The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1345 - The Media Nominates Their New George Floyd

00:00:00.000 Today on the Matt Wall Show, the left desperately wants to find their new George Floyd before the election.

00:00:04.520 They think they have a good candidate, a man named Dexter Reed, who was killed by police during a traffic stop.

00:00:08.980 But the basic facts of this case make it extremely clear that this man is no victim.

00:00:13.660 Also, after a Supreme Court decision, Arizona's ban on abortion will go into effect over the protests of both Democrats and Republicans.

00:00:20.160 Why are Republicans objecting to a pro-life law?

00:00:22.780 And board games are going woke now as Scrabble unveils a new inclusive version of the classic game.

00:00:27.660 We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Wall Show.

00:00:30.000 The cost of living has already increased 17% this year

00:00:58.360 and continues to rise despite interest rate controls.

00:01:00.940 As our national debt skyrockets, you need to be confident in the financial services companies you work with,

00:01:05.640 especially regarding your money and your future.

00:01:07.780 Birch Gold is a proven industry leader that you want on your side.

00:01:10.960 They'll show you how precious metal investments can fortify your lifestyle in retirement, even in turbulent economic times.

00:01:16.680 Navigating financial decisions can be scary.

00:01:18.480 If you're considering converting an existing retirement account into a precious metals IRA,

00:01:22.800 Birch Gold's dedicated in-house IRA department is there to guide you every step of the way.

00:01:27.520 Birch Gold values your questions and your concerns.

00:01:30.040 Their team is always available to provide answers and clarity.

00:01:32.840 Whether it's about fees, taxes on rollovers, or timing of the process,

00:01:36.480 they are here to ensure that you feel heard and informed.

00:01:39.120 Text Walsh to 989898 to talk to one of Birch Gold's experts and claim your free info kit on gold.

00:01:45.160 You'll learn how to convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold.

00:01:50.020 The best part is, it doesn't cost you a penny out of pocket.

00:01:52.840 Just text Walsh to 989898.

00:01:55.120 That's Walsh to 989898.

00:01:57.440 Last year, a man in his mid-20s named Dexter Reed was charged with three counts of aggravated,

00:02:03.080 unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked firearms

00:02:08.000 owner's identification card, which is required in the state of Illinois before you can possess a

00:02:12.640 weapon or ammunition.

00:02:14.220 And because nobody really spends time in jail in Illinois anymore, Reed was free on pre-trial

00:02:18.380 release for these felony charges as recently as this past March.

00:02:21.920 Now, it goes without saying that at that point, any functioning member of society who somehow

00:02:28.380 found himself charged with these crimes would try to lay low for a little bit.

00:02:32.980 Maybe they'd keep their illegal guns at home, for example. 0.85

00:02:36.300 But Dexter Reed did not choose that approach because he's not a functioning member of society.

00:02:40.960 Instead, in March, Reed went for a drive in an SUV wearing a ski mask and carrying a firearm.

00:02:47.420 That's when police say that they noticed that Reed was breaking yet another law.

00:02:50.180 He wasn't wearing a seatbelt.

00:02:51.920 Instead of cooperating with the traffic stop, this is what happened.

00:02:56.060 And I'm going to show you two angles of this incident from police body cams.

00:02:59.840 The second body cam is from an officer who was shot as this unfolded.

00:03:03.760 Watch.

00:03:07.880 Roll the windows down.

00:03:09.120 Roll the window down.

00:03:12.760 What are you doing?

00:03:15.120 Roll this one down.

00:03:16.160 Roll that one down too.

00:03:17.120 Hey, don't roll the window up.

00:03:20.340 Don't roll the window up.

00:03:21.540 Okay, do not roll the window up.

00:03:24.280 Unlock the doors now.

00:03:26.160 Unlock the doors now.

00:03:28.600 Unlock the doors now.

00:03:31.000 Open the door now.

00:03:33.220 Open the door now.

00:03:35.100 Open the door now.

00:03:36.700 I'll take portally virtual

00:03:45.640 I'll put your, put your window down, that.

00:03:52.780 Hold this one down to.

00:03:59.620 You do not roll the little.

00:04:02.140 role is alright now,

00:04:05.240 but,

00:04:05.960 So it's clear from the footage that Dexter Reed is wearing a ski mask and he's not cooperating

00:04:28.180 with the officers. They tell him to unlock the door, stop rolling up the windows, and he refuses

00:04:32.600 for quite some time. They have their guns drawn at one point and they're telling him, stop rolling

00:04:37.700 the windows up, unlock the door. He refuses. Then the officers see something that clearly puts them

00:04:43.760 in fear of their life and they back up and shots begin to ring out. One officer is hit in the wrist

00:04:50.080 and he survives. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, quote, Alderman Brian Hopkins, chairman of the city

00:04:56.200 council's public safety committee, said he's been told that 26-year-old Reed fired 11 shots through

00:05:01.120 his car window in what Hopkins called an attempt to kill police officers. An empty gun was recovered

00:05:05.320 at the scene, Hopkins said. He fired 11 rounds at these police officers before he was eventually

00:05:09.840 killed. As of now, police are still investigating the shooting, but Chicago's Civilian Office of

00:05:14.280 Police Accountability has determined that the evidence appears to confirm, quote, unquote,

00:05:18.000 that Reed fired the first shot. And the video by itself shows that pretty clearly. One social media

00:05:22.940 user on Twitter, the account exposed them. Synced up footage from two of the body cams that Chicago

00:05:28.220 police have released. The top body cam is the one that I just showed of the police officer who got

00:05:32.720 hit. The other body cam is from a third officer on the scene. And you can see that the first officer

00:05:37.780 gets hit before the other officers return fire. Watch.

00:05:41.840 The doors now. Unlock the doors now. Unlock the doors now. Open the doors now.

00:05:50.380 Youth.

00:06:03.940 A St Louis gun.

00:06:11.800 uncunk 명.

00:06:34.780 Nise Slamey.

00:06:37.660 Us.

00:06:38.900 Where's they?

00:06:40.280 Okay, so the footage is, on its own, pretty clear evidence that the officers defended

00:06:48.840 themselves. I mean, you could see the one officer get shot, and that should end the discussion

00:06:53.180 entirely. Like, that's it. He's shot at the cops, and he got killed. The end of discussion.

00:06:58.780 But it's not the end of the discussion, because even before these body cams were released,

00:07:02.400 professional agitators engaged in a concerted effort to turn Dexter Reed into a martyr,

00:07:06.880 of course. A former Chicago mayoral candidate and BLM activist named Jamal Green began posting

00:07:12.400 on social media this weekend that the footage would show a, quote, execution. He also warned

00:07:18.040 about possible riots, which, of course, is exactly what Jamal Green wants to happen. And Green's

00:07:23.120 strategy appears to be working, at least so far. This week, crowds turned up outside a police station

00:07:27.360 to heckle officers and make some of the most strained arguments imaginable. Watch.

00:07:32.080 complete chaos outside CPD's 11th district. Demonstrators blocking streets and clashing

00:07:41.180 with police. Close to 100 activists and concerned Chicago residents standing in solidarity,

00:07:51.440 demanding justice following the death of Dexter Reed. We don't need armed police officers to tell

00:07:57.180 somebody to put their seatbelt on. Dexter's vehicle had tinted windows, so the argument that they were

00:08:04.120 looking for a seatbelt issue doesn't make sense. So they're saying the cops couldn't have possibly

00:08:10.340 known whether he was breaking the seatbelt because he was driving with heavily tinted windows,

00:08:14.480 which is also against the law, by the way. Apparently, in BLM circles, this is seen as some

00:08:19.160 sort of checkmate, even though they've just provided an additional reason why police would have wanted to

00:08:25.160 pull this guy over. And on top of that, if you're wondering, well, why can't you have tinted windows?

00:08:30.280 This is why. Because the guy's like this. Because this is why they have tinted windows.

00:08:36.540 And then they argue that there's no need for armed officers to enforce seatbelt laws. Well,

00:08:40.420 apparently there is. Because if they were not armed, they'd be dead. Especially in a city like Chicago,

00:08:47.560 because you never know when someone who's not wearing a seatbelt might be out of jail on a felony gun

00:08:51.700 charge, still packing heat and wearing a ski mask and ready to shoot at you for no reason.

00:08:57.940 And all of that is irrelevant anyway. Because even if they had no reason to pull him over,

00:09:02.500 which they did have a reason, it still obviously doesn't justify him shooting at the cops. He shot

00:09:08.580 at them. You don't get to shoot at the cops if you disagree with their reason for stopping you.

00:09:15.660 I've been pulled over for seatbelt violations before. It's annoying. I find it annoying. I don't

00:09:21.060 think seatbelt laws should exist. I don't think cops should be in the business of enforcing that.

00:09:25.380 If I don't want to wear a seatbelt, then I shouldn't have to wear one. That's my personal opinion.

00:09:29.700 But obviously, when I've been pulled over for a seatbelt violation,

00:09:33.000 it never occurred to me that maybe I should murder the cops because of it.

00:09:38.920 But the push to portray Dexter Reed as a victim continues anyway, because none of this is really

00:09:43.120 about the facts. Alleged academics are getting involved too. An English professor at Amherst named

00:09:47.640 Frank Leon Roberts wrote on social media, quote, his name was Dexter Reed. Murdered in broad daylight

00:09:53.640 by the Chicago Police Department. 96 shots in 41 seconds. 26 years old. His crime not having his

00:09:59.560 seatbelt on. This is America. Defund and abolish the police. No, his crime was shooting at the cops,

00:10:04.760 you moron. This is another thing that's BLM people always do. They fixate on some little detail that has 1.00

00:10:11.740 nothing to do with anything. So in this case, it's going to be 96 shots were fired. So? Yeah,

00:10:18.280 they're trying to put him down because he's shooting at them. So they're going to fire as

00:10:22.040 many shots as they need. If it takes 500 shots, then that's what it takes. There was 96 shots.

00:10:28.620 What? So what? If there was 30 shots, you'd be okay with it? How many shots is too many? When someone's

00:10:33.400 shooting 11 shots at you as a police officer, how many shots are you allowed to return? Is it like 11

00:10:37.700 for 11? Are they supposed to be counting their bullets? One, two, three, four. That's it. That's

00:10:42.600 as many as he were. Everyone, stop, stop, stop. Wait for him to fire again. We can shoot one more.

00:10:48.240 A few hours after the professor wrote that tweet, he deleted it and erased his entire Twitter account, 0.98

00:10:53.100 maybe because it was a little too ridiculous, even by the standards of Amherst. But it wasn't

00:10:57.280 too absurd for the corporate press. They have also done everything they can to portray the police

00:11:02.040 as the aggressors here. Here's how the Washington Post covered Dexter Reed's traffic stop,

00:11:06.140 for example. The headline is, quote, police fired 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing a black

00:11:11.380 man during a traffic stop. So there's nothing in there about what Dexter Reed did during the

00:11:17.300 traffic stop. There's no mention of the fact that he opened fire on the cops. In fact, if

00:11:23.100 you read the story, you don't find any mention of Dexter Reed shooting his handgun until the

00:11:27.380 eighth paragraph of the story. That's not an exaggeration. They ignore it until eight paragraphs

00:11:34.420 in. Instead, here's what the Washington Post talks about. This is what they talk about first.

00:11:40.880 This is from the beginning of their article. It's as emotional and over the top as they possibly

00:11:45.360 can make it. Quote, Dexter Reed's mother remembers the last time she saw her son alive. He was just

00:11:51.140 riding around in his car, Dexter's mother, Nicole Banks, said as she broke down in tears. They killed him.

00:11:57.300 By the way, this is the footage they're referencing. Here it is.

00:11:59.520 He had just bought his new car three days before that. And he was just riding around in his car.

00:12:07.680 He said, Mom, I'm going for a ride. And they killed him. They killed him.

00:12:14.680 Just riding around in his car with a ski mask and an illegal handgun shooting at the cops. That's all.

00:12:20.960 Hey, Mom, I'm gonna go shoot at some cops. Okay, be back by dinner. 0.90

00:12:24.340 What? My son is dead now after that? I never would have seen that coming.

00:12:31.580 So Reed's mother is out at the press conference crying and fainting on camera. Now, I'm sure she

00:12:35.520 is legitimately distraught given that her child was killed. But as always, there's no self-analysis.

00:12:42.260 There's no moment of honest reflection where she wonders how she raised a child who would throw his

00:12:47.880 life away for no reason during a traffic stop. If that was my child, I wouldn't be out in front of

00:12:55.260 cameras in that way. I'd be ashamed. I would be distraught, ashamed of myself. I would say I raised

00:13:03.280 this suicidal son who just threw his life away in an attempt to kill police officers.

00:13:09.980 I would be reflecting on that as a parent. Instead, she blames the cops. And the lawsuit, 1.00

00:13:20.100 I'm sure, will be close behind. And the Washington Post decides to lead with that instead of an

00:13:24.260 accurate description of what happened during the traffic stop. It's hard to think of a more

00:13:28.020 deliberately dishonest way to frame the actions of an attempted cop killer. And just for good measure,

00:13:33.260 the Post puts a giant photo of Dexter Reed at some graduation ceremony from five years ago at the

00:13:37.840 top of the article. They leave his mugshot from his felony of firearms arrest off of it. They don't

00:13:42.760 go with that. This is the way it always goes with BLM martyrs. Maybe you've noticed, you never see 0.87

00:13:49.340 graduation photos of anyone who makes the news for any reason, unless it's a black guy who killed by 0.98

00:13:56.560 the cops. It's the only time you ever see, think about literally anyone else who makes the news for 0.66

00:14:00.720 any good, bad, doesn't. You don't see their graduation photos used in news articles.

00:14:05.800 On Twitter, a writer named Daniel Friedman pointed out the history of this tactic. It began after

00:14:11.880 Michael Brown was shot 10 years ago after fighting with a cop and trying to take his gun. Media outlets

00:14:17.100 went on Brown's Facebook, and then they used unflattering photos of Brown flashing gang signs

00:14:21.720 in their coverage. As Friedman writes, quote, black Twitter reacted angrily. They said that the media was

00:14:27.240 using images of Brown that stereotyped him. There was a trending hashtag, a hashtag if they gunned me down

00:14:33.180 of college students or professionals posting pictures of themselves looking like thugs in

00:14:37.400 solidarity with Brown. So the media relented, and they swapped out the thug photos for graduation

00:14:43.040 photos, and that's what they've been doing ever since. Now, in this case, the Washington Post

00:14:48.280 wasn't alone in whitewashing Reed's actions. CNN ran a similar headline that made no mention of Reed's

00:14:54.060 shooting at officers, quote, 96 shots fired in a fatal traffic stop. Here's what the body cam footage

00:14:59.420 shows. The AP reported, quote, deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises

00:15:04.780 serious questions about use of force. Now, it's almost comical when you picture the editor carefully

00:15:10.220 trying to construct these headlines so that they don't mention the elephant in the room. It's like

00:15:15.560 imagining someone trying to describe the maiden voyage of the Titanic without saying anything about,

00:15:20.300 you know, the whole iceberg incident. But I'd be remiss if I mocked the media's coverage of this

00:15:26.240 episode without mentioning the Daily Mail, because they chose to portray Dexter Reed as a, quote,

00:15:32.900 aspiring broadcaster. So he's not a felon or an attempted cop killer. He was the next Tom Brokaw,

00:15:40.140 apparently. Quote, on Tuesday, Chicago police released footage of the March 21st encounter,

00:15:45.160 which showed them firing 96 shots at Reed, even as he lay motionless on the ground outside his vehicle.

00:15:50.180 The aspiring broadcaster's death has reignited conversations around excessive police force

00:15:57.360 against black people, though officers maintain Reed open fire first. And that's another thing, again,

00:16:03.040 only if it's a black guy killed by the cops do they add in those kinds. Even if he was an aspiring 0.96

00:16:07.600 broadcaster, that has nothing to do with anything. And to just drop that into the middle of the

00:16:12.980 description of the crime is so bizarre. And, but this is, this is, this is what they do now. This

00:16:19.440 is the routine. At least they get around to suggesting that the officers were defending

00:16:24.300 themselves. So there's that. And it's easy to laugh at how absurd this is, but there's a point

00:16:29.720 to it. BLM and their allies in the media are desperate to find a new George Floyd before the

00:16:34.900 election. You know, we knew they would look for it. They're looking for it. They know Democrats

00:16:39.640 stand a very real chance of losing power in November. So they're using the same tactic

00:16:43.980 they did four years ago. George Floyd, we were told, wasn't a home invader or a thief or a drug

00:16:49.760 addict. They told us that he was a gentle giant trying to get his life back on track. And now we're

00:16:55.560 expected to believe that Dexter Reed is also some misunderstood pillar of the local community

00:16:59.860 instead of the degenerate that he clearly was. And the plan is to cause riots, to terrify everybody

00:17:05.720 into voting the way they want and force a national reckoning on race to promote more of their

00:17:10.780 mediocre allies into positions of power. And they plan to accomplish all this by lying about a dead

00:17:17.780 thug who shot at the cops. This is a strategy that we're seeing more and more as we head into the

00:17:23.560 election. Last October, for example, the media tried to incite riots over the shooting death of

00:17:28.660 Leonard Cure. This is a man who tried to kill a police officer on camera during a traffic stop.

00:17:33.840 And there's no dispute about that. I mean, it's on tape. Watch.

00:17:38.900 Put your hands behind your back because you're getting tased. I'm telling you that right now.

00:17:42.800 Why am I getting tased?

00:17:43.700 Because you are under arrest for speeding and reckless driving.

00:17:46.480 I'm not driving. Nobody was hurt. How was I speeding?

00:17:49.200 You passed me doing 100 miles an hour.

00:17:51.540 Okay, so that's a speeding ticket, right?

00:17:53.440 Sir, tickets in the state of Georgia are criminal offenses.

00:17:56.220 I don't have a ticket in Georgia.

00:17:57.740 You do now.

00:17:58.600 Why?

00:17:59.440 You passed me doing 100 miles an hour.

00:18:01.300 And what? Am I going to...

00:18:02.400 Hands behind your back.

00:18:03.620 Yes, you are going to jail.

00:18:06.240 Hands behind your back.

00:18:09.980 Put your hands behind your back.

00:18:11.800 Put your hands behind your back.

00:18:32.400 Stay down.

00:18:41.200 Stay down.

00:18:44.600 Stay down. 0.99

00:18:48.620 Give me the shots fired. 0.99

00:18:49.800 Okay, so the guy went out of his way to get himself killed.

00:18:53.360 The officer went out of his way to avoid killing him until he tried to use everything in his arsenal before he finally pulled the gun.

00:19:00.360 He could have pulled it much sooner.

00:19:02.400 In fact, he should have.

00:19:03.420 But then again, you know, the cops are...

00:19:05.060 The cops are in the position now where as someone is trying to kill them, they are consciously aware that if there's a line they have to walk, and if they end up on the wrong side of that line, they'll end up in prison forever.

00:19:18.260 So that's the situation that cops are in now.

00:19:22.220 And, you know, the other excuse that we often hear for the guys, the quote-unquote victims in these videos, is, well, here, well, you know, black men are...

00:19:31.880 They're afraid. 0.77

00:19:32.740 They're afraid of the cops.

00:19:33.840 And that's why they react the way they do in those videos.

00:19:37.900 Wait, so you're afraid of the cop?

00:19:39.780 And so you're doing everything you possibly can to provoke a violent response from the cops?

00:19:44.760 That's what you do if you're afraid of them?

00:19:47.620 What?

00:19:48.880 This is the exact opposite of fear.

00:19:52.120 This is a total indifference to your own life, to the cop's life, to the laws, to, like, the basic structure of civilized society.

00:20:02.460 After seeing that footage, here was the Washington Post headline, quote,

00:20:06.500 Deputy fatally shoots man who served 16 years for wrongful conviction.

00:20:10.100 The article begins, Leonard Cure, who was exonerated in 2020, was killed by a Georgia sheriff's deputy during a traffic stop.

00:20:16.640 The deputy used a taser and a baton before shooting Cure.

00:20:19.760 The Post didn't get around to mentioning that Cure tried to murder the deputy until 14 paragraphs into the story.

00:20:27.400 And even then, they described it as carefully as they possibly could.

00:20:30.080 They say that Cure was forcefully grappling with the deputy and pushing the deputy's head back with his hand.

00:20:35.180 Forcefully grappling, that's their way of describing, you know, a guy trying to choke the officer to death.

00:20:41.900 And, of course, Ben Crump came out and declared that Cure had been shot simply for being black.

00:20:47.540 Because, you know, if Cure was white, then the officer would have said, 0.93

00:20:49.940 All right, if you want to choke me to death, go ahead. 0.98

00:20:52.220 I mean, you're white, after all. 0.98

00:20:54.280 Maybe other cops show up and, you know, they run in for backup and he would wave them off.

00:20:58.900 He'd say, No, no, he's white. It's okay. No, he's white. It's fine. 0.98

00:21:01.480 He can go ahead and kill me. Just go ahead. Get it over with. 1.00

00:21:03.660 If you're white, that effort didn't catch on in quite the same way the media and BLM activists had hoped.

00:21:11.100 So now they're trying again.

00:21:12.960 And they'll continue to try until one of two things happen.

00:21:15.880 Either they get the riots they want and they terrorize millions of people into voting for Democrats out of fear.

00:21:20.800 Or, for once, normal, sane people stand up and say what's obvious.

00:21:25.760 And that's the fact that Dexter Reed and Leonard Cure and all these BLM heroes are the dregs of society. 1.00

00:21:34.020 They are not role models.

00:21:35.460 And they are not victims.

00:21:37.300 They are, in fact, the cause of many serious problems that cities like Chicago are experiencing right now.

00:21:42.180 That's the only message that can put an end to these riots before they start and avert a repeat of the pillaging we saw in 2020.

00:21:50.720 It happens to also be a message that most Americans believe, even if they're afraid to say it.

00:21:56.440 But as unpleasant as it may be, it's time we start saying it.

00:22:02.120 Now let's get to our five headlines.

00:22:09.240 Well, it's 2024, and if you're still spending your money with woke companies, cut it out. 0.95

00:22:13.640 There are a lot of great companies out there that aren't shoving diversity and inclusion initiatives down the throats of their employees or their customers.

00:22:19.900 Maybe you're already doing business with some of these.

00:22:21.700 That's great.

00:22:22.440 Maybe you're boycotting companies who have made headlines by acquiring the latest trans influencer as their spokesperson or whatever.

00:22:28.440 Even better.

00:22:28.900 But if you give it much thought to where your money is currently invested, a lot of big wealth management companies make billions of dollars investing your money however they want, wherever they want.

00:22:38.080 Even if that means investing in businesses who don't care about your values.

00:22:41.780 Align your portfolio with your principles today with my friends at Constitution Wealth.

00:22:46.820 Constitution Wealth is the patriot's choice in wealth management.

00:22:50.000 They'll help you build a solid investment plan while reducing your investments in the ESGs and DEIs,

00:22:54.760 companies that care more about global warming and diversity ratios than they do about your return on your investment.

00:23:00.880 And with Constitution Wealth, you can start using your shareholder votes to support conservative action.

00:23:05.600 Fight the culture war with your most valuable weapon, your investments.

00:23:09.200 Help build a parallel economy by working with an investment firm composed of professionals who are patriots like you.

00:23:14.420 If you have $250,000 or more of stock and bond investments and would like to reduce your exposure to woke companies, go to ConstitutionWealth.com slash Matt.

00:23:24.740 That's ConstitutionWealth.com slash Matt.

00:23:27.480 The article from the AP says the Arizona legislature devolved into shouts of shame, shame on Wednesday as Republican lawmakers quickly shut down discussions on a proposed repeal of the state's newly revived 1864 law

00:23:39.900 that criminalizes abortion throughout pregnancy unless a woman's life is at risk.

00:23:43.820 The state Supreme Court cleared the way on Tuesday for enforcement of the pre-statehood law.

00:23:48.460 Arizona abortion providers vowed yesterday to continue service until they're forced to stop, possibly within weeks.

00:23:53.480 State legislators convened as pressure mounted from Democrats and some Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, for them to intervene.

00:24:01.160 House Democrats and at least one Republican tried to open discussion on a repeal of the 1864 abortion ban, which holds no exceptions for rape or incest.

00:24:08.660 GOP leaders who commanded the majority cut it off twice and quickly adjourned for the week.

00:24:13.840 I think we have some footage of the commotion.

00:24:19.380 Let's watch that.

00:24:20.300 I move that we recess to the sun of the bill immediately.

00:24:23.840 You've heard the secondary motion.

00:24:25.740 I heard a second.

00:24:28.680 All in favor of that motion, vote aye.

00:24:31.680 All opposed vote no.

00:24:33.140 Ayes have it. 0.98

00:24:33.720 So all of it.

00:24:34.280 Shame on you.

00:24:38.380 Shame on you. 0.57

00:24:41.020 Shame on you. 0.57

00:24:43.720 Shame on you.

00:24:45.640 Hold the vote.

00:24:47.900 Hold the vote.

00:24:49.780 Hold the vote.

00:24:51.660 Hold the vote.

00:24:53.240 We know that the...

00:24:55.680 All right.

00:24:56.300 So they're very upset.

00:24:58.160 And these are people who, just to be clear, of course, about what they're upset about, they're upset that fewer babies are going to be killed in the state of Arizona.

00:25:07.560 They're very, very upset.

00:25:08.820 They're very distraught when they lie awake at night, tossing and turning, thinking about all of the babies who will live instead of being dismembered.

00:25:19.220 That's what they're upset about. 0.95

00:25:20.440 So these are evil, evil people.

00:25:21.780 And, you know, one of the arguments, I mean, you heard in the article I just read, the fact that this was an 1864 law was mentioned like four times.

00:25:31.220 You know, that's supposed to be relevant, the fact that the law dates back that far.

00:25:39.180 So it's a law.

00:25:41.780 Like, it doesn't matter how old it is.

00:25:43.720 So the claim is that, well, yeah, but people who are alive today didn't vote on that law.

00:25:51.620 Is that the way the law works now?

00:25:54.120 That every law that predates our own existence has to come back up for a vote?

00:25:59.420 Is that the way that we think a democracy is going to work now?

00:26:02.440 That any law that existed before us doesn't count?

00:26:05.760 But, and we have to, so with every new generation, we have to, we have to vote again on every law to make sure that every new generation is, is okay with every law that's been passed in the past.

00:26:16.980 It's crazy.

00:26:17.880 It's just, it's insane.

00:26:20.760 But this is the argument.

00:26:23.760 And unfortunately, it's an argument being made, not just by Democrats, but by Republicans.

00:26:27.820 Um, Carrie Lake, who's running for Senate, says that she opposes the Supreme Court decision banning abortion in her state.

00:26:37.620 And Trump told reporters yesterday that he thinks that the law, quote, went too far.

00:26:42.600 Watch.

00:26:44.500 Mr. President, did Arizona go too far?

00:26:47.360 Did Arizona go too far?

00:26:48.520 Yeah, they did.

00:26:49.320 And that'll be straightened out.

00:26:50.580 And as you know, it's all about states' rights.

00:26:52.720 That'll be straightened out.

00:26:53.700 And I'm sure that the governor and everybody else are going to bring it back into reason.

00:26:58.060 And that'll be taken care of, I think, very quickly.

00:27:00.480 What do you think about Florida?

00:27:02.360 Florida is probably maybe going to change or something.

00:27:05.300 See, it's all of what, it's the will of the people.

00:27:07.780 This is what I've been saying.

00:27:08.820 It's a perfect system.

00:27:10.500 So for 52 years, people have wanted to end Roe v. Wade to get it back to the states.

00:27:16.020 We did that.

00:27:16.780 It was an incredible thing, an incredible achievement.

00:27:19.460 We did that.

00:27:20.060 And now the states have it, and the states are putting out what they want.

00:27:24.240 It's the will of the people.

00:27:25.520 So Florida's probably going to change.

00:27:28.320 Arizona's going to definitely change.

00:27:30.500 Everybody wants that to happen.

00:27:32.500 And you're getting the will of the people.

00:27:34.120 It's been pretty amazing, wouldn't you think?

00:27:38.080 Okay, so that's Trump.

00:27:39.340 He says that everybody's happy that Roe v. Wade was overturned.

00:27:43.040 Obviously, everyone is not happy.

00:27:44.680 He says everybody wants the Arizona law to be changed.

00:27:47.760 Everyone does not want that.

00:27:50.060 Now, look, I've already said that I understand the prudential political judgment to not call for a federal ban on abortion when you're running for national political office.

00:28:02.820 Now, I personally would like to see a federal ban.

00:28:05.980 I think it should be banned federally.

00:28:07.520 But I also don't believe in committing political Harry Carey in a way that won't achieve anything except making it a lot harder for you to win an election, thereby ensuring that a radically pro-abortion lunatic in Joe Biden who imprisons pro-lifers will get elected.

00:28:22.120 So I get all that, you know, but if your argument is that it's states' rights and the states should make the choice and then you come out and oppose a state law banning abortion.

00:28:38.080 Well, now you're not making a states' rights case anymore so that Trump's response there doesn't really make any sense.

00:28:44.060 He says, yeah, the law went too far.

00:28:45.660 It's states' rights.

00:28:46.400 But it is a state.

00:28:47.400 This is not a federal law.

00:28:48.660 This is about Arizona.

00:28:49.860 So now you're just making a case against pro-life laws.

00:28:55.680 This is not states' rights anymore.

00:28:56.800 You're in principle making a case against the pro-life law itself.

00:29:02.680 And that we can't do.

00:29:04.300 We can't do that.

00:29:05.240 Both because it's just wrong.

00:29:07.280 It's the wrong view.

00:29:08.660 And it's wrong to throw the whole pro-life movement under the bus.

00:29:12.440 And also because politically it's not a smart tactic.

00:29:15.900 Okay, let me put it this way.

00:29:16.720 No matter what you do or say as a Republican, you are going to be painted as the anti-choice extremist, quote unquote.

00:29:26.040 Okay, that happens no matter what.

00:29:28.320 There's nothing Trump can do or say that's going to make the left go, oh, you know what?

00:29:31.240 Yeah, he's actually, he's cool on this.

00:29:32.620 He's cool, guys.

00:29:33.420 Hey, he's cool.

00:29:34.520 He's not against your reproductive rights, women. 0.65

00:29:37.260 He's not going to try to turn this into a handmaid's tale.

00:29:39.560 He would never do that.

00:29:40.880 They are not going to say that.

00:29:42.500 It doesn't matter.

00:29:43.120 Trump could come out tomorrow and announce that he's calling for legalized abortion nationwide through every trimester of pregnancy.

00:29:51.520 He could say that, and it wouldn't matter.

00:29:54.260 They still would brand him a radical pro-life militant.

00:29:57.760 It's not very different from what they do with race.

00:30:01.860 Okay, you can come out and say, I'm for prison reform.

00:30:04.440 I'm for criminal justice reform.

00:30:05.620 I think there are a lot of racist cops. 0.95

00:30:07.820 I think systemic racism.

00:30:08.960 You could say all that, and they still are going to brand you as a Jim Crow racist.

00:30:15.000 You want to bring it back to Jim Crow. 0.98

00:30:16.280 You want to go all the way back to slavery.

00:30:18.640 That's still going to be the narrative, no matter what you say.

00:30:22.500 And that matters, obviously, politically.

00:30:28.320 It also sort of, in a way, takes the pressure off.

00:30:32.500 There's no reason to compromise on your basic principle.

00:30:36.180 I mean, you shouldn't anyway, but there's no political reason to do it, because it doesn't matter if you do.

00:30:42.780 Their narrative about you is going to be the same no matter what you say.

00:30:48.320 And so don't worry about that.

00:30:50.120 Don't worry about their narrative.

00:30:51.180 You can't change it.

00:30:51.900 So, look, there are two ways to go, given that reality, given the reality that no matter what you do, you are a, quote, unquote, anti-choice, you know.

00:31:07.220 So there are two ways to go with that tactically.

00:31:10.460 Okay, and that's what we're talking about right now, about tactics.

00:31:12.400 One is to continually insist that it isn't true, because actually your views are much more moderate than the real pro-life militants.

00:31:26.140 You know, you could try that.

00:31:26.940 You could say, oh, yeah, well, there's a pro-life extremist over there.

00:31:29.000 I'm not with them.

00:31:31.000 I'm not one of them.

00:31:32.700 Yuck.

00:31:33.160 I don't want them.

00:31:34.700 You could do that.

00:31:35.860 And this is what Republicans have done historically.

00:31:38.040 Okay, this has been the historic Republican strategy for as long as I've been alive.

00:31:48.520 You know, pro-lifers have been treated as sort of the redheaded stepchildren of the conservative movement by most mainstream national Republicans forever.

00:31:58.180 And so that's what you can do.

00:32:01.380 I think there's little evidence that it pays off.

00:32:04.220 And, again, I'm putting aside the fact that it's just wrong.

00:32:06.060 It's just the wrong thing to do.

00:32:07.320 But politically, there's little evidence that that pays off.

00:32:11.940 The other strategy, okay, the other strategy is not to, like, we'll just jump on the grenade and, you know, and take a politically unpopular position and live with it.

00:32:21.720 And that's not what I'm saying.

00:32:23.000 I guess that's a third option.

00:32:25.020 So maybe there's three options.

00:32:25.920 That's the third.

00:32:26.660 I say don't do that either.

00:32:27.860 There's a second option, though, which is to flip the script, okay, to stop having the argument on their terms, to stop accepting their framing, to put them on defense.

00:32:41.120 And that isn't very difficult to do because, fortunately, the pro-life argument is very strong.

00:32:48.400 But you have to make it.

00:32:50.800 Okay, think about this. 0.59

00:32:51.700 There are many Republican politicians who've decided that being pro-life is a political loser.

00:32:56.540 Even though they have never, not once, never, not ever, actually articulated the pro-life case with any force or effectiveness.

00:33:07.920 Now, yes, every Republican pretty much has, at some point or another, called themselves pro-life.

00:33:15.400 Maybe they've, you know, maybe they've said something about we should protect the unborn, you know, that sort of thing.

00:33:20.700 So, like, in a sentence or two, they have very vaguely, very broadly articulated that they are pro-life.

00:33:27.580 But how many elected Republicans can you think of who have actually made the argument in an effective way, just explained, like, look, I'm pro-life, here's why, and then explained it.

00:33:44.700 And the case, again, is very solid.

00:33:47.800 Because this is the case.

00:33:49.200 In the form of a kind of a syllogism, this is the pro-life case.

00:33:53.580 Number one, it is always wrong to intentionally and directly kill innocent, defenseless human beings.

00:34:01.620 Number one.

00:34:03.420 Number two, unborn babies are human beings.

00:34:07.020 They cannot possibly be anything else.

00:34:09.300 Because if there were something else, that would mean they were another species.

00:34:11.700 And obviously, they are not another species, so they are human.

00:34:15.220 Number three.

00:34:17.400 Therefore, abortion intentionally and directly kills innocent and defenseless human beings. 0.68

00:34:22.920 Number four.

00:34:24.060 Therefore, abortion is wrong. 0.98

00:34:26.620 That's how you walk through.

00:34:28.460 Just four points.

00:34:30.480 Very clear.

00:34:31.740 Doesn't take long to say.

00:34:33.280 It's not complicated.

00:34:34.700 It's very simple.

00:34:36.140 You could say this on a debate stage.

00:34:38.040 It's not extremist.

00:34:39.680 It's not radical.

00:34:40.760 It's not.

00:34:41.620 It's a clear, powerful case.

00:34:46.880 It's the reason I'm pro-life.

00:34:48.760 It's because I find that convincing.

00:34:50.800 Doesn't mean everybody will.

00:34:51.980 But it's a, you can make that argument and actually convince people, I've done it.

00:34:58.820 Don't tell me it can't be done.

00:35:00.760 Because that's the other thing you hear also all the time.

00:35:03.060 People will say that, well, you can't convince anyone to be pro-life.

00:35:06.320 But the people saying that have never even tried to convince anyone.

00:35:11.580 They have no clue what they're talking about.

00:35:15.300 So that's the pro-life position.

00:35:16.880 And I ask you, when is the last time you heard a Republican, any Republican, in any elected office or running for office spell the argument out that way?

00:35:27.740 I'm not saying it's never happened, but I can't even think of one example off the top of my head.

00:35:31.760 Maybe some people in the comments will say, well, here's someone.

00:35:33.740 But maybe there have been a few.

00:35:35.140 I wouldn't, it wouldn't surprise me if there's been a few.

00:35:37.800 But it is very, very rare.

00:35:40.600 And that's pretty amazing, isn't it?

00:35:42.040 Because this is the argument.

00:35:44.180 And yet you can hardly think of one example in the last 30 years of a Republican actually making what the argument is, explaining what it is.

00:35:53.340 It almost never happens.

00:35:56.280 So I keep hearing that Republicans lose if they make the pro-life argument, yet I've never heard any of them make it.

00:36:01.100 So how can we say that?

00:36:02.840 How in the hell can you say that they lose if they do something they've never actually done?

00:36:08.520 Here's the beauty of this syllogism.

00:36:11.500 There is a way to argue against what I just said.

00:36:15.360 Against the four points.

00:36:17.540 You could do it.

00:36:18.880 It's not like there's no argument against it.

00:36:21.360 I mean, there's an argument against anything.

00:36:23.340 It might not be a good argument, but it might not be a true argument.

00:36:25.840 There's an argument against anything.

00:36:27.620 So there is an argument.

00:36:29.700 But the only thing you can really dispute is point one.

00:36:33.660 That's the only one you can really take issue with.

00:36:37.880 So, you know, point two, that quote-unquote fetuses are human, that's scientifically indisputable.

00:36:46.360 You cannot dispute that.

00:36:48.220 It's like disputing that an eagle is a bird.

00:36:50.280 It just doesn't make any sense.

00:36:51.220 You can't dispute it.

00:36:52.000 So there's no way around it.

00:36:54.260 You can dispute point one.

00:36:56.660 You could say that, well, actually, it's not always wrong to intentionally and directly kill an innocent human being.

00:37:01.860 You could say that, yeah, fetuses, quote-unquote, are human.

00:37:06.200 And yes, you're killing them through abortion, but it's not always wrong to do that. 0.87

00:37:12.420 So you could make, that's, that is the argument. 0.54

00:37:14.220 That is the only argument against the pro-life syllogism.

00:37:18.260 I think it's the wrong argument, morally, but that is the argument you're making if you support abortion.

00:37:24.840 You're saying that actually, in fact, sometimes killing innocent human life directly and intentionally is okay.

00:37:30.560 So, okay, let the left make that argument.

00:37:37.980 Force them to make that argument.

00:37:41.620 Force the debate to be around that point.

00:37:45.200 Not any other point.

00:37:48.460 Is it okay, under some circumstances, to intentionally and directly kill innocent human beings?

00:37:54.600 That is the fundamental question.

00:37:57.620 And if you support abortion, your answer to that question is yes.

00:38:01.340 All right, if that's your answer.

00:38:05.020 But you can see why nobody really wants to say that.

00:38:08.520 Nobody wants to frame it that way.

00:38:10.660 That is not the argument anyone wants to have.

00:38:14.900 No politician wants to stand up on the stage and say,

00:38:17.600 all right, let me explain why sometimes killing innocent people is okay.

00:38:21.460 Nobody wants to say that.

00:38:23.080 But that is what, that's, that's, that's what they're saying.

00:38:26.160 They're saying it, but they don't want to say it.

00:38:27.760 So they'd rather access the, the, the abortion conversation.

00:38:32.700 They, they'd rather stay in the peripheral, stay on the boundaries.

00:38:36.920 They don't want to talk about the actual issue.

00:38:38.840 They want to talk about rape and incest, life of the mother, you know, this and that.

00:38:43.340 And do we, what do we imprison women after they get abortions? 1.00

00:38:46.460 Like they want to stay all out here.

00:38:49.340 But the thing right there in the middle, the core of the issue,

00:38:52.240 they don't want to talk about it.

00:38:54.540 And yet conservatives allow them, allow them to stay on the perimeter rather than saying,

00:39:00.320 no, no, no, no, no, we're not even talking about that.

00:39:02.880 I'm not even talking about that.

00:39:05.120 How are we going to talk about that way before we've even talked about the,

00:39:07.720 what the actual issue is itself?

00:39:10.980 And I, and this strategy of reframing the argument,

00:39:15.900 discipline on the message, not allowing them to change the subject,

00:39:20.700 not allowing them to get hung up on hard cases, all that.

00:39:23.220 But that strategy can work.

00:39:25.160 We've seen it work.

00:39:26.780 It's what we did successfully and are doing successfully on the gender issue.

00:39:33.300 Okay.

00:39:33.700 It's why we have seen, this is not some accident.

00:39:36.160 Okay.

00:39:36.400 The fact that we've seen this massive change in the tide,

00:39:41.680 especially when it comes to children being castrated and mutilated,

00:39:46.220 where we are now culturally on that issue is night and day from where we were three,

00:39:51.020 four years ago.

00:39:52.460 And that was not an accident.

00:39:54.220 There's a strategy behind it.

00:39:55.760 It was, it was intentional.

00:39:57.700 Those of us in that movement said, here's how we're going to go about this.

00:40:03.100 And we framed the argument.

00:40:04.340 We said, this is what the subject is.

00:40:05.600 We're not going to let you talk about anything else on this.

00:40:08.300 This is what we're talking about. 0.78

00:40:11.260 Do you support castrating and mutilating kids or not? 0.91

00:40:14.060 That's what it is. 0.97

00:40:14.880 And we hammered on that and we're winning.

00:40:19.860 And the same thing can happen here.

00:40:22.280 All right.

00:40:23.360 Daily Wire has this.

00:40:24.480 A Canadian man had two healthy fingers amputated to treat his body integrity dysphoria,

00:40:29.040 a case report about his procedure reveals.

00:40:31.060 The 20-year-old ambidextrous man experienced profound distress over his left hand's fourth

00:40:35.440 and fifth fingers and decided to have them amputated, according to the case report,

00:40:39.240 which was published on March 27th.

00:40:40.640 Body integrity disorder is the rare phenomenon of individuals wanting to amputate parts of

00:40:45.140 their body, usually limbs, often because they feel the body part does not belong to them.

00:40:49.180 The young man opted for amputation after non-invasive treatments proved unsuccessful,

00:40:53.820 the report says.

00:40:57.040 The man described having intrusive thoughts about his left hand's fourth and fifth fingers

00:41:01.020 since childhood and felt they should not belong to his body.

00:41:04.360 He described often hiding his fingers, causing pain, and said he had not told his family about

00:41:08.840 his distress due to embarrassment.

00:41:10.640 The man also said he suffered from nightmares in which his fingers were burning or rotting.

00:41:15.360 He considered removing the fingers himself.

00:41:20.700 Now, you may recall in a certain film, a certain person asked a sex change surgeon about this

00:41:26.980 exact thing.

00:41:29.020 And that would be me, of course, in What is a Woman, talking to Marcy Bowers.

00:41:33.460 And I asked about someone who comes in asking for a limb to be removed.

00:41:38.400 Body integrity disorder.

00:41:40.600 And Bowers said, if you recall, that that would be kooky.

00:41:44.820 And it's also totally unrelated to the gender question.

00:41:48.760 And yet, here we are.

00:41:51.800 Now doctors are doing exactly that.

00:41:55.240 Because, of course, it's related.

00:41:56.900 Of course, it's related.

00:41:57.980 It's the exact same sort of thing.

00:41:59.500 Actually, I'll say this.

00:42:01.160 I think there is a better argument for removing a healthy arm or finger or whatever from a mentally 1.00

00:42:07.440 ill person than there is for gender transitions.

00:42:12.760 I think what they did to this guy by cutting his finger off is more justifiable than any

00:42:18.660 quote-unquote gender transition surgery that's ever been performed.

00:42:21.840 It's not justifiable.

00:42:23.080 It's crazy to do it.

00:42:24.060 Don't get me wrong.

00:42:25.240 But there's a better argument for that than there is for this other thing.

00:42:28.440 And I'll tell you why.

00:42:29.200 And by the way, again, I don't think doctors should do this, obviously.

00:42:34.420 But I think there's a better case.

00:42:35.780 And the reason is simply because removing the fingers was very clearly and explicitly done

00:42:41.460 in order to stop the guy from doing it to himself.

00:42:45.680 And the end result is he had fewer fingers.

00:42:49.240 Obviously.

00:42:50.400 That's the result he wanted.

00:42:51.960 And that's what he got.

00:42:52.620 Like, he went in and said, I don't want these fingers anymore.

00:42:56.340 It's crazy you don't want your fingers.

00:42:57.860 But that's what he said.

00:42:59.720 And so they cut his fingers off.

00:43:01.480 The reason for wanting that procedure was insane.

00:43:05.560 But that's what he wanted.

00:43:06.660 That's what he got it.

00:43:07.700 Now, in the case of gender transition, the patient doesn't want to simply lose their real

00:43:13.720 sex. 0.99

00:43:14.700 Okay, they don't go in saying, I don't want my penis anymore. 1.00

00:43:17.280 They're not saying that. 1.00

00:43:19.400 No, what they want is they want to gain a new sex. 0.82

00:43:22.460 They want to become something else.

00:43:25.060 And they're told that they can become that thing, but they can't.

00:43:29.340 So the procedure is the same as what happens to the guy losing his fingers.

00:43:33.820 It's the same kind of thing.

00:43:35.020 But it's being sold not as an amputation, but as a transformation.

00:43:40.040 So the gender transition surgery is barbaric and bizarre, like cutting the guy's fingers 1.00

00:43:44.840 off.

00:43:45.640 And it's also totally dishonest.

00:43:47.840 You're selling them something.

00:43:49.140 At least the guy who gets his fingers cut off, like he knows that the end result is,

00:43:52.520 okay, he's going to be a guy that has two fewer fingers.

00:43:55.220 But the person who goes in for the gender transition thinks and is told that at the end

00:43:59.000 of that procedure, they are going to have become, they will have actually gained something,

00:44:03.280 not lost anything.

00:44:04.280 And that's the difference.

00:44:09.660 And on top of that, of course, also losing your genitals is quite a bit more severe, I

00:44:13.740 think most people would agree, than losing a couple of fingers.

00:44:16.640 Like you can lose a couple of fingers and go on to live a normal, fine life.

00:44:21.160 You lose your genitals and it's just, you're not going to be, it destroys your life. 1.00

00:44:26.720 You're not going to be a functioning person. 0.88

00:44:28.260 You can't reproduce all the rest of it.

00:44:29.840 So the point is that, you know, gender transition is actually, it's actually the most extreme, 1.00

00:44:37.340 most bizarre, most barbaric form of this sort of thing.

00:44:42.060 Cutting off fingers is the less extreme version.

00:44:44.860 So once again, we say that we're on a slippery slope and a lot of people will say that, okay,

00:44:49.740 well, this is the next stop in the slippery slope is now we're cutting off fingers and

00:44:52.600 arms.

00:44:53.200 It's actually not the next stop.

00:44:54.440 Like if we're on the slope, the slope was going down like this and, and the gender transition 1.00

00:45:00.000 stuff is down here.

00:45:01.160 Cutting fingers off is like somewhere up here on the slope.

00:45:03.380 That's, that's on the way.

00:45:04.300 That's like a midpoint.

00:45:05.480 Okay.

00:45:05.780 That's, that's, you know, if we were, if we were following that process in a logical way,

00:45:09.800 we would have started with cutting fingers and arms off. 0.85

00:45:13.260 And then you get the chopping genitals off because that's the most extreme version of that. 1.00

00:45:17.600 Um, the only thing that would be more extreme is if we get to a point where somebody goes

00:45:24.160 to the doctor and says, I want to have my head removed and they decide to go along with

00:45:28.540 that.

00:45:28.700 Like if there's anything more extreme than the genital surgeries, it's that.

00:45:33.060 Um, so as always, you know, it's not really a, if it is a slippery slope, it's more that

00:45:37.360 we like, we plunge to the bottom of the slope and then we circle back and we cover the bases

00:45:43.000 that we skipped.

00:45:43.960 And that's kind of the way it works.

00:45:44.940 Finally, one more thing, Daily Wire has this classic board game dumbed down to be more

00:45:49.100 inclusive and less intimidating to young people.

00:45:52.060 One of the world's most popular board games is being altered to be less competitive and

00:45:55.380 more inclusive to appeal to young people.

00:45:57.840 Scrabble's parent company, Mattel, announced the move on Tuesday.

00:46:01.000 Uh, the first major change in 75 years, the new version will involve of Scrabble will

00:46:05.320 involve a second side to the board that is collaborative and faster paced to make gameplay

00:46:09.520 more accessible for anybody who finds word games intimidating.

00:46:12.820 The classic word game will debut a new way to play the game called Scrabble Together on

00:46:19.060 the flip side of the board and it'll be for less competitive people and, um, the new version

00:46:25.620 will have goal cards rather than scoring.

00:46:27.940 It will also have helper cards with prompts and clues as well as an option to play on teams.

00:46:32.040 It will also be a shorter game overall.

00:46:33.960 So, they're making, uh, inclusive board games now.

00:46:37.960 You know, I have to say that, you know, I, I find this personally offensive on a very deep

00:46:41.680 level as a board game nerd myself.

00:46:44.560 Uh, I take board games very seriously, uh, way too seriously.

00:46:48.620 Um, I take them so seriously in fact that most members of my family refuse to play board

00:46:54.920 games with me anymore.

00:46:55.640 I have been banned from board games by most members of my family.

00:46:59.720 Um, I have some members of my family that have put me on a board game moratorium that

00:47:04.220 has lasted for like a decade and I'm not even making that up.

00:47:06.880 In fact, in my family, we had one particularly intense game of, uh, Scattergories, which is

00:47:10.760 a great game by the way.

00:47:12.200 And we had a very intense game of Scattergories 10 years ago and it's still brought up, um, and

00:47:18.520 used against me anytime I recommend or I suggest playing a board game.

00:47:21.860 So that's how intense it was and I take it seriously.

00:47:25.940 Okay.

00:47:26.200 So, and is that so wrong?

00:47:27.980 Uh, as I mentioned before, the game Settlers of Catan, I love Scrabble too.

00:47:31.760 Settlers of Catan is, is the most important game to me.

00:47:34.460 I am, not to brag, uh, extremely good at that game.

00:47:38.640 Um, probably one of the top players in the world, I would assume anyway.

00:47:43.900 And there are only three people in my life willing to play me in that game.

00:47:48.060 And one is my wife and the other two are my brother-in-law and sister-in-law.

00:47:51.540 And we've basically been in a Catan tournament that lasted, you know, it's lasted about, I

00:47:55.580 don't know, it's lasted many years at this point.

00:47:57.440 And if we've played 50 times, I probably won 47 of those games.

00:48:01.000 That's the kind of streak I'm on.

00:48:02.660 And, uh, they would dispute that record, but they're not here right now.

00:48:06.860 And of course, there are always snitches in the audience that will like tweet at my wife 1.00

00:48:10.360 and say, well, Matt said this on the show.

00:48:12.180 Is it true?

00:48:13.520 Just, just cut it out.

00:48:15.340 So you don't need to do that in this case.

00:48:16.500 She doesn't keep track anyway.

00:48:17.740 She doesn't know.

00:48:18.220 Anyway, the point is, uh, I take board games very seriously, um, as one of the top board

00:48:23.460 game competitors in the world and probably in history.

00:48:26.020 And I see stuff like this and I find it, it's deeply unsettling because it's an insult.

00:48:30.580 It is an attack on the board game community.

00:48:32.800 The whole point is to be competitive.

00:48:35.220 It is to win.

00:48:36.160 It is to destroy your enemies by any means necessary.

00:48:40.060 That's the point.

00:48:42.300 That's why even when I play board games with my kids, I don't let them win.

00:48:46.940 None of my kids have ever beat me in any game because you have to earn that.

00:48:51.480 And so I'm on a, certainly against them on a, I'm on a win streak of every single game

00:48:54.960 I've played against them because you gotta, you gotta earn it.

00:48:57.260 You gotta earn beating me.

00:48:58.140 I'm not going to give it to you.

00:48:59.000 I don't care.

00:48:59.800 It doesn't matter to me.

00:49:01.240 I was playing shoots and ladders with my kids recently.

00:49:03.380 And my seven-year-old was winning.

00:49:06.160 He was about to get to the end and he landed on the space with a really big slide, you

00:49:10.040 know, that's like, it's almost, you're almost at the end and the slide takes you all the

00:49:13.080 way back down to the beginning.

00:49:14.140 And he landed on that and he was pretty upset.

00:49:16.280 And my other kids were like, oh, dad, can't he just skip that?

00:49:19.300 He's about to win.

00:49:20.200 And I said, no, sorry, bud, back down the slide you go.

00:49:24.920 Okay.

00:49:25.540 Sorry about your luck.

00:49:26.740 I'm five spaces away from winning this thing.

00:49:28.600 You think I'm going to just let you have it?

00:49:30.180 It'd be tainted anyway.

00:49:32.020 I can't let you have a tainted victory.

00:49:33.480 Um, and so that's the way I look at these things.

00:49:38.340 And, uh, so this is, uh, just a, a disgrace and an insult.

00:49:43.300 As you know, we here at the Daily Wire are big fans of entertainment content that isn't

00:49:47.020 trying to push a woke agenda into your living room.

00:49:49.460 And that's why you got to go check out The Ballad of Davy Crockett, a pro-America, pro-family,

00:49:54.180 pro-God, PG-13 action adventure that fathers and sons can watch together.

00:49:58.940 An historical fiction from the imagination of writer and director Derek Eslin Purvis.

00:50:02.680 The film explores some of the many myths that helped to create the legend of Davy Crockett.

00:50:07.680 The story begins in 1815 when Crockett's wife falls deathly ill, leaving his young children

00:50:12.340 to survive on their own.

00:50:13.780 The American legend must fight his way back to them across the many perils found in the

00:50:18.400 savage lands of the wild frontier.

00:50:20.360 This film examines the complex 200-year history of European settlers and Native Americans

00:50:25.000 living side by side as neighbors, long before Andrew Jackson's Indian Removal Act.

00:50:28.760 It stands in direct opposition to the genocidal colonization story that Hollywood loves to

00:50:33.020 tell.

00:50:33.820 Instead, exposes the truth that these two groups traded with each other, intermarried, and

00:50:37.820 yes, sometimes fought, as humans do.

00:50:40.660 The Ballad of Davy Crockett is in select theaters now.

00:50:42.700 It's available to buy or rent everywhere that you buy movies.

00:50:45.600 If you want to support films that are decent, family-friendly, and they push back against Hollywood's

00:50:50.060 anti-American agenda, please support this small independent film.

00:50:53.620 Click the link in the description and go check out The Ballad of Davy Crockett.

00:50:57.180 Well, it's been two years of fighting the left and building the future with great products.

00:51:01.460 We're only getting better.

00:51:02.500 Jeremy's second-generation razors are here.

00:51:04.500 Same mission, new razors.

00:51:05.900 You'll notice a redesigned ergonomic handle for superior durability and improved coated

00:51:10.540 stainless steel blades.

00:51:11.820 For those of you who craft your masculine look with precision, we have Jeremy's new

00:51:16.040 and improved Precision 5 razor.

00:51:18.280 Precision trimmer allows you to tailor your shave.

00:51:20.280 It provides an exceptionally smooth and close shave.

00:51:22.940 Now, if shaving is more of a chore, you just want to get it done and over with.

00:51:25.780 The brand-new Sprint 3 is for you.

00:51:27.840 Open blade geometry allows for a quick clean shave so you can get back to your manly activities

00:51:32.400 as quickly as possible.

00:51:33.600 Razors made right. 1.00

00:51:34.660 Progress that isn't progressive.

00:51:35.660 Head on over to jeremysrazors.com to upgrade your new second-generation razor today.

00:51:41.100 Now, let's get to our daily cancellation.

00:51:42.360 As ESPN reported this week, the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, which oversees

00:51:54.180 many of the smaller colleges in the country, has just passed a policy banning males from

00:51:58.340 female sports. 1.00

00:51:59.780 Although, of course, that's not how ESPN phrased it.

00:52:01.980 Here's their report.

00:52:02.740 The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, the governing body for most small

00:52:06.740 colleges, announced a policy Monday that will all but ban transgender athletes from competing

00:52:11.740 in women's sports.

00:52:12.620 The NAIA policy of Council of Presidents approved a policy in a 20-0 vote.

00:52:18.120 The NAIA, which oversees some 83,000 athletes at schools across the country, is believed to

00:52:22.360 be the first college organization to take such a step.

00:52:25.020 According to the Transgender Participation Policy, all athletes may participate in NAIA-sponsored

00:52:29.400 male sports, but only athletes whose biological sex assigned at birth is female and who have

00:52:34.820 not begun hormone therapy will be allowed to participate in women's sports. 0.99

00:52:39.460 Now, there are multiple falsehoods here.

00:52:45.060 Sex is not assigned at birth, for one.

00:52:46.860 Of course, it's observed at birth or before birth, even.

00:52:49.740 It's not assigned.

00:52:50.620 Second, the policy does not ban transgender athletes from competing in women's sports.

00:52:54.620 In fact, a woman who identifies as trans is free to play women's sports all she wants,

00:53:00.540 as long as she's not taking testosterone.

00:53:02.520 The whole point is that you can self-identify however you want to, but you still have to

00:53:08.160 play with your biological category, like everybody else.

00:53:12.000 But these are the standard falsehoods that we expect from ESPN when they're pretending

00:53:15.400 to report on an issue like this.

00:53:17.000 And we heard more of them when non-binary, quote-unquote, ESPN writer Katie Barnes appeared 0.61

00:53:21.540 on CNN with Jake Tapper to discuss this policy this week.

00:53:24.960 Watch.

00:53:26.280 Joining us now to discuss is journalist and author of Fair Play,

00:53:30.060 How Sports Shape the Gendered Debate, Katie Barnes.

00:53:33.360 Katie, thank you for joining us.

00:53:34.480 What do you make of the NAIA's new transgender participation policy?

00:53:40.640 Well, I think it is reflective of the times that we are in.

00:53:45.020 In terms of, for the last three or four years, we have seen most policy updates, when it comes

00:53:51.480 to transgender athletes, be reflective of restriction and in favor of more restrictive 0.64

00:53:56.260 policy.

00:53:57.020 And this seems to fall right in line with that.

00:54:00.000 Now, I'm not going to get hung up on this like I usually do, but I just have to point

00:54:03.540 out that she used the term reflective twice, and it was not a natural word choice in either

00:54:07.780 case.

00:54:08.600 She says, we have seen most policy updates be reflective of restriction.

00:54:12.360 Now, what she means is that they are restrictive policies.

00:54:15.740 Reflective of restriction is an incredibly awkward and wordy way of communicating that idea.

00:54:20.980 And this may seem like semantics, and mostly it is, I admit, but this is also a natural reflex

00:54:25.300 for liberal journalists in general, and in particular, the ones who are also trans activists.

00:54:30.300 They cannot answer any question directly.

00:54:32.520 Every answer must be made passive and vague and weirdly unclear and noncommittal.

00:54:38.380 Now, this is partly reflective of intellectual insecurity on their part, and partly it's

00:54:44.180 a strategy to make their insane ideas less coherent, and therefore less objectionable

00:54:48.800 to the average listener because they have no idea what they're saying.

00:54:51.260 Anyway, let's get to the crux of the issue.

00:54:53.180 Here it is.

00:54:54.440 There is a narrative that transgender female athletes have an advantage, that they always 0.98

00:55:01.280 win, that the reason that men and women generally compete in separate gender categories is because

00:55:08.720 it's not particularly competitive for men to compete against women.

00:55:13.940 Do studies support that?

00:55:16.460 Before we get to her answer, I have to jump in again here.

00:55:20.940 That's not the narrative.

00:55:22.580 The narrative is not that transgender women, quote unquote, always win.

00:55:26.180 Of course, they don't always win. 0.78

00:55:28.500 After all, these are always mediocre or poor male athletes who make this kind of switch.

00:55:34.080 Men who can dominate in men's competitions never seem to discover a female identity, which 0.99

00:55:38.180 is a very curious coincidence, isn't it?

00:55:40.380 And given that these are poor to mediocre athletes, it's quite possible that the most excellent

00:55:45.960 female athletes on the other side might have a chance to beat them, depending on the sport. 1.00

00:55:50.280 But even if they're beaten, they still had an unfair advantage.

00:55:53.220 Whether that advantage wins them the game or the gold medal or whatever is not the point.

00:55:57.940 Often it does.

00:55:58.580 Sometimes it doesn't.

00:55:59.440 But the unfair advantage remains.

00:56:01.720 Just as it would be unfair for me to show up to a foot race in rollerblades, okay?

00:56:06.840 Now, I might still lose because I haven't used rollerblades since I was like 10, but that

00:56:10.720 doesn't make it suddenly fair for me to use them in the first place.

00:56:15.800 Let's hear how Katie Barnes handles this. 1.00

00:56:18.980 Do studies support that?

00:56:20.520 Well, I think it depends on what you mean by support that.

00:56:28.320 Well, he means support that.

00:56:30.580 By support that, he means support that.

00:56:32.640 What do you mean?

00:56:32.980 It depends on what you mean by support that.

00:56:34.840 How else can you phrase it?

00:56:35.880 I don't know what else.

00:56:36.480 How can I explain what that means to you?

00:56:38.800 Once again, the trans activists simply cannot answer any question directly.

00:56:42.680 These people are allergic to clarity.

00:56:45.300 They have to make every answer as unnecessarily vague as they possibly can.

00:56:49.860 So let's continue.

00:56:52.380 You know, for my reporting and having really reported this out for many years, the reality

00:56:58.060 is that from a scientific perspective, we know that there are differences in sexes and

00:57:03.540 we know that the differences do tend to lead to athletic performance differences as well.

00:57:09.640 However, when we look at broad-based restriction at all levels of sport, it's very challenging

00:57:17.940 to say that scientifically that is supported in all cases, meaning that something that might

00:57:23.940 be appropriate for swimming does not necessarily apply to basketball when it comes to individual

00:57:29.680 sports versus team sports, as well as level of competition.

00:57:32.700 And so the idea, I think, that transgender women have an advantage in all sports at all 1.00

00:57:38.680 times, regardless of any kind of medical transition, I don't think that the scientific literature

00:57:44.380 supports that at this time.

00:57:46.500 So once again, we have the dishonest straw man reframing of the question.

00:57:51.360 She says that the research doesn't support the idea that, quote unquote, trans women have

00:57:56.120 an advantage in all sports at all times.

00:57:58.860 But no one is saying that.

00:58:00.700 There are probably sports where trans women, i.e. 1.00

00:58:03.480 men, don't have an advantage over women. 1.00

00:58:06.120 I mean, figure skating, if you count that as a sport, I think probably women have an advantage, 1.00

00:58:10.600 if anything, in that.

00:58:11.900 There are other sports.

00:58:12.680 There's also a sport I discovered recently called extreme ironing, which is real, and

00:58:16.660 that's where people iron clothes in remote locations. 1.00

00:58:19.440 I don't know.

00:58:20.300 But anyway, I mean, that's one where women would excel, and I'm sure there are other examples

00:58:24.560 also.

00:58:25.820 But, and as for at all times, it's an interesting qualifier.

00:58:29.820 Well, they don't have an advantage at all times.

00:58:32.620 I don't know what that means exactly.

00:58:33.760 I assume that would mean that all men are better than all women at all sports, which again, is 0.99

00:58:39.700 not what anyone is claiming.

00:58:40.560 So, she's dancing around and trying to argue against positions that are not actually positions

00:58:45.760 anyone is taking.

00:58:47.240 And let's continue on to see if she eventually gets around to making some kind of coherent 0.55

00:58:51.260 point.

00:58:51.780 Let's listen.

00:58:53.020 Would there be a way to come up with a rule that was more individual specific or sports

00:58:58.740 specific that might not be, I mean, it sounds as though you're suggesting, and if I'm putting

00:59:03.860 words in your mouth, I apologize.

00:59:06.140 It sounds like you're suggesting this policy is not necessarily fair, given how blanketed

00:59:12.980 it is.

00:59:13.700 Is there a way to do something like this that would be more fair and more reflective of what

00:59:18.320 is factually known about gender differences in different sports, etc.?

00:59:22.940 You know, I don't know if it's, I don't know if it's right for me to say whether or not this

00:59:29.680 particular policy is fair.

00:59:31.640 I think that right now, where we are as a society is really grappling with what does fair and

00:59:39.020 appropriate policy look like.

00:59:40.680 And in general, most athletic organizations in many states across the country are embracing

00:59:49.440 a blanket restriction.

00:59:51.860 And I think there are a lot of people raising questions about whether or not that is fair

00:59:56.660 and appropriate policy in all cases.

00:59:59.900 So we have our third time that the word reflective is used in this five-minute conversation, by the

01:00:04.660 way.

01:00:04.840 More importantly, what you're hearing in this conversation is defeat.

01:00:08.680 That's what you're hearing.

01:00:09.900 They'll never admit it.

01:00:11.260 Katie Barnes, with they, them pronouns from ESPN, isn't going to go on CNN and say, yeah, 0.95

01:00:16.000 you know what?

01:00:16.600 Never mind. 0.93

01:00:17.280 This is silly. 0.78

01:00:17.980 I mean, obviously, men and women are different. 0.96

01:00:19.720 Forget the whole thing.

01:00:20.840 Not going to happen.

01:00:21.540 She's never going to say that.

01:00:22.480 But if that exact conversation we just saw there had been on CNN three years ago, and

01:00:27.860 of course, conversations like that were on CNN three years ago, the tenor would be very

01:00:32.740 different.

01:00:33.600 We would have heard how trans women, quote unquote, are obviously exactly the same as biological 1.00

01:00:38.300 women, and anyone who says otherwise is a transphobe. 0.99

01:00:41.500 And now what we hear is this kind of evasive, weak, obscure nonsense about how the jury is

01:00:48.040 out, and studies must be done, and we can't know for sure.

01:00:52.400 Now it's nonsense, of course.

01:00:53.380 The jury is not out.

01:00:54.840 The jury never even had to deliberate on this.

01:00:56.760 I mean, the verdict was clear from the start.

01:00:58.220 Men and women are different.

01:00:59.420 Men don't belong in women's sports. 1.00

01:01:01.180 Men do have a biological advantage, but that is secondary to the simple fact that men are 0.66

01:01:07.100 not women and therefore should not be treated as women, no matter what sort of advantage 1.00

01:01:11.280 they have or don't have.

01:01:12.340 If there's anything that exists that's supposed to be for women, if it's a women's sport, 0.92

01:01:17.740 if it's a women's club, if it's a women's whatever, a women's restroom, okay, men don't 0.89

01:01:23.300 belong there because they're not that.

01:01:25.900 But they do have an advantage for certain.

01:01:28.220 And all that is true. 0.58

01:01:29.320 So what Katie Barnes is saying here is totally ludicrous and without factual merit, but it

01:01:34.820 is notable that she's so noncommittal and so equivocal in her responses. 0.98

01:01:39.640 She knows that people are awake now.

01:01:43.120 You cannot claim that sex differences don't exist or that so-called trans women are no

01:01:47.980 different from regular women. 0.98

01:01:49.220 You can't make that definitive claim without being immediately dismissed by almost everybody.

01:01:54.480 And she knows that.

01:01:55.580 So instead, these people, they retreat behind the supposed uncertainty around the question.

01:02:02.380 Uncertainty that they have invented entirely, but uncertainty about the differences between

01:02:06.980 men and women is not the same as certainty that there are no differences.

01:02:13.200 The former position represents a retreat and they are retreating.

01:02:18.340 And now we just have to keep pushing them back until sanity fully reigns again in our culture,

01:02:24.440 which is still a long way off.

01:02:25.800 And in the meantime, Katie Barnes, they, them, is today canceled.

01:02:31.200 That'll do it for the show today.

01:02:31.900 Thanks for watching.

01:02:32.360 Thanks for listening.

01:02:32.840 Talk to you tomorrow.

01:02:33.360 Have a great day.

01:02:34.280 Godspeed.

01:02:34.600 Godspeed.

01:02:37.600 Godspeed.

01:02:38.000 Thank you.

01:02:38.500 Godspeed.

01:02:38.600 Godspeed.

01:02:39.060 Godspeed.

01:02:39.900 Godspeed.

01:02:40.200 Godspeed.

01:02:40.780 Godspeed.

01:02:40.960 Godspeed.

01:02:41.540 Godspeed.

01:02:42.080 Godspeed.

01:02:42.840 Godspeed.

01:02:43.040 Godspeed.

01:02:43.780 Godspeed.

01:02:44.580 Godspeed.

01:02:45.020 On this page.

01:02:47.520 Godspeed.

01:02:48.940 Godspeed.

01:02:50.580 He ad långs. 1.00

01:02:51.460 Godspeed.

01:02:52.680 Godspeed.

01:02:53.580 Godspeed.

01:02:53.640 Godspeed.

01:02:55.420 Godspeed.

01:02:55.520 Godspeed.

01:02:57.680 Godspeed.

01:02:59.160 Godspeed.

01:02:59.720 Godspeed.

01:03:00.620 Godspeed.

01:03:01.600 Godspeed.

01:03:01.640 Godspeed.

01:03:02.720 Godspeed.

01:03:02.780 Godspeed.

01:03:03.640 Godspeed.

The Matt Walsh Show - April 11, 2024

Ep. 1345 - The Media Nominates Their New George Floyd

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript