Ep. 1684 - A Foreign Invasion Is Underway, But This Is What Can Be Done To Stop It
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, as a Ugandan commie and a far left con artist from Somalia are on the verge of winning their bids to takeover two major American cities, I want to talk about practical solutions that might prevent this from ever happening again, and turn back the tide on the foreign invasion that has crippled our country. Also, Trump threatens to go in "guns ablazing" to stop the persecution of Christians in Nigeria. Kamala Harris calls for lowering the voting age to 16. Wanda Sykes confesses to a civil rights violation. And a far left Youtuber viciously attacks Charlie Kirk's widow, proving again who our real enemies are. In case we needed the reminder.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4bEQDy6
Ep.1684
- - -
DailyWire+:
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to DailyWire.com/Subscribe to join now.
Finally, Friendly Fire is here! No moderator, no safe words. Now available at https://www.dailywire.com/show/friendly-fire
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
ExpressVPN - Go to https://expressvpn.com/walsh and find out how you can get 4 months of ExpressVPN free!
Christian Care Ministry - Go to https://medishare.com/matt or text the word MATT to 70246.
ZipRecruiter - Go to this exclusive web address to try ZipRecruiter FOR FREE: https://ZipRecruiter.com/WALSH
Good Ranchers - Visit https://goodranchers.com and subscribe to any box using code WALSH to claim $40 off + free meat for life!
- - -
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
- - -
Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Let's be honest, if you're a gun owner and you're still shooting unsuppressed, you're messing up.
You've got a great gun, you've got a decent aim, but you're still out there making your range days loud when they don't need to be.
A suppressor from Silencer Shop fixes that.
Less noise, less recoil, no more walking away from the range with your ears ringing.
Silencer Shop takes your gun from good to greater than you ever imagined and makes it easy.
Silencer Shop has the largest selection of suppressors in the country.
Approvals are coming in at record speeds, and their expert team can help you with anything you need.
No guesswork, no bureaucratic headaches, just better range days and hunting trips.
And when it comes to the Second Amendment, Silencer Shop puts their money where their mouth is, supporting your rights more than just about anyone else.
Go to silencershop.com slash walsh today and start shooting smarter, quieter, and better.
That's silencershop.com slash walsh.
Because if you're serious about freedom, you ought to shoot like it.
Silencer Shop because your rights and your ears are worth protecting.
Is your home's title still in your name?
With one forged document, scammers can steal your home title and equity, but now you can protect yourself.
Home Title Locks at Million Dollar Triple Lock Protection provides 24-7 title monitoring, urgent alerts to changes, and if fraud happens, they'll spend up to a million dollars to fix it and restore your title.
Use promo code dailywire at hometitlelock.com for a free title history report, plus a free 14-day trial of their million-dollar triple lock protection.
Head over to hometitalock.com now with promo code DailyWire to ensure your title is still in your name.
Today, Matt Walsh show is a Ugandan commie and a far-left con artist from Somalia are on the verge of winning their bids to take over two major American cities.
I want to talk about practical solutions that might prevent this from ever happening again and turn back the tide on the foreign invasion that has crippled our country.
Also, Trump threatens to go in guns a blazing to stop the persecution of Christians in Nigeria.
Kamala Harris calls for lowering the voting age to 16.
Wanda Sykes confesses to a civil rights violation and a far-left YouTuber viciously attacks Charlie Kirk's widow, proving again who our real enemies are in case we needed the reminder, and a lot of us do.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
Data brokers spy on your online activity and profit from it.
They monitor everything you click on and do online, then sell that information to other companies at even foreign governments.
There have even been cases where they knowingly sold people's private data to fraudulent companies.
That's why I use ExpressVPN to stay protected from these big brother data brokers.
With ExpressVPN, 100% of your online activity travels through secure encrypted tunnels, keeping everything you do completely private.
No one, not data brokers, big tech companies, or even your internet provider, can track your behavior.
ExpressVPN also hides your IP address, the unique number used to identify you online, leaving data brokers with nothing valuable to sell.
For U.S. customers, ExpressVPN's new identity defender feature removes your data from data brokers' files, monitors the dark web for leaked information, and alerts you if someone tries to use your social security number.
This isn't about hiding shady behavior.
It's about your privacy.
As more of our lives move online, more of our personal moments are being watched and monetized.
Protect yourself with ExpressVPN because privacy is essential.
As someone who spends hours researching for each show, I rely on ExpressVPN constantly, whether I'm digging into sensitive topics or just browsing without my ISP, logging every search.
I can't imagine doing research without that protection, especially when I have to connect to airport or public Wi-Fi on the go.
Right now, you can get an extra four months when you use my special link.
Go to expressvpn.com/slash walsh and get four extra months of ExpressVPN.
It's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash walsh.
There's no way around it.
When it comes to healthcare, people are really frustrated with how much it costs and how to pay for it.
Usual ways that we've been doing this have only gotten more expensive, more complicated, and of course, aggravating.
And that's why MetaShare is such a welcome relief.
It's called healthcare sharing.
And it's different, but look, it works.
More than a million Americans are now doing this.
And MetaShare has been a great option for more than 30 years.
So really, you could save thousands of dollars a year on your healthcare and be happy.
Imagine that.
It could happen.
If you've heard about it and you know and you want to know more, there are two easy options.
Go to metashare.com slash matt.
That's metashare.com slash matt, or just grab your phone and send a text.
You'll get the info, which could really help you and your family out.
Text the word Matt to 70246 to get the facts.
Text Matt to 70246 and you'll get the link.
That's Matt to 70246.
You could fill a very large museum with exhibits about empires that collapsed because as barbarians gathered outside the gates, their leaders were distracted by relatively unimportant internal conflicts.
And certainly you could set up rows and rows of bookshelves at the Louvre with volume after volume going into detail about how various civilizations from the Byzantines to the Ottomans to the Canadians met their demise because they were unable or unwilling to address the very real looming threats they were facing from the outside.
And then of course, once you meticulously assembled all these books documenting these historical examples and placed them in the Louvre, those books would probably be stolen by a handful of burglars armed with power tools.
So put another way, it's the highest luxury for wealthy and prosperous civilizations to fight amongst themselves right up until the moment they realize that in reality, the barbarians aren't simply at the gates anymore.
They've made their way inside and no one's even noticed.
And by that point, it's too late.
The foreign conquest is plain for everyone to see right at the moment when you can't do anything about it.
So if you don't see where I'm going with this, then that's probably a good sign, if I'm being honest.
There's no reason to recap any of the infighting that's occurring right now among the conservative movement.
If you're not aware of the extraordinary degree of internal squabbling on the right, which I suspect that most average conservatives probably aren't, well, that's a point in your favor anyway.
It's an indication that you don't spend much of your time online paying attention to the endless bickering on social media.
But suffice it to say, many conservatives are at each other's throats at the moment.
They're certainly at my throat from every angle, even though none of them can really explain what it is I've done or said that they find so objectionable.
I also haven't changed my goal, which is advancing the interests of this country and of the Americans who live here.
That's all I've ever tried to do or ever really talked about.
But here's the important thing.
No matter where you stand on these attacks and all this drama, if you're even aware of it, really doesn't matter.
What matters is that while conservatives are busy ripping each other to shreds, an Islamic socialist from Uganda is about to take over the biggest city in the country.
And at the same time, as if that's not enough, a far-left Somali scam artist is about to take over one of the biggest cities in America's heartland, Minneapolis.
And this is the kind of threat that a serious country and a serious political movement would prioritize above any other.
If foreigners who want to destroy the U.S. are able to seize control of our largest cities, then nothing else matters.
Okay.
Whatever it is that you're worried about doesn't matter.
Foreign policy doesn't matter.
Podcasts, even the most offensive and racist podcasts you can think of, don't matter.
The Constitution doesn't matter.
The Heritage Foundation doesn't matter.
Nothing matters at all in that scenario because we will have ceased to exist as a country.
Okay, once we become Somalia or Uganda, we've lost everything and we can never get it back.
Now, no one needs me to outline the case against Omar Fateh, who's probably going to be the next mayor of Minneapolis.
No one needs me to outline the case against Zoran Mamdani, who's probably going to be the next mayor of New York.
Nor does anyone, at least in this audience, need me to make the case against mass migration more broadly or Somali immigration in particular or anything like that.
We've beaten that drum many, many times before and will continue to beat it.
But really, especially if you live in places like New York or Minneapolis or any of the thousands of American suburbs that have become unrecognizable in the past 20 years, you don't really need to watch any monologue about it, listen to any podcast about it.
You've already seen firsthand exactly what the problem is and how it's about to get much, much worse unless we actually take some meaningful action.
Because again, if we don't, the country is over.
And I'm not saying that if Zoran Mamdani is elected and Fateh is elected, you know, in their elections, that the country is over in that case, because like that is probably going to happen.
And we still have a chance as a country.
But if we just submit finally to this invasion, then the country is over.
It's just done.
We don't have a country anymore.
If the country comes to reflect the vision of somebody like Zoran Mamdani, then that's the end of the country, because that's what he wants.
That's his vision.
Now, the good news, although it's easy to forget it, is that meaningful action is indeed possible.
The Republican Party currently has control of both houses of Congress, in addition to the White House.
In case you forgot, conservatives have the power to prevent any more American cities from being taken over by foreign communists.
So in the interests of being constructive, instead of simply identifying the problem that we've all identified by now, or those of us who are sane and have common sense have identified, I just wanted to outline a few proposals, right, which the Republican Congress could and should pass into law immediately.
So here are some actual practical solutions that we could talk about and not just talk about, but that could be pursued.
We have the power right now to do it.
But before I do so, I need to preempt the objections that are going to sound something like this.
People will say, well, the courts might strike that down or, well, the Democrats would filibuster.
Yeah, it's true that courts might strike down these proposals, just like they've struck down every single policy the Trump administration has attempted to implement.
And yeah, Democrats might filibuster the legislation, but that doesn't mean that we're out of options.
We can eliminate the filibuster.
We can appeal rulings by lower court judges.
And if necessary, we can ignore them if it comes down to it.
But I don't think that will be necessary, though, because the proposals I'm about to outline are indeed both constitutional and obviously necessary.
And for my first proposal, by way of background, take a look at these recent appearances by Omar Fateh, the scam artist running for mayor of Minneapolis, who's become known as the Mamdani of the Midwest.
Watch.
Have a better communication between the mayor and the chief and also the city council member so that whenever we know something's coming down the pike, that city council is alerted immediately because they're the connection point to community and they can articulate that and disseminate that information to folks.
I think that's really important.
As-salamu alaykum.
As-salamu alaykum.
Somalia.
Somalia.
Hiran State.
Ma'awisle.
Early voting war.
Hadda illa November 4.
I need your vote.
Wani di bahanahai.
Wani di bahanahai.
I need you.
So he's waving the Somali flag.
He's speaking in a foreign language.
He's pledging fealty to Somalia.
He's talking about tipping off illegals in advance of ICERAIDS.
He clearly understands that his constituency is Somalis like himself, not Americans.
And he's not ashamed of any of this because, as we've discussed before, Somalis are now a dominant voting bloc in Minneapolis, which is home to the largest Somali population in the entire country.
The solution, or one of them, one thing that we could do is ban politicians and candidates from holding rallies or creating advertisements in any language but English.
American voters should always know what their leaders are saying.
This is basic.
Ask, you know, any voter who can't speak English, any voter who needs a candidate or politician to speak in another language, shouldn't be a voter, should not be voting in the first place.
Now, right away, I can imagine the replies, that violates the First Amendment.
Well, actually, it doesn't.
It's not a restriction on the content of anyone's speech.
Politicians can have whatever ideas they want.
It's a restriction on how that speech is delivered.
And we have many restrictions like that.
That's why politicians can't campaign within 50 feet of a polling place.
That's why politicians can't blast their campaign advertisements at 2 a.m. with a bullhorn outside of your house.
There's a lot of different ways that they cannot convey their message.
So the principle is pretty clear.
Speech becomes unlawful when and only when the government has a clear and unambiguous need to regulate that speech in order for the country and its government to remain functional.
And in the context of laws that require candidates to speak English, there's precedent to back this up.
Consider the case of Alejandria Alendrina Cabrera, which you probably haven't heard of this, but a little over a decade ago, she ran for a city council in Arizona.
But there was a problem with her candidacy.
The law in Arizona requires that elected officials have the capacity to speak decent English.
This is from Time magazine.
Quote, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled last week that Cabrera did not meet the state's requirement that elected officials must be proficient in English.
Cabrera's candidacy became an issue when the mayor, a political rival of hers, filed a lawsuit claiming that her lack of English proficiency made her ineligible.
Cabrera, an American citizen who spent some of her childhood in Mexico, knows some English.
When she was questioned at trial, she was able to state her name and place of birth, but she could not answer a question about which high school she attended.
In much of the country, Cabrera would not have a problem.
Candidates do not have to prove that they know English, but Arizona enacted a law in 2006 that bars people who do not speak, write, and read English from holding state or local offices.
Now, here's more coverage from the New York Times.
Quote, when Cabrera speaks English, her face takes on an expression somewhere between deep discomfort and outright despair.
Her tongue, which darts around in her mouth in her native Spanish, slows to a crawl.
In his report, which was detailed in a court hearing on Wednesday, William Eggington, a professor of English and linguistics at Brigham Young University in Utah, said that based on interviews and tests he conducted with Ms. Cabrera, she had basic survival level English that fell well below that need to participate in city business.
This is the law, the city attorney said, arguing that the 1910 Act granting Arizona statehood required officeholders to perform their duties in English without the aid of a translator.
It's been on the books since statehood.
So she was tossed from the ballot, and that was it.
I mean, it's as simple as that.
If the state of Arizona can have a law like this, then the federal government can and should impose a similar restriction on every candidate in every office.
We can require that candidates speak coherent English instead of a foreign language when they're campaigning.
And there's no First Amendment violation here.
If anything, the First Amendment and the Constitution requires we have a law like this.
The country cannot exist for much longer without it.
And while we're at it, we should require an English language proficiency test for voters when they register to vote.
And again, the principle is the same.
If you can't speak English, then you shouldn't be voting.
You're not really an American.
You're not capable of interacting with other Americans in this country.
You haven't made the slightest effort to assimilate into our country.
And if you're allowed to vote, what does that mean?
Well, it means you'll protect your own country's interests, not America's.
And for that reason, there is a clear and compelling government interest in preventing you from voting, just like we prevent felons from voting.
Yes, in this country, it's entirely possible for an American citizen to lose his right to vote by becoming a felon.
And many states have laws like that on the books.
But ask yourself this question.
Who's more dangerous in the voting booth?
A Somali communist who can't speak a word of English, who wants to drain every dollar from the U.S. Treasury and send it back to Somalia, or a guy who hasn't paid his taxes in five years?
Who's more dangerous in the voting booth?
A Muslim socialist from Uganda who can't speak English and who wants to dismantle the police force or a guy who committed insurance fraud five years ago?
Now, we all know the answers to these questions.
If we're going to ban felons from voting, then we should ban foreign language speakers from voting too, if they can't speak English, if they're not proficient in English.
We should also require all politicians and candidates to renounce any dual citizenships they may hold and publicly pledge their total and absolute loyalty to the U.S. to the absolute exclusion of all other nations.
Now, from a First Amendment standpoint, this should not be controversial either.
As to the latter part, you know, we already make elected officials take an oath of office, of course.
Many public servants in various fields have the same obligation.
That's because the Constitution explicitly states that office holders shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution.
So all I'm proposing is that we move the oath forward a bit to the candidate stage.
You should not be able to run for office in this country unless you're willing to swear total, absolute fealty to this country to the exclusion of every other country.
And if you're not willing to do that, then you should not be allowed to run for office in the first place.
Now, yeah, a candidate can lie, but at least this country would be spared the indignity of watching Somali politicians telling us to our faces for months on end that they don't actually care about representing Americans.
You know, they'd have to pretend to care about this country.
And for some of them, particularly the inbred ones, that might be too difficult to fake.
And some of them would be unwilling to do it.
Would Omar Fateh be willing in the candidate phase?
Would he be willing to get up there?
Would he have been willing to get up there as a prerequisite to run for office?
Would he have been willing to stand up and say, I swear my absolute loyalty to this country.
I put this country above every other country, including Somalia?
Would he have even been willing to say that?
Probably not.
And additionally, as to the second proposal I just made, dual citizens are already subjected to dramatically increased scrutiny when they're trying to obtain, say, a top-secret security clearance.
So there's no reason that we shouldn't impose even more scrutiny when a dual citizen tries to run for office, given the obvious conflict of interest that's involved.
Again, there is precedent.
You know, we don't even need to make an argument.
We just need to pass a law immediately.
And here's one more idea while I'm at it.
That would clear up a lot of these problems and would also make it so that someone like Mom Dani or Fateh would never be able to be elected ever again.
So here's just an idea.
If over 10% of immigrants from a certain country are on welfare in this country, then we should ban all immigration from that country for the next 10 years.
Okay, there's a reasonable policy.
And, you know, 10 and 10 is kind of arbitrary.
You could set the threshold anywhere.
5%, 20%, doesn't matter.
But you could set it at 0.01%.
I mean, that's where I'd prefer to put it.
But I'm being kind of generous in where I set the bar, being very reasonable.
But the point is that if a significant number of immigrants from a country are coming here to leech off of our people rather than to contribute to this nation and its people, then we need to shut off the spigot.
And this should be the safest proposal of all the ones I've laid out.
Foreigners don't have any right to enter this country in the first place.
It's a privilege.
And we should obviously shut it down immediately if it's turning into a burden for American taxpayers.
You know, last week we talked about how well over 50% of illegal aliens receive food stamps, many of them from countries like Somalia, Haiti, Iraq.
So terminate all migration from these countries immediately for at least 10 years.
And again, you could say 50 years, 100 years.
I mean, I'd be in favor of that, but again, I'm being very generous.
10 years.
Shut it off for 10 years.
We'll save a lot of money, be much better for this country.
And we won't have Haitians winning the mayor's race in Ohio anytime soon.
So it's a win-win.
Now, if you want to quibble with some of these proposals, that's fine.
Maybe you think some of them won't work.
These are just kind of a few ideas off the top of my head.
The point is, this is the kind of thing that we should be talking about every single day.
This is what drives me nuts: that we have power right now, and we're not spending every single moment of every day talking about real things we can do to use that power to solve some of these problems, the big problems.
How is that not the focal point every single day?
We're not going to have this power forever.
This is a short window that we have right now, and it is closing.
And these are the kinds of proposals that conservatives, whether they're posting on social media or hosting a podcast or working at a think tank or anywhere else, should be spending their time on.
These are proposals that advance conservatism and more importantly, preserve the future of this country.
It's what we elected conservatives to do.
So why aren't they doing it?
Why isn't I've thrown the idea?
I don't want the first person to have an idea like this.
Call it the 10 in 10 law or whatever.
10% of welfare, 10-year ban.
Can someone explain what the downside would be to that?
What would be the downside?
How would it hurt America?
Can anyone say, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
We can't do that.
That's really going to hurt us.
Can anyone make that case?
I'd love to hear it.
But nobody can.
No one would be able to explain what the problem would be.
And any attempt to explain the problem would focus on how it would negatively impact the third world country where these people are coming from.
But that is not our concern, is it?
Or it shouldn't be.
So, Republicans, the ball's in your court.
Someone pick it up.
Propose the law.
You can even take credit for it.
Go ahead.
I don't care.
I just want to get it done.
Why aren't we getting it done?
Until anyone can explain that, it's our responsibility to demand that Republicans answer this simple and fundamental question.
What are you doing to ensure that some of the most important cities in this country are actually run by Americans instead of foreign subversives like Zoran Mamdani and Omar Fateh?
That's the question that matters.
And before another conservative fires another volley at anyone else on the right, before another major American city falls, someone in power needs to answer it.
While our side still has power to wield.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
What if you could actually find what you're looking for instead of wandering around like an idiot?
Parking spots that don't require a prayer, gifts that don't scream, last-minute panic, jeans that fit without trying on 17 pairs.
Wild concept, right?
Well, just think of all the time you'd save, time you're currently wasting.
While you may never instantly find these things, if you're hiring, you can find qualified candidates right away, time and time again with ZipRecruiter.
And today you can try it for free at ziprecruiter.com slash walsh.
Finding the right talent doesn't have to feel like searching for a needle in a haystack.
ZipRecruiter's powerful matching technology cuts through the noise and connects you with top candidates fast.
No endless scrolling, no guesswork, just results.
Their advanced resume database gives you instant access to contact information for qualified professionals so you can reach out to people who actually want to hire, you actually want to hire without having to jump through all the hoops.
It's kind of efficiency that changes how you think about recruiting.
And it's working.
ZipRecruiter has earned its spot as the number one rated hiring site on G2, trusted by businesses that need to build great teams without wasting time on platforms that overcomplicate the process.
Want to know right away how many qualified candidates are in your area?
Look no further than ZipRecruiter.
Four to five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
And right now, you can try it for free at ziprecruiter.com slash Walsh.
Again, that's ziprecruiter.com slash Walsh.
ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire.
With the holidays coming up, all those dinners, those moments around the table with family, I want to make sure every meal is special.
That's why I use Good Ranchers.
All their meat is 100% American, raised on local farms and delivered right to my door.
The quality, well, it's truly incredible, whether it's a holiday roast, bacon for Christmas morning breakfast, or chicken for a nice family dinner, knowing exactly where my meat comes from gives me and my family peace of mind.
And honestly, people notice the difference.
The flavors are truly better.
The holidays are, you know, they're about bringing people together and creating memories over good food.
And when you're serving America's best meat, those meals become even more meaningful.
It's the kind of quality your family deserves and the kind that they'll be talking about long after the holidays are over.
I used to think you could only get a really great steak at an expensive steakhouse, but Good Ranchers delivers that same quality right to my door.
Now it can impress family and guests without dropping 100 bucks every time we eat out.
And here's the deal.
If you subscribe to any Good Ranchers box today using code Walsh, you get an additional $100 off your first three orders, $40 off your first, $30 off your second, and $30 off of your third with our code at free meat for life when you subscribe.
So hit up goodranchers.com this holiday season.
Full of delicious meals.
Again, use code Walsh, goodranchers.com.
Let's get back to the table.
All right, speaking of third world countries, Daily Wire reports, President Donald Trump issued a direct warning to Nigeria on Saturday, promising to withhold aid from the nation and threatening to take further action if the government did not step in and put a stop to the targeted killing of Christians there.
Trump made a statement via his truth social platform calling on the Nigerian government to stop the Islamic terrorists who are killing Christians and warning if they do not do so quickly, the United States could go into that now disgraced country, guns a blazing.
Trump posted, quote, if the Nigerian government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the USA will immediately stop all aid and assistance in Nigeria and may very well go into that now disgraced country, guns a blazing, to completely wipe out the Islamic terrorists who are committing these horrible atrocities.
I think this might be the first time in American history that a president has used the phrase guns ablazing, especially while actually making a threat of this kind.
Saying literally, I'm going to go in there, guns ablaze.
I think it might be a first.
But of course, Trump has a lot of those kinds of records, you know, in Guinness.
He's got the first president to ever say, you know, almost everything he says sets a record of that kind.
Anyway, I am hereby instructing our Department of War to prepare for possible action.
If we attack, it'll be fast, vicious, and sweet.
Just like the, that's also a first.
I think it's the first time any president has ever described a potential attack as fast, vicious, and sweet.
Just like the terrorist thugs attacked our cherished Christians, warning the Nigerian government better move fast.
So as always with Trump, some of the phrasing is kind of funny, but the actual issue that's being dealt with here is not at all funny at all.
This is incredibly serious.
And Trump on Air Force One was talking about this and elaborate a little bit more.
Let's play that.
They're killing record numbers of Christians in Nigeria.
And they have other countries very bad also.
You know that part of the world, very bad.
They're killing the Christians and killing them in very large numbers.
I'm not going to allow that to happen.
So Trump is trying to put an end to the Christian persecution in Nigeria, which has been going on for a very long time.
Islamic militants are slaughtering Christians.
Upwards of 50,000 have been killed over the past decade, depending on decade, decade, decade and a half or so, depending on what numbers you trust.
I mean, really, you can't trust any numbers about this.
I mean, we don't actually know how many Christians have been slaughtered in Nigeria.
It is many thousands, could be many more than 50,000.
So that's how it generally goes with the genocide is that the people conducting it are not exactly keeping clear records.
So we don't know exactly.
Thousands every year.
We do know that.
And this is happening mostly under the radar.
I mean, it's not under the radar in Nigeria, but on the quote unquote global stage, no one has really paid much attention.
And so one of the most important things Trump has done here is draw global attention to it.
And we'll talk more about this week, probably tomorrow.
We'll go deeper into the persecution of Christians in that country and give you more information about it.
So we'll try to keep the conversation going this week.
Now, a lot of people are focused on Trump's threat to go in, quote, guns ablazing.
But we should also know by now that Trump says stuff like that as a bargaining chip.
I mean, we've seen him do this countless times.
I would guess we're not really going to move in militarily into Nigeria, though, that we could.
I mean, that's why Trump is so effective, is that he makes these dramatic threats.
Often he does not follow through because he doesn't need to.
Sometimes he does.
He's willing to.
And so that's enough to extract concessions often because he'll make these threats.
And you kind of, you know, it's like, well, is he really going to, he might do that.
He's shown a willingness to follow through, which if you want your threats to mean anything, then you have to have demonstrated a willingness to actually follow through, which Trump has.
So, you know, we'll see if that part happens.
Cutting off all aid to the country, though, that is something that needs to happen.
I mean, that should happen anyway.
Why are we giving aid to Nigeria?
Can anyone explain why we're doing that?
I mean, people could explain it.
I'm sure there's all kinds of explanations that we could get, all kinds of official explanations, but how does it benefit Americans to give aid to Nigeria?
That would be the difficult question to answer.
We give, you know, billions of dollars.
We gave a billion dollars last year for what?
It certainly is not being used to protect the Christians in that country.
That is obvious.
So it's not being used for that.
So why are we doing it?
Now, a lot of this money is supposed to address hunger in the country.
It's supposed to feed people.
We sent them, actually, it was just a month ago, about a month or back in September, a couple months ago, we sent, I think it was a $32 million package to Nigeria for nutrition assistance.
And we sent $30 million the year before that, also, you know, for the same reasons.
And that was part of a $500 million humanitarian aid package to sub-Saharan Africa, mostly for food.
And that's just part of the aid that we send.
So overall, we've sent Nigeria something like $8 billion in the past nine or 10 years.
And through a quick Google search, all I could find is how much we've sent thereabouts since 2015.
Before that, we were sending money before that.
How much, you know, you could find that out.
It just needs a little more investigation.
Billions of dollars is the point.
We have sent billions of dollars to Nigeria.
We've spent billions of dollars on them.
And again, for what?
Well, we've already established.
There's no way you can argue that this benefits America at all.
There is no American who has benefited.
There's no American family sitting down for dinner tonight that somehow is benefited by the fact that we're spending billions of dollars on Nigeria.
And on top of that, it doesn't even help Nigerians.
I mean, after just take the last 10 years, you know, almost $10 billion over the last 10 years, so almost a billion dollars a year.
And that's a lot of money.
Okay, that's a lot of money, billions of dollars.
And they still can't feed themselves in that country.
20 or 25% of the country is undernourished or malnourished.
That's what we're told.
And we're told that as a justification for continuing to send them money.
But what effect is it having?
I mean, even if we all agreed that, oh, yeah, well, we should obviously be spending billions of dollars to make sure that Nigerians have enough food, which I don't agree with that.
Now, if you want, I'm all about charity, if you want to give of your own free will and volition.
If you're someone who says, well, no, we can't take away aid from Nigeria because that would be cruel.
You know, they won't be able to feed themselves.
Well, no one is stopping it.
You are perfectly able to send however much money you want.
And if enough Americans really do care about making sure that Nigerians have enough food, well, then they can all get together.
And there's tons of charities you can give money to.
Go ahead and do that.
But even if we were to agree that that's a good enough reason to send them foreign aid, well, it's not even, it's not doing anything.
We're spending billions and billions and billions of dollars.
And after decades of this, they still can't feed themselves.
And of course, because this is the scam with foreign aid, the money goes to their government, the same government that has no interest in protecting Christians from being slaughtered.
So we funnel billions into the coffers of corrupt, failed third world governments.
And again, for what?
It's not making Nigeria any less dysfunctional.
It's not solving their problems.
And much more importantly, it's not solving any of our problems.
Has the $8 billion to Nigeria improved America?
I mean, can anyone point to like a tangible improvement, a tangible positive impact in America that stems from the $8 billion investment that we've made in Nigeria?
Like, can you fill in the blank here?
So it's step one, give Nigeria $8 billion over the last 10 years.
Step three, the everyday lives of Americans are improved.
What is step two?
Can you fill in the blank on step two?
What's happening in step two that would connect those dots?
I don't think anyone can explain that.
Today is, let's be honest, if you're a gun owner and you're still shooting unsuppressed, you're messing up.
You've got a great gun, you've got a decent name, but you're still out there making your range days loud when they don't need to be.
A suppressor from Silencer Shop fixes that.
Less noise, less recoil, no more walking away from the range with your ears ringing.
Silencer Shop takes your gun from good to greater than you ever imagined and makes it easy.
Silencer Shop has the largest selection of suppressors in the country.
Approvals are coming in at record speeds, and their expert team can help you with anything you need.
No guesswork, no bureaucratic headaches, just better range days and hunting trips.
And when it comes to the Second Amendment, Silencer Shop puts their money where their mouth is, supporting your rights more than just about anyone else.
Go to silencershop.com slash walsh today and start shooting smarter, quieter, and better.
That's silencershop.com slash walsh.
Because if you're serious about freedom, you ought to shoot like it.
Silencer shop because your rights and your ears are worth protecting.
The very last day to join Daily Wire Plus with our deal of the decade.
Join today for under $7 a month, same price you would have paid in 2015 and get access to everything.
Catch up on what you've been missing, like two new episodes of our flagship show, Friendly Fire, and powerful new documentaries, including the 1916 project, USS Coal, Al-Qaeda Strike Before 9-11, and Hiding in Plain Sight.
And with your annual Daily Wire Plus membership, you'll be one of the first to see the Pendragon cycle, the rise of the Merlin premiering January 22nd.
You can get all of it and everything coming next for under $7 a month.
But today is the final day of the deal.
Go to dailywire.com/slash subscribe to join today.
All right, Kamala Harris certainly can't explain that or anything else.
She's been making the rounds quite a bit recently.
And here she is on some kind of podcast.
Diary of a CEO is the podcast.
And here she is proposing a disastrously stupid idea.
Listen.
I think we should reduce voting age to 16.
I'll tell you why.
So Gen Z, they're age about 13 through 27.
They've only known the climate crisis.
They missed substantial parts of their education because of the pandemic.
If they're in high school or college, especially in college, it is very likely that whatever they've chosen as their major for study may not result in an affordable wage.
They've coined the term climate anxiety to describe fear of not only being able to buy a home, but fear it'll be wiped out by extreme weather, but fear of having children.
It is expected that Gen Z will have 10 to 12 jobs in their lifetime.
They are a larger number than boomers.
They're a specific generation of people who are going to impact our nation and the world.
And I think we must invest in them, but I think that they are rightly impatient with a lot of what is the tradition of leadership right now.
And if they were able to vote, because they know everything that's happening right now is going to impact them more than anybody older than them for the most part, in terms of how these systems work.
If they're voting right now at 16 and up, they're going to be talking about the importance of climate.
They're going to be talking about the importance of figuring out how AI is going to affect the future of the workforce.
They're going to be focused on what are we really doing about affordable housing.
And basically in politics, here's the hard truth about this.
Shut up, Kamala.
That's enough.
So, yeah, we got to lower the voting age to 16 so that Gen Z can vote, she says.
So nobody tells Kamala that Gen Z is already voting.
The majority of Gen Zers are above the age of 18.
So if your argument is that we need to lower the voting age in order to get Gen Z involved, well, good news.
They are involved.
Whether you think that's good news or not, they are involved.
They're already voting.
Gen Z are between the ages of 13 and 28.
So most of them are voting anyway.
Although, if we're going to lower the voting age for their sake, why not lower it?
You know, why not go all the way?
Why not lower it to 13?
Why not lower it to 10?
Why not lower it to 8?
Why not lower it to five?
Why not have infants vote?
I mean, if you start lowering the voting age, there is no line that makes sense to draw.
If you lower it beyond 18, then any other line you draw is totally arbitrary.
And that's by design.
Now, the 18 cutoff makes sense because that's when you're a legal adult.
So that makes sense.
There's a logic to that.
Now, I think the, as you know, I think the voting age should be higher.
I think 20.
I think the voting age should be 39 because I'm 39.
And when I turn 40, the voting age, the voting age should just get higher and higher as I age specifically.
That's another law that I'm proposing.
The voting age is whatever age I am personally.
And then when I die, no one's allowed to vote ever again.
When I die, that's the end of voting.
I'm taking voting with me when I go out.
So I'd propose that law.
I don't know.
That one probably has even less of a chance of making it through.
But if we're not going to do that, then I think 25, like 25 is a better threshold.
And that's also not arbitrary because that is when your brain is fully developed is by the age of 25.
I think 18 is still way too young for voting in my mind.
I mean, yes, you're a legal adult, but you haven't lived as an adult in the world for any length of time.
You haven't taken on any adult responsibilities.
I mean, I don't know very many 18-year-olds who really have adult responsibilities.
And that should be a prerequisite of voting.
But let's put that to the side.
18 at least makes some kind of sense.
That's a discernible, coherent line to draw.
But if you put it down to 16, then there's no reason to stop at 16.
And that's the point.
It's like 16.
Well, why not 15?
I mean, why not 14?
And the ultimate goal is to abolish the voting age entirely.
And that's what these people actually want to do.
Like, don't, we should know, don't put anything past them.
There's nothing too extreme for them.
And they would, yeah, they would prefer if there was no voting age at all.
That's what they actually want.
And why is that?
Well, the reason that Kamala gives is that kids have a lot of anxiety and a lot of fear about stuff like climate change, which means that they should vote for some reason.
That's literally her argument.
She says, oh, you should be able to vote at 16.
Why?
Well, because, you know, 16-year-olds have a lot of anxiety about the climate.
Okay, so they're afraid and anxious.
They have dysregulated emotions, and that is a qualification for voting.
So their anxious, emotional state is a reason why they should vote?
If anything, wouldn't that be a disqualification?
Well, no, not for her, because the real reason she wants to lower the voting age, of course, is that, yeah, kids are emotional and ignorant and easy to manipulate, which is no insult.
That's no slight.
I mean, we were all kids once.
We were the same way.
Many of us are still that way, and we're not kids anymore.
The difference is that for adults, it's shameful to be that way, but for kids, it's inevitable.
Kids are kids.
Kids are ignorant in the sense of lacking information, whereas you have a lot of adult voters who are ignorant in the sense of ignoring information or refusing to pursue information.
So it's a kind of willful ignorance.
But for kids, it's an unwilling ignorance.
And there's a reason that Kamala wants more ignorant voters.
She wants more voters who are ignorant.
She wants more voters who have no skin in the game.
She wants more voters who don't understand the issues.
She wants more voters who are immature, more voters who are overly emotional.
That's what she wants.
And there's a reason she wants it.
All right.
Variety had their Power of Women award ceremony over the weekend, which what is that?
I don't know.
Well, it's just more cringe girl boss feminism because we're still doing that.
You know, we keep saying that wokeness is dead, but it's funny.
We keep saying wokeness is dead.
Nobody on the left seems to realize that.
We on the right are saying, wokeness died.
Over on the left, they don't realize that, which tells me that it's not actually dead, right?
Because they're the ones who, it's their thing.
So they're still doing it.
It means it's not dead.
And this is kind of a different topic.
I don't want to get too sidetracked, but I was thinking about this when I saw this clip that a lot of us on the right have claimed that wokeness is dead.
And I think the reports of the demise of wokeness were very premature.
Feminism hasn't gone anywhere.
Would anyone say that feminism has died?
I wish that it would die.
It deserves to die.
It deserves to die many painful deaths.
The ideology does, I mean.
But it hasn't.
And really, none of the left's projects are dead.
Most of them aren't.
As we talked about, a communist is about to be mayor of New York.
It kind of blows my mind that you still have conservatives say, wokeness is dead.
The left, the left is on the run.
We got them on their heels.
Meanwhile, an actual foreign communist is about to be the mayor of New York.
You know, they're out marching in the streets with their cringe, no kings movement.
Antifa is more active than ever.
The leftists are more violent than ever.
They're killing us.
I mean, wokeness is not dead.
And I think that's cope among conservatives when they say that.
I think that when someone on the right says that, what they mean very specifically is that the trans stuff is dead.
Or if not dead, it has receded significantly, which it has, thank God.
But I think it's cope, it's self-delusion to claim that wokeness across the board is dead.
It's just not.
Okay, that's why my message here very consistently is that's why we need to be focused on it.
It is not over.
Like we have not, we won an election.
Okay, we won a single election, which is great.
I'm glad we did.
It's very important.
But it's not over.
And now you look back at some of the celebrating that was done.
And there was a reason to celebrate.
We should have celebrated.
It is a good thing.
But I think that a lot of conservatives took that as, well, you know, it's over.
We don't need to fight the left anymore.
Right.
All the talk of the golden age, right?
The golden age is upon us.
And yeah, you get caught up in the moment and you feel good.
And some of that is, some of that is understandable.
We all did.
I got caught up in the moment.
But no, this is not like the golden age of conservatism.
It just isn't.
It's like, it's not even close.
We won a presidential election.
That's what happened.
Fantastic.
And truly is fantastic.
But the fight very much continues.
And we need to realize that.
We need to get our heads back in the game.
And I think a lot of us have not had our heads in the game.
So anyway, Wanda Sykes spoke at this event.
Not the most important public figure at this point, but she did speak at this event.
And she decided to confess to a crime publicly, which I thought was interesting.
Listen.
I'm going to be upfront with you.
If when it comes to a position, and I look on the paper and they're right there, or she might be right here, and he's up there.
I'm behind the woman.
That's just how I operate.
And I'm be honest with you, if she's a black woman, oh, I ain't, I ain't, girl, you got the job.
Girl, you got the job.
Okay, first of all, the DOJ should be announcing an investigation into Wanda Sykes today.
She just confessed to a civil liberties, civil rights violation.
She just confessed to a crime.
I mean, that's what happened there.
She confessed to a federal crime.
Racial and gender discrimination in hiring is against the law.
The EEOC should be investigating, just as they would if any white man stood up there and said that he gives the edge to white men in hiring.
I mean, can you imagine any white man saying that and not being immediately sued into oblivion, if not thrown in prison?
No, you can't imagine that.
So same should apply here.
But you also see the game that these people play, right?
This is the gaslighting.
So here is Wanda Sykes explicitly admitting that she will hire a black woman regardless of her qualifications, admitting that if a woman, especially a black woman, is even less qualified.
She said that.
She said, well, the man could be up here and maybe the woman's a little down here.
I'm still going to choose the woman.
So just coming out and saying, yeah, I'll take the less qualified person because of their gender and or race.
And she admits this on stage to a cheering crowd.
And yet if we then turn around and say that DEI hires are less qualified, then we get called racist, even though they admit it.
So they say, we hire less qualified black women because they're black women.
And then we say, oh, so you hire less qualified black women just because they're black women.
And they say, what?
How dare you say that?
Well, no, we didn't say that.
You said it.
You just said it like a second ago, and we're repeating what you said.
You literally just said that that's what you're doing.
And we see you doing it.
And so we are pointing out that you're doing it.
But that's the game.
And of course, you know, and the result is that now, because of this sort of thing, not just because of Wanda Sykes, but because she's a small symptom of a larger problem, as we know.
And because of that, like this is why all black women in important professional positions are under suspicion, basically, because these DEI policies have been in place for so long.
And leftists like Wanda Sykes and countless others have admitted that they give preference to black women, even if they're less qualified.
Joe Biden admitted that famously.
So, and, you know, black women are not the only ones who benefit, but they check multiple DEI boxes, which means that now you have to wonder anytime a black woman is in an important position.
I mean, you have to wonder, well, did they get that job because they really happen to be the most qualified for it?
Or did they get it because they were hired by somebody like Wanda Sykes, who will come out and say that she'll give the job to the less qualified person if it's a black woman.
So you have to wonder that.
Were they put there because they check the demographic boxes or were they put there because they're qualified?
You know, that's the result.
It's not our fault.
Right.
And I know that me saying that, like, that's going to get clipped.
Matt Walsh says that we should be suspicious of every black woman who's in an important professional position.
Well, I didn't say we should be.
I said that we are because that's the situation that you guys have created because you guys have decided to put the fact that someone's a black woman above qualifications.
And so now every time a black woman is in any kind of professional position, we have to like, how did she get that job?
And no, we don't do that with white men.
So we never have to be suspicious of white men in that way in any position.
Now, not there are plenty of white men who can be incompetent, who can be not good at their jobs, but no white man is going to be hired because he's a white man.
So we never have to worry about that.
Any white man in any position, we never have to go, well, did he only get that job because he's a white man?
Never have to wonder that because that definitely is not the case.
In fact, in most jobs, you look at it now and you go, well, he got that even though he's a white man.
That we know he's, he's, he came up at a system that was biased against him.
You have actual affirmative action policies up until recently that were explicitly biased against him, and he still got into this position.
So that's a mark in his favor.
That's all, that's all the more reason to think that he must be like super qualified.
But you look at a black woman, you go, well, yeah, she could be very qualified.
It's perfectly possible, but also could just be there because she's a black woman.
Either one of those scenarios are possible.
And we don't know which one.
This is the point that Charlie Kirk made not a lot long ago, and it got a lot, got in a lot of trouble with the left.
Made this point about black airline pilots.
And of course, you had a bunch of leftists and even some people, even some conservatives, of course, who are saying, well, that's racist.
That's going too far.
No, this is the point.
When you start elevating people based solely on their race or their gender or the demographics, and then now we don't know.
Well, are you saying that every black pilot is unqualified?
No, of course not.
There's plenty of qualified ones, but I don't know which is which.
How are we supposed to know?
And that's the whole point.
Okay, also this finally, Daily Wire reports, liberal host Kyle Kalinsky mocked Erica Kirk, the widow of assassinated conservative Charlie Kirk in a widely ridiculed expost on Friday night.
And the article goes on about all the backlash he got.
Well deserved.
But we'll just put rather than reading it, we'll just put the tweet up on the screen, which I'd rather not do to give this guy any more of the attention that he craves.
But so you can see the tweet is an AI fake image of one of these Halloween costume memes, and it says fake grieving widow grifter costume includes fake teardrops, skin-tight black leather morning pants.
And then it's Erica Kirk holding a pile of money.
So not exactly a subtle joke there.
You know, this is what we're up against.
Now, now, this guy in particular, this Kyle Kalinsky, he's not relevant.
Nobody cares about him.
You know, this is one of these guys, one of these YouTubers.
He's been on YouTube for like 17 years.
He's been on YouTube since it was invented.
He's one of the guys.
He opened up a YouTube account like five days after they after they after the site came into existence.
And he's got 2 million subs.
So, and I know 2 million sounds impressive, but that's over 17 years.
So this guy's growth has stalled out, stalled out a long time ago.
I think this is one of these guys that was like vaguely sort of relevant briefly about 12 years ago, back when Reddit atheists were back in that back in that, he's just like a classic Reddit atheist guy.
And so back in that window of about 14 months when Reddit atheists were relevant, if they ever were, back in 2012 or 2013 or something.
So that was his time of relevance.
And he's just kind of been, but he's just been existing ever since then.
Growth has stalled out.
Nobody cares about this guy.
Nobody talks about him.
Nobody likes him.
He has zero influence whatsoever.
And you find this.
Like there are some of these.
so-called influencers and YouTubers who, yeah, they have millions of followers, but they have no influence at all.
Like no one listens to them.
They are not impacting the culture in any way whatsoever.
And yet some of them, because they've been around for so long, they've got millions.
And so now what he's trying to do is re-skindle, rekindle the spark by trying to get some growth going again with his stalled out channel and stalled out non-existent brand.
And he's trying to do it by trolling a grieving widow.
That's his plan.
That's his growth plan for this quarter is to troll a grieving widow, which really means that I shouldn't even be acknowledging it and giving this sad sack any attention that he's begging for.
But I am going to give it some attention for a brief minute because you should know that this is what we're up against.
These are people who will celebrate your death and then laugh in the face of your mourning loved ones.
They will piss on your grave and spit on your grieving spouse.
These are people who have no honor.
Okay, a pathetic, like little rat-faced scumbag like this, no honor at all.
This is not a man of honor.
This is not a man of integrity.
There's none of that to speak of.
This is not a man at all.
But there's a lot of them.
And this is what we're up against.
And this is why I have so obsessively tried to redirect everyone's focus back to the fight, back to the left, to the people who really and truly want you dead.
This is what we need to be thinking about and talking about and rallying against.
And the treatment of Erica Kirk should be very enlightening.
If you needed to be enlightened anymore on this point, then this should do it for you because this woman, Erica, has not done anything.
Like the way that she is on the left on social media, she is reviled.
I mean, they despise her.
It is go into the fever swamps of blue sky sometime.
I don't really recommend it, but if you really get it, if you really want to see, if you want to see it, and so maybe I do recommend it, just to get everyone focused again on what matters.
Go type her name in.
It's not even like, well, there's a couple of posts here and there of trolls.
It's like nothing, no one will say anything in her defense.
Nothing but seething contempt and mockery for this woman who has not done anything to any of these people.
What has she done that anyone finds so offensive?
She's mourned the loss of her husband and she's tried to carry on his legacy.
She's in a, to put it mildly, very difficult position where your husband was shot in the throat and killed.
You've got two young children.
He was a man.
He was a very important man.
He was a great man who had this massive, important organization.
And so you've got your family and your kids, and you have his legacy, and you have the country looking at you.
And all of this was thrust on you all at once.
Not because of anything you did or anything like you.
You were just living your life.
And you find yourself thrown into this position.
And these scum, these absolute dirt.
I mean, these people are dirt.
They really are.
They just, I'm sorry.
Now, it's like we try not to be dehumanizing, but you're barely a human being.
If this is how you treat a grieving widow, you're barely human.
I mean, you're human only in the biological sense.
You have no humanity.
You have no soul.
You forfeited your soul.
You're certainly not a man.
You're just this pathetic eunuch, this little, disgusting, slimy little worm.
That's all you are.
That's what you've chosen to be.
That's who you've made yourself.
And if you were to ask them how they justify, because even people like Kyle Kalinsky, even in his own brain, to the extent that he has one, he probably feels, he feels still, still feels the need to justify doing that, mocking a widow.
Because even somebody like that, you know, even though, even though they're like cartoonishly evil, these people are just, they're cartoons.
They're cartoon villains.
But even for these cartoonishly evil people, they still feel the need to justify in their own heads because they can't, like no one can look at themselves in the mirror and say, yes, I'm an evil person.
I'm just an evil piece of.
That's all I like.
No one, even Kyle Kalinsky, that's what he is, but he would never be able to tell himself that.
And so he finds a way to justify it.
And the way that they would justify it is say, well, have you seen the way she's reacted?
The way she's reacting?
Oh, reacting what?
By crying?
Because her husband was shot?
What's the correct way to react?
You want to give us the handbook.
Go ahead.
Do you have the handbook?
Do you have the handbook for grieving spouses?
Like, have you ever experienced anything, even like a, even, even a even a fraction of what she's going through and experiencing?
Have you ever had that in your pathetic, useless life?
Have you ever had to experience anything like that?
Oh, no, you haven't.
And yet you can sit there on your YouTube channel, sit there back on Twitter or on Blue Sky, just on your phone typing, I don't, this is not the, I wouldn't react this way.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
You don't know anything.
And anyway, that's got nothing.
It doesn't matter.
You and I both know.
It doesn't matter what Erica did or what she said.
It doesn't matter how she reacted.
Even though there's obviously nothing wrong with how she's reacted to any of this, she's a grieving widow.
She's, it's all, but it doesn't matter.
It makes no difference.
You would be treating her the exact same way.
And you know it.
You would be treating her the exact same way.
Because you're people of no honor.
You are dishonorable, disgusting, low, slimy, parasitic worms.
And this is how you treat people.
And we all know that.
There is, you know, in life, there are like the bare minimum, there's like this bare minimum bar of human decency.
And don't ridicule a grieving widow is, that's like the bar.
Okay.
That's like as low as the bar can get.
And if you can't clear that bar, then again, you're just, you're, you're a person of no honor.
So, and this is them.
And, and never forget that if you're a conservative, that this is how they feel about you.
And this reality, it never escapes my, never, it doesn't escape me.
I mean, this is, this, this is very much at the forefront of my mind.
And so especially for anyone out there, people have, there's a lot of, as I mentioned at the top, I have this, all this infighting going on and a lot of people are catching arrows and I'm getting a lot of them from a lot of different sides.
And some of the people who are flinging those arrows at me are have said, have accused me of, you know, acting, being a little different over the last couple of months, being maybe more extreme, a little angrier, less forgiving in my language, all that sort of thing.
And yeah, guilty as charged.
Guilty as charged because they killed Charlie and they celebrated it.
And I have not forgotten that.
And I'm not ever going to forget it.
And the other thing that I won't forget is that I know that if it happened to me, they would do the exact same thing.
They would be laughing in my wife's face with glee.
And we all know that, right?
If it happened to me, that's how they would react.
We all know that.
And that realization makes things very clear for me who the enemy is.
It could not be clear.
And it should be clear to all of us.
All right, we're going to wrap it there for today.
We'll get back to the daily cancellations tomorrow.
I know I've skipped out of them on the last, this was kind of, it's like an unofficial cancellation, but we won't call it.
So we'll get back to that tomorrow.
Until then, thanks for listening.
Thanks for watching.
Have a great day.
Talk to you tomorrow.
Godspeed.
Hey there, I'm Daily Wire executive editor, John Bickley.
And I'm Georgia Howe, and we're the hosts of Morning Wire.
We bring you all the news you need to know in 15 minutes or less.
