Ep. 525 - Tucker, Hannity Targeted With The Most Frivolous Harassment Allegations Yet
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
175.57793
Summary
The latest Me Too allegations against Fox, including this time against Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, are perhaps the most frivolous harassment claims we ve heard yet. Also, George Stephanopoulos' wife says she would watch porn with her adolescent daughter. And in our daily cancellation, we discuss the woman who got naked for the cops at a Portland protest and showed off her genitals to the police.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Today on The Matt Wall Show, the latest Me Too allegations against Fox, including this time
00:00:05.480
Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, are perhaps the most frivolous harassment claims we've heard yet.
00:00:11.240
We'll talk about that. Also, five headlines, including George Stephanopoulos' wife
00:00:14.960
says that she would watch porn with her adolescent daughter. She says it would be a
00:00:20.540
learning experience for them, and so she would be willing to do that. And in our daily cancellation,
00:00:25.240
we discussed the unnamed woman, speaking of pornography, who got naked for the cops at a
00:00:31.440
Portland protest and showed off her genitals to the police officers. Something tells me that,
00:00:37.940
you know, although this woman is being celebrated as a hero by the media, she would not be received
00:00:42.820
in quite so positive a light if this was a naked dude showing off for women. So we'll talk about
00:00:51.580
the double standard there, that and much more on the way today on The Matt Wall Show.
00:00:55.240
Now, we begin here, you know, and I must admit, I'm not a huge fan of cable news myself. It's not
00:01:02.380
how I choose to get my information. I generally find that cable news hosts tend to be uninteresting
00:01:08.120
and the insights they offer, such as they are, the talking points they offer are usually superficial
00:01:14.380
and redundant. One of the very few exceptions, in my opinion, to that rule is Tucker Carlson,
00:01:21.020
who actually uses his platform to say things that are necessary and important. And he engages with
00:01:27.140
issues and engages in a way that others won't, even other conservatives won't, especially other
00:01:33.680
conservatives with comparable platforms won't. And this has made Tucker the highest rated host on cable
00:01:39.280
news, the most relevant voice in media by far, the most talked about voice in media. It's also made him
00:01:46.200
a target, a prime target. And it's why, even though he has the highest rated show on cable news,
00:01:54.140
a lot of advertisers have fled because the left is focused intently on scaring away his sponsors to
00:02:01.220
silence him. Last week, the media ran wild with a story about inappropriate stuff. One of Tucker Carlson's
00:02:09.240
staff members posted anonymously on a message board. And this was supposed to be a huge scandal for
00:02:15.840
Tucker Carlson, for some reason, that one of his staff members was posting edgy content on a message
00:02:23.420
board anonymously. Because I guess, what, Tucker is supposed to be monitoring the activity, even
00:02:29.820
anonymous activity of all the people that work for him? Because that's a normal thing that I guess all
00:02:35.060
media personalities do. Then last night, Tucker revealed that the New York Times was planning to
00:02:40.740
dox him and expose his family to harm. Again, not for the first time. Here he is addressing that. Watch.
00:02:50.800
Last week, the New York Times began working on a story about where my family and I live. As a matter
00:02:56.580
of journalism, there is no conceivable justification for a story like that. The paper is not alleging we've
00:03:01.720
done anything wrong, and we haven't. We pay our taxes. We like our neighbors. We've never had a
00:03:06.280
dispute with anyone. So why is the New York Times doing a story on the location of my family's house?
00:03:13.000
Well, you know why? To hurt us. To injure my wife and kids so that I will shut up and stop disagreeing
00:03:19.240
with them. They believe in force. We've learned that. Two years ago, a left-wing journalist publicized
00:03:24.980
our home address in Washington. A group of screaming Antifa lunatics showed up while I was at work.
00:03:29.940
They vandalized our home. They threatened my wife. She called 911 while hiding in a closet.
00:03:35.620
A few weeks later, they showed up again at our house. For the next year, they sent letters to
00:03:40.420
our home threatening to kill us. We tried to ignore it. It felt cowardly to sell our home and leave.
00:03:46.040
We raised our kids there in the neighborhood, and we loved it. But in the end, that's what we did.
00:03:51.220
We have four children. It just wasn't worth it. But the New York Times followed us. The paper is
00:03:56.460
assigned a political activist called Murray Carpenter to write a story about where we are
00:04:00.460
now. They've hired a photographer called Tristan Spinsky to take pictures. Their story about where
00:04:05.920
we live is slated to run in the paper this week. Editors there know exactly what will happen to
00:04:11.120
my family when it does run. I called them today, and I told them. But they didn't care. They hate
00:04:16.500
my politics. They want this show off the air. If one of my children gets hurt because of a story
00:04:21.180
they wrote, they won't consider it collateral damage. They know it's the whole point of the
00:04:25.240
exercise to inflict pain on our family, to terrorize us, to control what we say. That's
00:04:32.520
Now, the Times, for the record, says they aren't planning to run with any piece like
00:04:37.600
that. So it's a he said, they said sort of situation. And I can tell you that I don't
00:04:43.860
believe the New York Times for a second. It's not like they don't have a track record of doing
00:04:48.240
this kind of thing. I have no trouble believing what Tucker Carlson is saying here. It's much
00:04:52.600
harder to believe that Tucker would just invent this out of whole cloth and name names, which
00:04:58.280
is something he came up with on his own, a fiction story. It's harder to believe that
00:05:03.620
than it is to believe that the New York Times got called out and is now lying to cover their
00:05:07.560
own asses. And then, so that's, you know, two things. And remember, this is all within,
00:05:14.680
you know, a week or two. Then yesterday, also, we have the big breaking news, which the rest of
00:05:20.620
media is amplifying with trumpet blasts of celebration, that two women are filing harassment
00:05:26.280
suits against a whole bunch of Fox News employees and personalities, including Tucker Carlson and
00:05:31.600
others. As per usual, when people on the right are accused, these allegations are being taken at
00:05:37.700
face value because, of course, we're back to believe all women, right? We're back to that again.
00:05:42.260
We took a break with Joe Biden. Now we're back. Now we're, now we're believing women again. You
00:05:46.660
know, we, we, there was a couple of months there when we weren't supposed to believe women anymore,
00:05:49.640
but now, yeah, we can believe them again. Um, and, uh, but if, and of course these allegations
00:05:57.120
then, because believe all women, these allegations are being taken at face value as fact with very
00:06:03.080
little skepticism, but let's take a look at the actual allegations. Um, you tell me if these seem
00:06:10.440
credible to you, you be the judge here. Okay. I'm going to read now from the AP report.
00:06:16.900
This is what it says. Fox News channel stars, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Howard Kurtz were
00:06:21.940
accused of sexual harassment by a frequent on-air guest in a lawsuit filed Monday that the network
00:06:26.840
called frivolous and untrue. In the same case, a former, uh, Fox employee said she was harassed and
00:06:32.900
raped by news anchor, Ed Henry, who was fired July 1st, shortly after the network became aware of the
00:06:37.220
accusations. Henry's lawyer, Catherine Foti said Monday that her client's accuser, Jennifer Eckhart
00:06:42.980
initiated and encouraged a sexual relationship. Hannity and Carlson represent two thirds of Fox's
00:06:48.200
lucrative primetime lineup while Kurtz hosts the weekend media buzz show. None of the men have been
00:06:52.980
mentioned before in any misconduct allegations of Fox until the charges were made by Kathy RU.
00:06:59.240
I think that's how you pronounce it. A R E U. The lawsuit filed in New York describes RU's discomfort
00:07:04.920
with a, uh, March 28, 2018 incident on the set of Hannity show where the host allegedly put a hundred
00:07:11.920
dollars on a desk and challenged the men on his staff to take her out on a date. She said she was
00:07:17.400
a guest on Carlson show in December, 2018, and that after it was over, he told her he was staying in a
00:07:23.120
hotel room in New York that that night without his wife and children. In 2019, she said Kurtz invited her
00:07:28.980
to his hotel room to discuss her hope of getting a full-time job at Fox. When she instead invited him to
00:07:33.760
dinner with her and a friend, he declined, she said. In the cases of Carlson Kurtz, uh, RU believed the
00:07:40.040
men were making sexual advances, the lawsuit said. RU said she was also propositioned by
00:07:44.560
Gianno Caldwell, a Fox contributor. Based on an outside law firm's investigation, Fox said it found all of RU's
00:07:51.900
claims patently false, frivolous, and utterly devoid of any merit. Fox said it would defend itself
00:07:57.100
vigorously. Um, and then, uh, and then RU also said she got lewd messages from Ed Henry. And then
00:08:04.460
we have also the accusations against Ed Henry from, this is from Jennifer Eckhart. Uh, she said she was
00:08:10.500
24 at the time. She said that 49 year old Henry restrained her with metal handcuffs, took a nude
00:08:15.620
pictures of her and raped her in a hotel room. She said that she had asked Eckhart to, or that he had
00:08:21.460
asked Eckhart to be his sex slave and, uh, quote, little whore and punished her when she did not
00:08:26.940
comply with these demands. Um, okay. So there you go. There's all, there's all the information.
00:08:33.600
First, we have Kathy RU, who, who, who, by the way, was not an employee of Fox at the time of these
00:08:38.660
alleged incidents, who says, uh, let's, let's go through these one at a time. She says that Sean
00:08:45.620
Hannity put a hundred dollars on a table and offered to, uh, pay any man in the studio to take
00:08:51.580
her out. Now this, even if it happened, isn't sexual harassment at all. It makes no sense at all.
00:09:00.360
Why would Hannity, but he was going to pay someone to take her on a date. What does,
00:09:06.080
what does that even mean? What's, what's the context here? Unless there is a context that,
00:09:11.940
that, that, and this was a joke that would make sense in the context that we're not being told
00:09:17.480
about. Now that seems plausible, I guess the idea that Hannity did it randomly for no reason
00:09:23.900
with no context, just out of nowhere, here's a hundred bucks. Someone take this lady on a date.
00:09:29.780
It's just not plausible, but either way, whether it happened or not, whether there's context or not,
00:09:36.380
it's not harassment. It's a weird joke at absolute worst. Then she says, Kurtz asked her to come to
00:09:42.420
his hotel room and talk about getting a job. She says, let's go to dinner. And he said, no,
00:09:46.560
uh, the end according to her, you know, again, not harassment. Harassment would be if the
00:09:52.060
propositions continued and they were unwelcomed, um, inviting a woman to your hotel room when she's
00:09:58.180
not your coworker may not be appropriate. It may not be morally right. Especially if Kurtz is married.
00:10:03.380
I don't know if he is or not, but it's not harassment. And to the charge against Tucker.
00:10:09.180
I mean, this is really just one of the most frivolous sexual harassment claims I've ever
00:10:15.420
heard in my life. And the people that are amplifying these claims, they know that they
00:10:21.600
know it. And they know that if you actually click on the headline and the link and you read
00:10:27.140
what the claim is, you're going to immediately say, this is ridiculous.
00:10:32.940
So they know that, but, but the, the goal here is just to have Tucker and Hannity labeled as sexual
00:10:39.480
harassers. They, all they want, because as it says in the AP article, um, there have been plenty of
00:10:45.980
other claims made against Fox news people. As we know, uh, Hannity and Tucker have never been
00:10:51.840
mentioned by anybody before. And I think that is much to the chagrin of the left and their competitors
00:10:58.840
in the media who would love it. If these guys were also mentioned. And here we go. Finally,
00:11:03.140
they get it. The fact that it's frivolous doesn't matter because now all they can do, all they care
00:11:07.420
about is that they can label these guys as sexual harassers and that they can, they can put that
00:11:11.580
asterisk next to their name for the rest of their lives. Uh, but what does she say? She says, um,
00:11:16.320
that he said to her, I'll be alone in the city tonight. The end. That's it. That's all that
00:11:24.040
happened. According to her, even if her account is completely accurate, which we have no reason
00:11:30.060
to believe that it is, this isn't harassment saying I'm going to be alone tonight in the city
00:11:35.900
is sexual harassment. She chose to interpret it as a sexual proposition, which even if it was,
00:11:43.920
again, we have no reason to think it was, we have no reason to think any of this even happened,
00:11:47.280
but even if it was, even if it happened and even if she interpreted it correctly, that's not harassment.
00:11:54.660
I can easily imagine a non-sexual way and reason why something like that would be said.
00:12:01.840
Just for example, uh, you know, someone could say how they're, they're going to be,
00:12:07.960
they're going to be alone tonight. They have a hotel room to themselves and they're just happy to get
00:12:11.560
a break. That's, that's, that's a, that's a, a sentiment. People that have traveled and have
00:12:17.480
spent a night alone in hotel room when they've got kids, you know, happy for the break. Maybe they
00:12:21.780
can relate to that sentiment. So you could easily interpret it that way, but this is how she chose
00:12:27.760
to hear it. If it, again, if it happened at all, this is how she chose to hear it. She also says we
00:12:33.040
should note that she suffered punitive damages for turning down this alleged implied potential.
00:12:38.240
This is an alleged implied potential sexual proposition. And, uh, for turning down this
00:12:45.200
alleged implied potential sexual, sexual proposition, she says that she was, uh, punished
00:12:49.420
because she was only asked to appear on Tucker's show three times after that. Oh, the horror,
00:12:54.700
the horror, you know, I've only been asked to appear on Tucker's show once. I guess he sexually
00:13:00.000
harassed me too. I don't know. I, I, apparently, in fact, I've been on cable news shows frequently,
00:13:05.920
um, for, for a period. And then suddenly I'm not invited on again. It's pretty common. It happens
00:13:11.600
to a lot of people. It could be just that they have other guests they're bringing on. They just
00:13:15.480
haven't thought about it. It could be that they didn't find me that interesting. It could be that,
00:13:19.020
uh, maybe I said something on air they didn't like. Uh, it could be that the news cycle has
00:13:24.200
turned in a direction where they figure I don't have as much to offer. I mean, it could be any of
00:13:27.640
those explanations or yes, maybe it could be sexual harassment. I'm being, I'm being punished in some way.
00:13:31.880
Uh, yeah, let's go with that last explanation. It certainly is the most flattering to me,
00:13:36.700
right? That's, I would prefer for, for that to be the reason it's better than thinking that I
00:13:41.940
wasn't invited on because I'm not interesting. Uh, that, that, that would be, that would,
00:13:46.240
that would really hurt my self-esteem. So those are the claims against Tucker, Hannity and Kurtz.
00:13:50.520
The allegations against Ed Henry are obviously quite a bit more serious, but the seriousness of
00:13:54.380
them raises questions in and of itself. She says that she was stripped, cuffed, and assaulted
00:13:59.000
in a hotel room. Now, if that happened, um, it's a brutal, violent felony, multiple,
00:14:07.120
this is rape, kidnapping, aggravated assault. I mean, we've got probably a dozen violent felonies
00:14:12.480
here. And, uh, according to this, he's a, he's, he's a, he's a violent kidnapper and rapist
00:14:17.780
and should be facing life in prison if all of this happened exactly as it said. So why is this a civil
00:14:24.480
complaint in that case rather than a criminal complaint? Why didn't she go to the police
00:14:30.180
to say that I was kidnapped, bound and raped by a man? That's, I mean, according to this story,
00:14:38.060
this is a, this is a, uh, a shocking felony that was committed. Why didn't she immediately go to
00:14:45.940
the police after freeing herself and escaping? You know, uh, I mean, you can argue that in some of
00:14:52.720
these cases of legitimate harassment and, you know, there's always the question of, well, why didn't
00:14:57.320
you say something earlier? And sometimes there, there could be a, uh, a valid reason that nothing
00:15:04.480
was said earlier. Maybe you were uncomfortable. Maybe, you know, you, you weren't sure if it rose
00:15:09.660
to the level of, uh, of, of harassment or not. Maybe, you know, you were worried about professional
00:15:15.340
consequences. I mean, we could see all that, but with something like this, it's mind boggling that
00:15:22.360
you wouldn't go to the police right away with something like that. I mean, that is, that is so
00:15:27.000
that is such a horrific crime that you would have suffered that it's, it's hard to understand why
00:15:34.500
you wouldn't immediately go to the police. Um, so it's, it's, it's a strange thing and it's not
00:15:40.860
something that a thinking person can just take immediately on face value. Maybe it happened.
00:15:46.260
Maybe it's exactly as it's being described, but there are reasons to take a step back and,
00:15:51.760
and wonder, uh, what's, what's going on here. And anyway, regardless, this can't be lumped in
00:15:58.340
with the claims against Tucker and Hannity, which are just completely and obviously without merit.
00:16:05.880
And we know that because even if they happened, they don't rise anywhere close to the level of
00:16:12.520
harassment. Again, she wasn't even a coworker of theirs and call me cynical, but I suspect that that's
00:16:19.440
actually what she might be mad about. You know, she's not getting those sweet Fox bucks like she
00:16:24.320
wants. So she's finding another way to go about it. That would just be a potential theory of the case
00:16:29.880
here. Uh, in a theory that to me makes a lot more sense than what we're getting from this woman in
00:16:35.160
relation to Tucker and Hannity, especially. And the real point here is that all of this,
00:16:40.660
the avalanche of attacks, all of them gratuitous against Tucker Carlson specifically is what happens
00:16:48.620
to people who peak their heads too far above the crowd, who become too much of a problem to the left
00:16:54.380
because this is how the left plays the game. It's a take no prisoners approach, win at any cost.
00:17:00.060
Um, they, it's not enough to just beat you. Um, they want to destroy you. They want to destroy you
00:17:08.780
and everyone you love and everyone who knows you. That's the way they handle it. And we should
00:17:14.480
always remember that and act accordingly. All right, let's go to five headlines.
00:17:22.300
The rioters in Portland are still at it. Of course, let's check in and see how that's going on.
00:17:52.300
You know, you see videos like that and it, we should remember that, yes, these are violent
00:18:05.160
domestic terrorists who should all be arrested and sent to prison. Um, but also these are scrawny,
00:18:14.280
weak, pathetic wimps. And that's, and that's the thing that always jumps out at you when you see
00:18:19.940
these videos. There's a reason why they operate in packs and groups, and that's how they attack
00:18:25.740
people. That's how they do everything because one-on-one, these are just utterly pathetic and
00:18:30.400
unimpressive people. And that's, I think that's a big reason why they're doing what they're doing.
00:18:37.100
Um, it's, it's a way of feeling. I mean, a lot of these people probably were bullied in school,
00:18:41.600
um, and have just been treated as pathetic and unimpressive because they are their whole lives.
00:18:48.200
And now they're finding a way to finally an outlet where they can feel strong and powerful.
00:18:52.660
They put on the black costume and the mask and they go out and smash stuff. Uh, but they can't
00:18:57.180
even successfully smash glass with a, with a, you know, with a fire extinguisher. Um, because,
00:19:02.960
you know, probably the guy you were seeing there probably bench presses 47 pounds or something,
00:19:06.900
if that. Um, so that's, and that's the balance I always want to strike when we talk about
00:19:12.740
Antifa and the rioters that on one hand, they do represent a very real threat,
00:19:18.880
but I don't, you know, I also don't want to make the mistake of portraying them as if they
00:19:26.420
individually are tough and scary people because they aren't at all. But you put a group of any,
00:19:32.300
I mean, you put, it doesn't matter how weak and, and, and pitiful you are as a person.
00:19:35.940
If you get together in a group of a hundred people or more and you've got weapons and you're
00:19:41.520
setting fires. Yeah. Um, you're, you're going to be dangerous. Okay. Let's go to number two here.
00:19:46.520
Report from the daily wire says the wife of ABC's good morning host, George Stephanopoulos revealed
00:19:53.620
she's perfectly willing, uh, to teach her teenage daughters about sex by watching porn with them.
00:20:00.420
Allie Wentworth, whose daughters are 15 and 17 told the dissenters podcast that porn
00:20:05.000
would be educational for them because she could explain that porn is performative rather than
00:20:09.440
realistic. According to Yahoo news. Wentworth said in porn, women have been conditioned to look and
00:20:14.740
act a certain way. They are performing and it's dangerous to have boys see this as something women
00:20:19.060
want. You can't stop them. So I would watch it with them. I would look at the
00:20:23.460
porn with them that one time, like they're performing. Um, and then she goes on. I have
00:20:31.960
an issue with how we are raising this generation of children because we grew up without social media
00:20:36.640
for us, our children, us as parents are Guinea pigs. You know what I mean? I don't know what to
00:20:41.440
say about don't use your phone, use your phone. And I started learning as I went, uh, when I would
00:20:47.560
see other people's daughters and how sexualized they were on social media. And I became very passionate
00:20:51.920
about the idea that we went to, we want to regulate social media. We need to chart these
00:20:55.640
waters for our kids. So I started doing these panels on the social media and its effects.
00:20:59.420
And my feeling was, this was a very dangerous thing. I see it with other kids. Our suicide
00:21:04.240
rate too has doubled. I see the bad effects. I think there are good effects too. I mean,
00:21:08.660
this is, I'm just reading a transcript right now. This doesn't make any sense. It sounds like,
00:21:12.680
was she drunk or something? When that, that wouldn't make it much better. That would make it a little
00:21:17.620
bit better if she was drunk when she did. I have no idea if she was or not. Um, but this is largely
00:21:23.500
incoherent. I mean, we, we, we do find that she's worried about people's daughters being sexualized.
00:21:27.920
She seems to be worried from what I can decipher, um, um, about the effects of social media and her
00:21:33.760
way of responding to that is to watch hardcore pornography with her daughters, including her
00:21:38.940
15 year old daughter. Nothing matters. I mean, really no matter how old the daughter is, that's just
00:21:43.500
creepy and disgusting and weird, um, to put up mildly. So there's George Stephanopoulos's wife.
00:21:49.180
Number three, reading, um, again from the daily wire, it says St. Louis circuit attorney, Kim
00:21:58.420
Gardner, a Democrat announced on Monday that she's charging the St. Louis couple who defended their
00:22:02.100
private property using firearms last month with felony unlawful use of a weapon. The couple also
00:22:08.780
reportedly faces a fourth degree misdemeanor assault charge. Uh, the St. Louis dispatch reported Mark
00:22:16.320
and Patricia McCloskey each are facing a single felony count of unlawful use of a weapon exhibiting
00:22:21.340
charging documents say he pointed an AR 15 rifle at protesters and she wielded a semi-automatic handgun
00:22:27.260
placing those protesters in fear of injury. Um, so just to reiterate on this case, because this is
00:22:37.820
obviously an outrageous miscarriage of justice and the governors are has already said that he would
00:22:44.980
pardon. If there were charges brought, he would pardon these two, uh, American citizens who are
00:22:49.840
only defending their own property. And I'm glad to hear that. But the fact that charges were pressed at
00:22:54.920
all, uh, is as I said, outrageous. They're standing on their own property holding firearms. That is their
00:23:05.500
second amendment. Right. This is a direct attack on the second amendment. And it's not as though,
00:23:11.140
despite what we hear from the media, it's not as though they had no reason to think that these
00:23:16.420
supposed peaceful protesters might be violent. This is how dumb the media thinks we are. And this is how
00:23:22.680
dumb a lot of people actually are that they're, you know, they're, they're portraying the McCloskeys as
00:23:28.180
these gun toting lunatics and say, well, what, why would they think that they were at any risk? I mean,
00:23:33.900
these were peaceful as if we haven't all been watching the news for two, for two months and
00:23:38.400
seeing cities across the country, buildings being burned, random people assaulted. Let's pretend we
00:23:44.040
haven't seen that. No, except for all of that, there's just no reason at all to think that for
00:23:53.160
them to have thought that they were in any physical danger at all. Uh, number four, going back to the
00:23:57.760
Portland riots for a moment. Here's another interesting recent phenomenon at these riots. Uh, first,
00:24:32.440
So what you're seeing there are the moms, the Antifa moms have shown up and they are forming a human
00:24:50.500
chain, a shield to shield their precious children as their precious children commit felonies, such as
00:24:57.260
trying to set a federal building on fire. Uh, so commit serious, serious, dangerous felonies.
00:25:02.640
The moms have shown up to, uh, help them, aid, abed them in their crimes. So to, to those of us who
00:25:09.380
had been theorizing that one of the reasons why Antifa exists is because of horrible parenting.
00:25:16.220
Now we have confirmation for that theory. If there was any doubt at all,
00:25:19.640
the, the pair, the terrible neglectful, awful parents have actually showed up to advertise
00:25:26.160
to all, but announce, Oh yeah, yeah. We're horrible. Well, look at us. Look how horrible we are.
00:25:30.780
They're on parade. They are parading their awful parenting for all of us to see.
00:25:35.600
So glad to, glad to get that confirmation. That feels, that feels good at least number five.
00:25:39.720
And now the AP, um, the AP is the latest to come out and say that the, the word black,
00:25:44.640
um, should be capitalized, but not white. And we, we, we've seen this more and more recently,
00:25:51.520
but I want you to listen to, here's the AP explaining why, um, there is this dichotomy
00:25:57.300
where we capitalize one and not the other. It says the AP said, this is according to an AP report.
00:26:01.860
The AP said white people in general have much less shared history and culture and don't have the
00:26:06.460
experience of being discriminated against because of skin color. We agree that, um, this is now John
00:26:12.540
Dana Showsky, the AP is vice president for standards said in a memo. We agree that white
00:26:17.480
people's skin color plays into systemic inequalities and injustices, and we want our journalism to
00:26:21.800
robustly explore these problems, but capitalizing the term white as is done by white supremacists
00:26:28.000
risks subtly conveying legitimacy, uh, to such beliefs. Okay.
00:26:33.380
Okay. This is obviously nonsense. I mean, even if I were to agree that white people are never
00:26:45.000
discriminated against because of their skin color, which of course is not true, talk about systemic
00:26:51.620
racism. Okay. The only explicit out in the open example of actual systemic racism, like it's a
00:27:03.260
policy that we're going to discriminate against certain races. The only one that the only example
00:27:07.920
anyone could come up with is affirmative action. And that's, that is discrimination against white
00:27:12.800
people. So, but even if I were to agree with that, um, you know, white people don't have the
00:27:17.280
experience of being discriminated against. What does that have to do with grammar? What does that
00:27:21.540
do with punctuation? So we're, we're, you're going to, uh, or capitalization rather you, you capitalize
00:27:29.200
the first letter in the word black because they're discriminated against, but not, but not white because
00:27:33.840
they're not. What relation is there between those two things? It's total nonsense, but this is the left
00:27:46.020
turning grammar into as, and this is not the first example of it, obviously, but this is grammar
00:27:52.280
being politicized. This is a grant. Even grammar now is an ideological concern. And so even when
00:27:59.720
you're deciding what letters to capitalize, it's, you're not, you're not making that determination
00:28:03.960
based on any grammatical rule. You're making it based on ideological doctrine. And that's what we see
00:28:10.860
once again. All right, we're going to go to our daily cancellation. Um, before we do, you know,
00:28:16.240
there's so much going on this year. It's hard to know where even to start. Um, and you know, we just,
00:28:22.620
you just heard a list of all the news stories. That's just, that's just a small sample just from
00:28:27.280
today. And then of course you have the left-wing media constantly pushing their agenda instead of
00:28:31.240
doing actual reporting. When you can't get the real story, you have to go outside the narrative and
00:28:35.420
get the facts. So if you're just a political junkie set on getting both sides of the story,
00:28:39.280
whatever it is, um, get a reader's pass today from dailywire.com. You'll get access to exclusive
00:28:43.720
op-eds from your podcast hopes, hosts like yours truly, as well as guest writers and in-depth
00:28:49.140
analysis from our excellent daily wire reporters. Uh, you could go right now and see my latest
00:28:53.820
piece that I just put up talking about, uh, you know, the, the school system basically arguing now
00:29:01.060
that school, that the public school system itself is inessential. And as a homeschool parent,
00:29:06.200
I happen to agree. And I flush out that argument there, this membership tier is already a bargain
00:29:10.660
at $3 a month. So if you join today, you get your first month for 99 cents. You also get access to
00:29:15.740
our mobile app. You receive push notifications for breaking news and special content, as well as you
00:29:20.020
can join the community of daily wire members who are actively commenting and discussing our content
00:29:23.740
with each other. That's mobile ad-free access to all of our daily wire news, exclusive op-eds,
00:29:28.260
and all of our podcasts on our mobile app, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe now. Um,
00:29:35.720
okay. Now for our daily cancellation, we're going to be canceling this naked exhibitionist
00:29:44.200
and her fans and media. Maybe you've seen this picture. Uh, this is, I'm told an iconic
00:29:49.600
picture, uh, historically significant picture. I have been, I have been reliably informed of an
00:29:57.080
unidentified pervert showing up naked to the Portland riots. And actually, as you can see here,
00:30:02.440
spreading her legs for the officers. This is supposed to be a way, I guess, of, uh, of showing the
00:30:09.680
officers, showing them something. She, she is certainly showing them something. All right.
00:30:16.320
Specifically her genitalia is what she's showing them. And of course the media loves this, perhaps
00:30:21.960
not surprisingly. Here's the LA times practically breaking into poetry when describing, uh, this
00:30:29.420
woman is their article. It says she emerged as an apparition from clouds of tear gas as federal
00:30:35.300
agents fired pepper balls at angry protesters in the early Saturday darkness. A woman wearing nothing
00:30:40.620
but a blast black face mask and a stocking cap strode towards a dozen heavily armed agents,
00:30:45.960
attired in camouflage fatigues lined up across a downtown Portland street. The agents dispatched
00:30:51.560
by the Trump administration over a vociferous objections of state and city officials are part
00:30:55.960
of a force that has fired projectiles at and detained activists protesting nightly since the
00:31:00.660
killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, May 25th. Oh, we're still pretending. We're still
00:31:04.840
pretending this has anything to do with George Floyd whatsoever. Okay. Um, numerous photos and videos
00:31:10.780
posted on Twitter show the unidentified woman as she, she halted in the middle of the street at about
00:31:14.880
1 45 AM. She stood calmly a surreal image of human vulnerability in the face of an overpowering
00:31:21.040
force that has been criticized nationally by civil rights advocates. The agents and gas masks and
00:31:26.620
helmets continued firing pepper balls in a staccato pop, pop, pop heard on video aiming low at the
00:31:33.020
asphalt where puffs of smoke mingled with clouds of gas. Um, before it was over, she struck ballet poses
00:31:42.240
and reclined on the street. She also sat on the asphalt in a yoga like position facing officers before
00:31:48.100
they left. The woman making her statement Saturday was altogether uninhibited at one point standing on
00:31:53.280
one leg and raising her arms in a arc type motion. As she struck ballet poses, a patrol car arrived and a
00:32:00.020
dozen officers in blue uniforms replaced the line of agents. Um, uh, okay. And then it goes on. I mean, this thing
00:32:09.300
goes on forever. I was, I can't even come near arguing, uh, or reading the entire thing.
00:32:18.620
Okay. But this is all for a chick who showed the cops her genitals. Now I want you to imagine for a
00:32:26.340
moment, a different scenario, slightly different. Okay. But, but analogous, let's say this was a woman's
00:32:33.640
march. And those were a bunch of women holding shout your abortion signs instead of cops, instead of
00:32:39.620
male cops, largely. And then imagine a naked man comes out, emerges as an apparition from the darkness,
00:32:48.720
as the LA times would say, and strikes a bunch of naked poses, uh, exposing his whole nude self in all
00:32:57.740
his glory, uh, before these, these, these women. What do you think? Any chance that dude is celebrated?
00:33:04.580
What do you think? You think they're gonna be celebrating that? No. Um, on the contrary, of course,
00:33:09.360
he would be condemned as a sex predator, probably arrested as such and officially charged. Uh, he'd be
00:33:15.520
on the sex offender registry already. And his performance would be seen as further evidence that
00:33:20.580
masculinity is toxic and dangerous and women are oppressed and so on and so on and so on and so on.
00:33:25.220
This is why we need the Me Too movement. You see, right here. Oh, but this is different somehow. Right?
00:33:32.380
This is, this is different. How's it different? Why is it different? Nobody can explain. No one can
00:33:40.120
explain, but it just is. We're supposed to accept. We're supposed to simply accept that it's different
00:33:45.640
and go along with it. Well, no, we shouldn't accept it. And this is something that when it comes to,
00:33:52.500
uh, especially the double standard, I mean, the double standard when it was, especially with
00:33:56.360
how women are treated versus men, this, the standards that men are held to versus women. I
00:34:01.560
mean, the double standards there are glaring, um, obvious to anyone with two brain cells,
00:34:07.340
but this does become, I think for some conservatives, uh, a little bit complicated
00:34:14.940
because as conservatives, and I actually agree that men and women are not the same.
00:34:21.860
And this is what we've been saying all along. And actually men and women should not be treated the
00:34:26.920
same. Um, you know, we, we, we shouldn't in, in our daily lives and in the way we treat each other,
00:34:33.800
we shouldn't just pretend that if you're dealing with a woman or a man, it's exactly the same.
00:34:38.140
There is a difference. And so as conservatives, we should, we should recognize that. And I've
00:34:45.500
heard some conservatives, in fact, someone on Twitter today was making this argument to me
00:34:48.320
that, uh, yeah, this is a double standard, but there should be a double standard. This is what
00:34:52.380
we think as conservatives. So we shouldn't complain about this. Um, no, no. Uh, yes, I, I believe
00:35:02.780
that men and women are not the same and shouldn't be necessarily treated the same. That's what
00:35:06.720
chivalry is about. Okay. As men, we're going to, you know, respond to women a little bit
00:35:11.800
differently. If we want to be chivalrous, I believe in that, but that doesn't mean this
00:35:16.800
should go without saying. It doesn't mean that we should give women the license to be jerks
00:35:22.160
and perverts and degenerates while condemning men for the same. Not only that, but giving women
00:35:28.300
license and actually celebrating them for being jerks, perverts, and degenerates while accusing
00:35:32.720
men of being those things, even when they're not. So just perfect example here, here's a woman
00:35:38.580
naked, spreading her legs for officers in the middle of the street. Okay. And, and, and,
00:35:43.620
and we're supposed to celebrate that. On the other hand, if you have a man on a subway who's fully
00:35:49.440
clothed and slightly spreading his legs a little bit, because he's, you know, it's just, he's a man.
00:35:55.220
And so anatomically, he's not able to sit exactly how a woman can sit because he has other,
00:35:59.680
shall we say concerns he has to take into account here. That is supposed to be gratuitous and awful
00:36:06.240
and patriarchal. And, and, you know, that's a big problem. We have that PSAs about it and,
00:36:10.460
and signs on the subway telling men not to man spread. Okay. That's an example of treating men
00:36:18.380
and women differently in a way that is not good and that we should not support as conservatives or as
00:36:23.980
anybody. I don't care what your political leaning is. We should not support that. So there's a
00:36:29.420
difference between advocating for, for chivalry and for recognizing the inherent differences
00:36:35.340
between the sexes. You know, you can do that. That doesn't mean giving license to women, um,
00:36:43.120
to act in exactly the kinds of ways they're constantly accusing men of acting and complaining
00:36:48.560
about men acting that way. So no. Uh, and there's of course nothing chivalrous about seeing that
00:36:56.340
display and celebrating it. Again, should, should need to be explained. I don't think I should need
00:37:01.760
to spell this out, but I think I do. Um, these double standards. No, we can't accept them. We
00:37:07.220
shouldn't accept them. We shouldn't go along with them. I think too many people are willing to
00:37:11.020
and we should. All right. So, uh, canceled. We're canceling who we cancel. We're canceling the woman.
00:37:18.260
We're canceling, you know, the media, everybody, everyone involved is canceled on this one.
00:37:23.200
And we're going to wrap it up there. Uh, but before I do, you know, I just wanted to mention
00:37:27.100
Ben Shapiro's book, how to destroy America in three easy steps, uh, goes on sale Tuesday, July 21st,
00:37:33.380
which last I checked is today. So it goes on sale today at 6 PM Eastern, 3 PM Pacific. Ben's going to
00:37:38.420
be doing a virtual live signing event. Um, with, uh, your purchase of a signed copy, you can write in
00:37:43.920
questions, which may be read on air. And, uh, he'll, you know, as he's signing the books, he'll,
00:37:48.460
he'll read those. So go to dailywire.com slash Ben right now. Uh, now's your chance. Still,
00:37:54.420
you still have a little bit of time to pre-order the book. So I would encourage you to do that.
00:37:58.860
Uh, and then be a part of Ben's live signing on Tuesday, July 21st, which is today. So that'll
00:38:05.660
be exciting. And it's a great book as well. I have it on my shelf and I've been, I've been reading it,
00:38:09.240
uh, the last couple of days. Uh, we'll wrap it up there. Thanks for watching everybody.
00:38:17.580
If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the
00:38:21.260
word, please give us a five-star review. Tell your friends to subscribe as well. We're available on
00:38:26.100
Apple podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, we're there. Also be sure to check
00:38:30.540
out the other daily wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Knowles show,
00:38:33.660
and the Andrew Klavan show. Thanks for listening. The Matt Wall show is produced by Sean Hampton,
00:38:38.120
executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
00:38:43.180
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens edited by Danny D'Amico. And our audio was mixed by Robin
00:38:48.780
Fenderson. The Matt Wall show is a daily wire production copyright daily wire, 2020. Dr.
00:38:54.860
Fauci throws out the first pitch for the Washington nationals. Kanye West gets freedom and naked
00:39:01.960
Athena streaks for the cops. Check it out on the Michael Knowles show.