Biden-Harris administration, it's just the cost of doing business in an election year.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Grand Canyon University is a private Christian university in beautiful Phoenix, Arizona, It believes that we are endowed by a creator with certain unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
GCU believes in equal opportunity and that the American dream starts with purpose.
GCU equips you to serve others in a way that promotes human flourishing and creates a ripple effect of transformation for generations to come.
By honoring your career calling, you impact your family, your friends, and your community.
Change the world for good by putting others before yourself to glorify God.
Whether your pursuit involves a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree, GCU's online, on-campus, and hybrid learning environments are designed to help you achieve your unique academic, personal, and professional goals.
With 350 academic programs as of June 2024, GCU meets you where you are and provides a path to help you fulfill your dreams.
The pursuit to serve others is yours.
Let it flourish.
Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University.
Private, Christian, affordable.
Visit gcu.edu.
Well, as you know, hopefully by now, Am I Racist, my new film, number one documentary of the decade, is coming to Daily Wire on October 28th.
So you can stream it at home on October 28th, exclusively on the Daily Wire.
You can stream it Globally, too.
You know, one thing, I get a lot of questions from people in other countries around the world that have been waiting to see this film.
And this is when you can finally see it.
So the film is coming to Daily Wire on October 28th.
But if you go to dailywire.com right now, you can find a lot of other great stuff, including other, you know, What is a Woman or other films.
But you can also find right now merchandise for Am I Racist, including this one that I'm very excited about.
This, to me, is this is the best piece of merchandise we've had.
You know, in the Matt Walsh merch store, really in the Daily Wire merch store, period, in a long time.
And also, this is better than that other board game that that other host sells.
Did I just rip off his idea?
Did I see how successful his game was and say, I need one for myself?
I'm not going to say I didn't do that.
But this is the Am I Racist game.
Games are fun if there are stakes.
You need to have stakes in a game.
And the stakes here are pretty high, because this is basically a trivia game.
But if you get the trivia answer wrong, then you're racist.
That's basically the way the game works.
I'll show you.
So there are a lot of...
It's a whole bunch of cards, and they all have facts, stereotypes, that have to do with different races.
And you have to kind of figure out if it's right or if it's racist.
And like I said, if you're wrong, if you get it wrong, then it turns out you're racist.
So this is a high-stakes gamble.
So just for an example, I'll give you one.
We'll do a quick round of trivia.
I'll just give you one right now.
We'll find out when you're playing at home if you are right or racist.
Here's the fact.
In the Middle Eastern country, Agrabah, a woman accused of adultery, is punishable to death by stoning.
Now, is that true?
Or is that a vicious, slanderous, racist lie?
Well, then you flip it around and you find out the answer.
Well, if you said that that's true, then you're racist.
Because it turns out that Agrabah is a fictitious country in the story of Aladdin.
And you thought that was true.
I read that and you said, oh yeah, Agrabah, they do stone people to death.
Yeah, that sounds like an Arab country.
They probably would do that in an Arab country.
That's what you were thinking to yourself, weren't you?
You racist scumbag.
How dare you?
And you know something?
They don't even stone women to death in Agrabah, in Aladdin.
That's not part of the story, is it?
So now we're slandering Aladdin, too.
We're going to have a Disney on our ass in no time here.
Okay, so that's the game.
You can go to dailywire.com and find out if you're racist.
Yesterday we talked about Kamala allegedly mulling an appearance on Joe Rogan.
And I think that it's safe to say that after her Fox interview last night, Rogan is probably off the table.
Because she sat down for an interview with Brett Baer.
And something that, as we talked about yesterday...
She never would have done this unless she was desperate.
I mean, there's no way that back in August, sitting down for a Fox News interview was something that they considered to be in the cards.
But they're doing it now because it's a Hail Mary pass.
It's the kind of thing that you lob into the air if you feel like you have no choice.
High risk proposition.
And in this case, the risk really did not pay off.
It was...
Pretty much a disaster.
She did as bad as you would expect, if not worse.
So let's go through some of these clips from this interview.
We'll start with this.
Here they are.
This is how the interview began.
Talking about the border crisis.
Let's watch.
How many illegal immigrants would you estimate your administration has released into the country over the last three and a half years?
Well, I'm glad you raised the issue of immigration because I agree with you.
It is a topic of discussion that people want to rightly have.
And you know what I'm going to talk about right now.
Yeah, but just a number.
Do you think it's one million, three million?
Brett, let's just get to the point, okay?
The point is that we have a broken immigration system that needs to be repaired.
So your Homeland Security Secretary said that 85% of apprehensions...
I'm not finished.
We have an immigration system that needs to be...
It's a rough estimate of 6 million people have been released into the country.
And let me just finish.
I'll get to the question, I promise you.
I was beginning to answer.
And when you came into office, your administration immediately reversed a number of Trump border policies.
Most significantly, the policy that required illegal immigrants to be detained through deportation, either in the U.S. or in Mexico.
And you switched that policy.
They were released from custody awaiting trial.
So instead, included in those were a large number of single men, adult men, who went on to commit heinous crimes.
So, looking back, do you regret the decision to terminate Remain in Mexico at the beginning of your administration?
At the beginning of our administration, within practically hours of taking the oath, the first bill that we offered Congress before we worked on infrastructure, before the Inflation Reduction Act, before the Chips and Science Act, before the Bipartisan Safety Communities Act.
So you basically get how this went.
She filibustered It's funny she said in that, when she started to answer the question or not answer it.
So let's get to the point.
But getting to the point is exactly, of course, what she didn't do and never does.
For her, answering a question is always a game of frantically avoiding the point at all costs.
And she's not the only politician in the country who handles interviews that way.
Most of them do.
She's just really bad at it.
She's very bad at it.
So that's how it went.
And Brett Baer tried valiantly to get her to answer the question.
And she would ramble and filibuster her.
The only difference is that Brett was really the first interviewer who has ever called her out on this and not allowed her to just get away with it.
And this dynamic also was very evident when she was asked about Biden's cognitive decline.
This is maybe the most striking moment in the interview.
Let's watch.
You call Donald Trump.
He's misguided.
You say now he's unstable.
He is unstable.
He's not well.
You say he's mentally not stable.
He's not stable.
Let me ask you this.
You told many interviewers that Joe Biden was on his game, that ran around circles on his staff.
When did you first notice that President Biden's mental faculties appeared diminished?
Joe Biden...
I have watched from the Oval Office to the Situation Room.
And he has the judgment and experience to do exactly what he has done in making very important decisions on behalf of the American people.
There were no concerns raised?
Joe Biden is not on the ballot.
I understand.
But you talked about it.
And Donald Trump is.
After George Clooney said within a few minutes of talking to President Biden at a fundraiser that he thought this was not the same Joe Biden that we saw on the debate stage.
Donald Trump is on the ballot.
I understand.
You met with him at least once a week for three and a half years.
You didn't have any concerns?
I think the American people have a concern about Donald Trump, which is why the people who know him best, including leaders of our national security community, have all spoken out, even people who worked for him in the Oval Office.
First of all, it's amazing that this is the first time she's ever been directly asked that question.
She pushed Biden out, took over the nomination, and has never been asked.
Think about this.
When she refuses, as she always does, to take accountability for the disasters of the Biden administration, when she just dismisses any suggestion that the last four years count for anything, the implied reasoning behind that is that the president had dementia.
She's not going to come out and say that, but Her actual argument, we all know, is that, well, the last four years don't count because the guy at the top is senile.
And you can't hold that against me.
So that's kind of the...
And any of her voters, however many she ends up having, that's also their...
Reasoning.
That's going to be their reasoning.
Anyone who's going to give her another four years, it's going to be under the assumption that, yeah, well, but she, the president, this is not her fault.
The guy is xenon.
And in spite of that, she's never asked about it until today.
And you heard how just shifty and dishonest her answer was.
But my favorite moment was probably this one.
More than 70% of people tell the country is on the wrong track.
They say the country is on the wrong track.
If it's on the wrong track, that track follows three and a half years of you being vice president and President Biden being president.
That is what they're saying, 79% of them.
Why are they saying that?
If you're turning the page, you've been in office for three and a half years.
And Donald Trump has been running for office.
But you've been the person holding the office, Madam Vice President.
You and I both know what I'm talking about.
You and I both know what I'm talking about.
I actually don't.
What are you talking about?
What I'm talking about is that over the last decade, people have become...
But you're the lever of power.
But listen, over the last decade, it is clear to me, and certainly the Republicans who are on stage with me...
So that was probably my favorite part.
Come on, you and I both know what I'm talking about.
Actually, I don't.
I don't know what the hell you're talking about.
And you speak for all of us, Brett.
Nobody knows what the hell she's talking about.
Least of all, does Kamala know what Kamala's talking about?
All she can do is reflexively pivot to Trump.
Blame him, even though she's been in office, not him.
And it's a pathetic...
It was a pathetic, weak, pitiful performance.
A very unimpressive performance.
And that's the word I think that best fits Kamala.
I was thinking as I watched these clips that she is an exceedingly unimpressive person.
I think she is the least impressive, the most unimpressive presidential candidate in American history.
And I think that that's not hyperbole.
I mean, there have been some duds, of course, but she's the most unimpressive.
There's just nothing formidable about this person at all.
She has no impressive traits.
She's like the Carolina Panthers of politicians or something like that.
And that's almost worse than being, say, the Browns.
The Browns are a dysfunctional disaster all the time.
And you could say that dysfunctional disaster describes Kamala, but I think it's more accurate to say that she's just this dull, bad...
Kind of blah all the time.
It's just nothing.
A very low ceiling, let's say.
So if she's going to smash the glass ceiling, it better be no more than four feet off the ground because that's as high as she can get.
And it's different from, say, like Barack Obama was a bad president, but a very bad president.
When all is said and done, he may go down as the worst president of all time.
I mean, the other competition, of course, is Joe Biden.
But when you look at the pivot point of Barack Obama's presidency, his eight years, and just what a disaster it's been for the country and the culture.
But on a personal level, there were some impressive things about him.
He had rhetorical skills.
He had charisma.
He George Bush, also not a very impressive man, but at least had a kind of swagger and personality to him.
Like, even our bad presidents had traits that explained how they became president.
You could look at them, and even if you don't like them and you think they're terrible, you could say, okay, yeah, I can see how that happened.
I can see how it happened.
But with Kamala, and she's not president yet, thank God, but still, you look at this person, and there's just nothing there.
Incredibly unimpressive.
Joe Biden would be second place on the list of the most unimpressive.
But at least he used to have political skills.
He doesn't anymore because he has dementia.
But Kamala, I mean, what are her skills?
Really, what are her...
Even if you're the...
You're dyed-in-the-wool Kamala supporter, you're going to vote for her.
Even to you, I would pose that question non-rhetorically.
What are her great skills?
What's the most impressive thing about this person?
Really?
And that's what comes across.
Which is why I think, as I've said before, I think the campaign, they wanted to keep her off, keep her away from interviews, keep her away from unscripted moments.
And they wanted to do what they were doing for the first couple weeks of the campaign, where she only did the rallies and they brought the celebrities out.
And, you know, they were building this hype train around her that had nothing to do with her specifically, but they were just kind of turning her into this fictional character.
Who you never even saw, except at the rallies when she was delivering a scripted speech.
And they obviously wanted to do that.
Their plan was to try to, if they could have got away with doing that for the whole three months before the election, they would have.
And I think it was a strategic mistake.
I think they should have just, politically, strategically, they should have just stuck with that.
Don't do a single interview.
Don't do a single press conference.
Only do the rallies.
Have the celebrities come out and just do that.
Just coast on the vibes and try to do it for three months.
That was their best chance.
And yeah, she would have got killed for it by people like me.
Conservative media would have continued to criticize her harshly for not doing any interviews and being scared.
But, you know, this is what happens.
You know, it's like the quote, whoever, it's better to say nothing and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
And I think that, you know, she probably should have taken that to heart, but it's too late now.
So, let's flip it around to Trump.
He had a town hall on Fox News yesterday, and there was one moment from that that I think is notable.
Let's watch that.
Up and down the ballot, how many of you are worried about biological men and boys competing against women and girls in sports?
Just show me.
That's almost the entire, that is the entire room.
And I know you have a question.
I do.
By the way, excuse me, it's so crazy.
It's so crazy.
Your question, your name and your hometown.
My name is Linda and I'm from Milton, Georgia, but originally Brooklyn, New York.
I'd get that in there.
My question is, how do you plan on addressing the transgender issue in women's sports?
I have nine grandchildren, six of them female, all playing sports, and we are very concerned for their safety, not just on the field and the courts, but in their locker rooms as well.
It's such an easy question, and everybody in the room, and you know that answer.
We're not going to let it happen.
You look, just yesterday they had a volleyball match.
Did you see that?
Yeah.
Where a person that transitioned, okay?
We have to be very careful because this can terminate your political career if you say it slightly off, all right?
But transitioned from man to female.
I was on a volleyball.
And I saw the slam.
It was a slam.
I never saw a ball hit so hard.
Hit the girl on the head.
But other people, even in volleyball, they've been permanently, I mean, they've been really hurt badly.
Women playing men.
But you don't have to do the volleyball.
We stop it.
We stop it.
We absolutely stop it.
You can't have it.
It's a man playing in the game.
I mean, physically, from a muscular state, even if it was a little bit less, maybe they do all sorts of tests and drugs and everything else.
Look at what's happened in swimming.
Look at the records that are being broken.
So how do you stop it?
Do you go to the sports leagues?
Do you go to the Olympic councils?
You just ban it.
The president bans it.
You just don't let it happen.
Good answer.
I mean, it really is that.
Well, there are different levels of the problem.
So when you say ban it, there's different...
But ultimately, it's probably going to be a legislative thing.
But it is as simple.
You just ban it.
I mean, he's right.
It should not be allowed.
It should be banned on every possible level where you can ban men from competing in women's sports.
And by the way, it's not even the law, right, when you're putting this in law or into policy.
The policy is not, oh, trans-identified men are not allowed to compete in women's sports.
That's not what the law says.
You don't need to say anything about trans in the law.
Because trans actually has nothing to do with it.
That's the whole point.
Like, what you identify as is irrelevant.
It's not...
We don't...
The law...
It doesn't matter to the law what you identify as.
The law and the policy should be that women's...
That female...
Sports are...
Most of these sports at most levels are sex-segregated.
And so you play on the sport that aligns with your biological sex.
That's it.
And...
Doesn't mean trans, quote-unquote, trans people are banned from sports.
They can still play sports.
But you just have to be on the team that aligns with your biological sex, regardless of what you identify as.
It really is amazing, and I know I kind of make this point a lot, but it's worth marveling at just how thoroughly we have won on this issue.
I mean, we've really crushed...
Like, we've crushed them on this issue.
When you've got questions like this being asked on Fox News, and the whole audience is against men and women's sports, and they're, you know, cheering for it, and the Republican candidate is speaking out against it so clearly and forcefully, yeah, you just ban it, right?
That shows you how much we've won, because none of that would have happened or did happen in 2016 or even 2020.
So it's really been, over the last four years, some of us have been fighting on this issue for more than four years, but it's been over the last four years that these great strides have been made, and we have totally shifted the Overton window on this thing.
And so for the trans activists, they're truly fighting a losing battle.
And I've been saying now for a while that I think that on the issue of transitioning kids and the issue of women's sports, the trans activists are losing those issues and they will lose them completely.
But I've also said that on the larger issue of trans ideology, like that's going to be a longer term fight.
I mean, that isn't going anywhere.
But I actually think I revise that, I think, and say now that Yeah, we're protecting kids from transitioning, protecting women's sports.
I mean, these issues, it's been, for team sanity, it's been one victory after another, after another, after another.
And the trans activists are totally, it's not going to turn around for them, it just isn't.
And they're losing it, and it will be totally lost.
But I also think that I have an even more optimistic view, actually, now that I think that even the broader fight against trans ideology that they're losing there, too.
And ten years from now, as a trans activist, even a thing?
Or, you know, there might be a few, but it's fringe, fringe, fringe stuff that no one's talking about or paying attention to.
I think that could be the case ten years, even five years from now.
And This is kind of more evidence of that.
This is sort of staying on this topic, but going to another story.
New York Post has this.
I'm reading now.
I'm going to read the article from the New York Post, just reading it verbatim.
This is their language.
A transgender woman convicted of killing a couple to try to get money for her sex change ended up having the procedure covered by California taxpayers thanks to radical policies backed by VP Kamala Harris.
The notorious so-called yacht killer, who was born John Jacobson Jr., and now goes by Skylar DeLyon, is currently serving life without parole after initially being sentenced to death for the slaying of Thomas Hawks, 57, and his wife Jackie, 47, in 2004.
DeLyon...
DeLeon 45 Let's just call him Jacobson, actually.
Jacobson duped the couple into letting them and several associates board their 55-foot yacht and take them out on it after feigning interest in purchasing the vessel.
While out at sea, somewhere between Newport Harbor and Santa Catalina, Jacobson used the stun gun to incapacitate the couple and forced them to give up their bank account information and sign over the boat's title before tying them to the anchor and tossing it overboard.
And this was all done in order to get a sex change operation, and then two decades later, the sex change operation happened, courtesy of the taxpayers.
Okay, so that's the story.
Now, by the way, I was reading the article verbatim, at least initially, and the article uses the biologically incorrect pronoun throughout, refers to the killer as she and her.
But I didn't want to correct that as I was reading, because I want you to see that the New York Post still felt the need to respect the pronoun preferences of a convicted killer.
So that's still happening with the media.
But in spite of the New York Post absurdly participating in this charade for the sake of protecting the feelings of a murderous psychopath, in spite of that, we still see the Overton window shift here.
Because nobody will defend this.
This guy was able to get the taxpayer-funded quote-unquote transition surgery.
He was able to do that thanks to the bureaucrats in the state and the policies they've put in place.
But no voters support this.
I mean, put that up for a referendum.
Should taxpayers be funding sex change operations for inmates in prison?
Even in California, do you think that's going to pass?
I don't think so.
And no Democrat politician at this point will defend it.
Kamala certainly won't.
Now, she did defend it and support it back a few years, back in 2020.
But now she won't.
Because going back to one more clip from the interview last night, Brett Baer asked her about this, about funding sex change operations for criminals, for prisoners.
And here's how she handled that.
Every transgender inmate in the prison system would have access.
So are you still in support of using taxpayer dollars to help prison inmates or detained illegal aliens to transition to another gender?
I will follow the law.
And it's a law that Donald Trump actually followed.
You're probably familiar with, now it's a public report, that under Donald Trump's administration, these surgeries were available to, on a medical necessity basis, to people in the federal prison system.
And I think, frankly, that ad from the Trump campaign is a little bit of like throwing stones when you're living in a glass house.
The Trump aides say that he never advocated for that prison policy and no gender transition surgeries happened during his presidency.
Well, you know what?
You've got to take responsibility for what happened in your administration.
Yeah, no surgeries happened in his pregnancy.
It's in black and white.
Would you still advocate for using taxpayer dollars for gender reassignment surgeries?
I will follow the law.
I think Donald Trump would say he did.
You would have a say as president.
Like I said, I think he spent $20 million on those ads trying to create a sense of fear in the voters because he actually has no plan in this election that is about focusing on the needs of the American people.
So, another amazing moment.
I mean, first of all, she says you're responsible for what happens during your administration, which is a problem for her, you know, because that's the opposite of her message most of the time, that she's not responsible for any of the things that happened during her administration, least of all inflation, the economy, border crisis, crime, all the rest of it.
But, you know, and she says that Trump...
Supported this, and that's not true.
Actually, the Trump campaign, of course, Trump never supported sex change operations for inmates, and this never happened in the federal prison system under Trump, so that's a lie.
But still, the most remarkable thing is that she won't defend it.
Only four years ago, she was out saying proudly, yeah, absolutely, She won't say that.
He gave the inmate sex change operations to yell at him also.
Why am I the only one going in timeout for the sex change operations?
That's what she's doing.
Again, leaving aside the fact that that's not true, it is a tacit admission that she's wrong.
I mean, this is 100% the way you respond when you are agreeing that it's a bad thing.
So, I don't know, what else do you need to see?
When you've got Democrat politicians, even the most radical Democrat politicians, who four years ago considered this a winning political issue.
They thought that this was a winner for them.
That they could make themselves seem tolerant and enlightened and all those sorts of things by going out and supporting sex change operations for inmates, by supporting gender transitions of children and everything else.
And now, only four years later, they are running from it as fast as they can.
They never bring it up.
When was the last time Kamala, on her own, brought up trans issues?
Except maybe in the most sort of opaque way.
Like, in the most kind of general, vague sort of way.
But when was the last time that, on her own, at a rally, in an interview, or wherever, she just...
Brought it up as a point.
They don't because they are embarrassed of it.
And that's how you know.
If you're a trans activist, you know you're in trouble.
You know you're in big trouble because you're losing the fight in state legislatures.
You're even starting to lose in the courts.
And You've lost in the court of public opinion, and now you're losing your own people.
Like, they're ashamed of you.
They are embarrassed of you.
They're looking at you like, okay, yeah, all right.
They want your support.
Yeah, they want you to vote for them, but they're like, they want you to stay over there and, yeah, don't.
That's, uh, okay.
All right, yeah, thanks.
Thanks for your support.
Just stay there.
That's okay.
So that's a bad sign for the trans activists.
But a great sign for humanity.
You know what keeps me up at night?
The state of our country.
But at least I'm not tossing and turning because of my mattress anymore.
That's right, folks.
I'm talking about Helix Sleep.
Now, you might be thinking, Matt, aren't all mattresses basically the same?
Well, that's wrong.
That's liberal thinking right there.
Helix understands that we're all different, unlike the left's one-size-fits-all policies.
They offer 20 unique mattresses, including their Lux and Elite collections for you hardworking Americans who deserve some luxury.
The Helix Plus for you big and tall people and even a Helix Kids mattress.
Overwhelmed by choices?
Well, don't worry.
Helix has a sleep quiz that'll match you with your perfect mattress in under two minutes.
Here's another reason to love Helix.
Their mattresses are fiberglass-free.
Unlike some other brands using fiberglass as a flame retardant, which, by the way, has been causing more problems than Biden's economic policies, Helix owns its manufacturing facility that's entirely fiberglass-free.
So you can sleep easy knowing that you're not inhaling tiny glass particles.
A company that actually cares about your health and doesn't try to slip something dangerous into your home.
Very novel.
So, if you want to sleep like you've never slept before, head on over to helixsleep.com slash Walsh, where for a limited time, Helix is offering up to 20% off all mattress orders.
Just go to helixsleep.com slash Walsh.
That's helixsleep.com slash Walsh.
This is their best offer yet, and it won't last long.
With Helix, better sleep starts now.
On October 28th, my new hit comedy, Am I Racist, is coming home to Daily Wire Plus.
When it hit theaters this September, it immediately became the number one new comedy, and it's now officially the number one documentary of the decade.
That's worth repeating to really irritate our friends on the left.
Am I Racist is the number one documentary of the decade, plus it's verified hot on Rotten Tomatoes with a 97% audience score.
So now my personal journey through the weird wasteland of woke insanity is coming exclusively to Daily Wire Plus October 28th.
Your couch is your front row seat to witness me going undercover to hilariously dismantle DEI. But Daily Wire Plus is the only place you can stream Am I Racist at home, and it all starts October 28th.
If you're not a Daily Wire Plus member, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code DEI for 35% off new annual memberships.
Right now.
Your membership also gets you instant access to the cultural phenomenon What is a Woman?
Streaming now and you'll be the first to watch Am I Racist at Home October 28th only on Daily Wire Plus.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
For our daily cancellation today, we must cancel Jerry Seinfeld.
It's a bit of a sad moment for me.
I've always liked Jerry Seinfeld.
His show was a touch overrated, but still one of the greatest television comedies of all time, no doubt about that.
He hasn't created a solid piece of entertainment, whether a film or a TV show, since Seinfeld went off the air 25 years ago, despite multiple attempts.
But even so...
He's undeniably one of the great comics.
And over the years, he has shown a willingness to speak out against hyper-PC culture and the deleterious effect that it has on comedy.
He spoke out most explicitly in an interview with The New Yorker recently where he said that the extreme left, in his words, is killing comedy.
As far as I can remember, it was the first time that he had directly called out the left.
Now, not exactly an act of bravery.
He's a 70-year-old comedian who's worth over a billion dollars.
So he's not putting much on the line by talking about these issues.
But many of us appreciated it all the same.
That is until the interview he just did with fellow comedian Tom Papa this week, where he backtracked on all of it.
I did an interview.
So there were two things that I have to say I regret saying and that I have to take back.
And I said that the extreme left has suppressed the art of comedy.
I did say that.
Yeah.
That's not true.
It's not true.
No?
No.
Again, let's go back to our solid liquid analogy.
Okay.
And the other thing that I have said about this...
If you're Lindsey Vonn, if you're a champion skier, you can put the gates anywhere you want on the mountain.
She's going to make the gate.
That's comedy.
Whatever the culture is, we make the gate.
You don't make the gate, you're out of the game.
The game is, where is the gate?
How do I make the gate?
And get down the hill the way I want to.
So, does culture change?
And are there things I used to say that I can't say, that everybody's always moving?
Yeah, but that's the biggest, easiest target.
You know, you can't say certain words, you know, whatever they are, versus about groups.
So what?
So these larger cultural themes of this is not considered acceptable, this is not acceptable.
Yeah.
So I don't think...
As I said, the extreme left has done anything to inhibit the art of comedy.
Right.
I'm taking that back now, officially.
They have not.
Right.
Do you like it?
Maybe, maybe not.
It's not my business to like or not like where the culture is at.
Yeah.
It's my business to make the gate.
Wow, what a profile and courage.
An inspiration for the ages, is Jerry Seinfeld.
Now, needless to say, this is a cowardly retreat.
All the more cowardly because of how unnecessary it was.
People talked about his original comments condemning the extreme left for about half a day and then moved on.
At this point, he may as well have said it 600 years ago.
He didn't need to issue any clarification, much less a full retraction and apology.
But he was obviously quite disturbed by the pushback, however mild and fleeting it may have been.
Jerry Seinfeld never had much edge to begin with, but whatever edge he may have had at one point, he has now lost, obviously.
And we've seen this devolution.
And it's been quite sad and tragic.
We've seen it with nearly all of the greatest and most influential comedians and entertainers and cultural figures of his generation, the ones who are still alive.
They've pretty much all retreated and gotten duller and blander with age.
Howard Stern is another prime example.
And we've talked about that many times.
People often lament that George Carlin, because obviously he would be older, he's a generation above Seinfeld, but people often lament that George Carlin isn't around anymore to lampoon the woke insanity.
What they don't understand is that if he was around, he would almost certainly be in the Howard Stern and Jerry Seinfeld camp.
I mean, you should be thanking God.
If you like George Carlin stuff, you should be thanking God he's not around.
He would be doing stand-up sets about how Donald Trump is a threat to democracy.
He'd be doing a hilarious rant about why it's lame to disrespect a person's preferred pronouns.
That would totally be what he would be doing.
That's been the trajectory for nearly all of these people.
Even Bill Burr has gotten distinctly more PC with age, like a lot more.
Now, you would think it would go the opposite way.
As you get older and richer, you'd give less of a damn what anyone says or thinks.
But in most cases, the combination of age and wealth has a neutering effect.
And these guys are comfortable with their place in life.
They're fat and happy.
The last thing they want to do is rock the boat, which is probably why.
Probably why it'd be best if most comedians just retired at 50, so we don't have to see them like this.
It's just sad and pathetic and painful to witness.
And case in point, Seinfeld now says...
That the job of a comedian is to make the gate.
I mean, I can't think of a worse, a more wrong-headed way of explaining what a comedian is supposed to do.
This is coming from a legendary comedian.
But what he says is that the culture sets out the boundaries, draws the course, And a comedian is supposed to operate within those boundaries.
Supposed to navigate the course.
Follow the guideposts.
Stay on the path that the culture has created for you.
Use the words they tell you to use.
Avoid the language they tell you to avoid.
Talk about this subject, not that one.
These things are forbidden.
Avoid those.
This is comedy, according to the brave and bold Jerry Seinfeld.
Comedy is following the rules, making the gates, staying in the lane, driving the speed limit to mixed metaphors.
After doing stand-up comedy for like 50 years, this is Seinfeld's great insight.
Half a century in the business, and he now sounds like a court jester performing a set for Kim Jong-un in North Korea.
Isn't it hilarious?
Isn't it so funny to follow the rules exactly and never offend your audience under any circumstances?
Isn't that cool, kids?
This is what the cool people do.
That's true comedy.
Now, the reality, of course, is the opposite.
The primary job of a comedian, the most essential role of comedy in any society, is not to make the gate and follow the course, but to question why the gate is there and not over there.
Why does the course go this way, but not that way?
You can't find the humor and absurdity in the boundaries if you're not willing to push them.
That doesn't mean that comedy always has to be intentionally outrageous or intentionally offensive just for the sake of it, but it does have to be aware of the ridiculous aspects of the culture, the rules that don't make any sense, and it has to be willing to lampoon those rules, which will always risk upsetting the people who put the rules in place.
This is why the left can't do comedy anymore.
It's why comedians like Bill Burr have gotten much less funny as they've become more liberal.
Walking on the path without questioning it or without venturing off of it, that may be the safest thing, and it may be the easiest.
It's not funny, though.
There's never been a good adventure story about a guy walking on a marked trail from point A to point B and never leaving it.
There's also never been a funny comedy with that premise.
A comedian doesn't just make the gate.
He critiques it.
He questions it.
He makes observations about it.
He points to its idiosyncrasies.
He might even crash directly into it on purpose.
He does anything but unquestioningly follow it.
Otherwise, he is, at best, a boring and lame and redundant comedian.
At worst, he's not a comedian at all, but a propagandist, a whore for the cultural powers that put the gates up in the first place.
And such a pathetic specimen as that might still make us laugh, but we're laughing at him, not with him.
And there is certainly a significant difference between the two, and that is why Jerry Seinfeld is today sadly canceled.
That'll do it for the show today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Talk to you tomorrow.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
The question everyone in America is asking: Am I racist?
Get a Daily Wire Plus membership to see Am I Racist?
This is all I have.
Did you want to?
I can help you guys out.
Go to amiracist.com and sign up now.
I've been told because I'm a white male, kind of at the top of the pile, how do I get down from the top?
