Ep. 1457 - The Biden Administration’s Mishandling Of Hurricane Helene Is One Of The Greatest Scandals In American History
57:21 Share

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the federal government has run out of money to help the victims of Hurricane Helene, but they do have enough money to dole out to illegal immigrants. We'll take a look at that. Also, a 70-year-old Trump supporter is sent to prison for nine years for, she says, trying to verify the integrity of the 2020 election. Politico warns that J.D. Vance may seem scary to female voters because he has a beard.

And you'll never believe it, but the internet is very mad at me. Again, I'll respond to the latest outrage and hopefully clear it up today. That and much more today on The Matt Wall Show.

Folks, Harris's so-called economic plan is nothing short of a disaster. Brace yourselves for massive tax hikes. We're talking an almost 40% top income tax rate, a 7% increase to the corporate tax, and a ridiculous capital gains tax on unrealized gains. All this just so that she can add nearly $2 trillion to our already bloated $2 trillion deficit.

If you're like me, you're probably thinking it's time to make more of your savings tax sheltered and inflation sheltered as well. This is where I turn to the good people at Birch Gold Group. They've been helping me and they can help you too. Birch Gold will assist you in converting an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold. And here's the kicker, you don't pay a penny out of pocket. It's that simple. Just text the word WALSH to 989898 and get a free info kit on gold. There's no obligation, just solid information on fortifying your savings before things really go off the rails.

As the exclusive gold partner of The Daily Wire Plus for the past eight years with an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and thousands of satisfied customers, you can trust Birch Gold just like I do. Don't let the left's economic madness catch up with you and catch you off guard. Text Walsh to 989898 for your free info kit today. That's Walsh to 989898.

One of the excuses you always hear when there is a massive failure by the Biden-Harris administration is that no one could have possibly seen it coming. No one could have predicted that the Inflation Reduction Act would actually increase inflation. No one could have predicted that the Afghan government would collapse immediately after we pulled out our troops, leading to a security breakdown and the deaths of 13 US military personnel. No one could have predicted that shipping pallets of cash to Iran would provide funding for a new campaign of terrorist attacks by Iran's proxies and so on.

The truth, though, of course, is that all of these disasters were easily foreseeable. The problem is that the people in charge of predicting the consequences of all these policies are either grossly incompetent or malicious. At every step, they have lied to Americans about what they know or should know was about to happen. And there's maybe no better illustration of this problem than the federal government's response to Hurricane Helene, which has now killed

more than 200 people, and 200 people may be a gross underestimate when all is said and done. We still do not even know the full scale of this disaster, except that it's massive. So take a look at what the DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was saying just three months ago. Mayorkas, as head of the DHS, oversees the federal disaster relief agency FEMA

Well, on June 21st, Mayorkas went in front of the cameras to boast that FEMA was, quote, tremendously prepared for the upcoming hurricane season. In fact, he doesn't just say that FEMA is tremendously prepared for hurricanes. He says that they're prepared for wildfires, extreme heat, a variety of other disasters. He can handle all of it, he says. Watch.

FEMA is tremendously prepared. This is what we do. This is what they do. And the key here, Rebecca, is also to make sure that the communities who are potentially impacted are prepared as well. And it's not just hurricanes and wildfires, also extreme heat, which certainly some parts of the United States are already experiencing.

This is what we do, says Mayorkas as he smiles. It's all very reassuring. Now, admittedly, the words tremendously prepared can be interpreted in a few different ways. And unfortunately, Mayorkas wasn't more specific. But ordinarily, when the official overseeing a disaster relief agency says that they are tremendously prepared, they're saying that at a minimum, they have all the resources they need to quickly and effectively respond to whatever natural disasters may occur. So

It was more than a little confusing to hear the DHS secretary on Wednesday announcing that actually FEMA is out of money. They don't even have the cash to make it through hurricane season. Watch. Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas sounding the alarm on FEMA funding right after the devastation of Hurricane Helene. Listen.

We are meeting the immediate needs with the money that we have. We are expecting another hurricane hitting. We do not have the funds. FEMA does not have the funds to make it through the season. This all comes as the Biden-Harris administration spent over a billion dollars from a FEMA program on services for migrants.

Now, it's easy to become desensitized to all the lying that we've heard from this administration. It's easy to roll your eyes when you see even more evidence that these people at a minimum, at a minimum and at best are grossly incompetent. But this is truly another level.

Imagine this kind of thing happening in literally any business in the country. Imagine the cook at IHOP telling his boss that he's tremendously prepared for the breakfast rush. And then the customers show up and actually turns out there's no flour, there's no eggs, there's no bacon in the kitchen. They need an emergency shipment because they're all out of ingredients. How long do you think that cook would have a job exactly? Five seconds? Less? As you just heard at the tail end of that Fox News report, this is starting to look like something

Much worse than incompetence. It looks a bit like embezzlement, actually. First of all, didn't the government's fiscal year just start on October 1st? How are they out of money already? And why exactly was FEMA administering billion-dollar services, quote-unquote, to foreign nationals, including illegal aliens, living inside this country?

As the New York Post reports, quote, the Department of Homeland Security allocated $640 million this year in FEMA-administered funds to aid state and local governments coping with the influx of asylum seekers. And DHS allocated $780 million for the migrant crisis last year through the FEMA Emergency Food and Shelter Program, which funds relief not associated with natural disasters, and the FEMA Shelter and Services Program, which was authorized in late 2022 by Congress to respond to the migrant crisis.

Now, that money, according to the DHS website, goes to families and individuals encountered by the Department of Homeland Security. There doesn't need to be an emergency or a natural disaster or anything like that. These people just need to come into this country illegally, and they're eligible. And so they're getting paid while our own citizens are stranded in their homes and drowning.

In response to this reporting, the DHS claimed that Congress didn't authorize that $1.4 billion to go to American citizens. It was supposedly earmarked for the migrant crisis, meaning it was never intended for Americans, which is supposed to be reassuring. It's supposed to be a defense when they say, no, yeah, we were never gonna spend that money on Americans. Yeah, we believe you. That's the problem, you scumbags.

But in any event, that still doesn't explain why the DHS secretary said FEMA was well prepared just three months ago. And more importantly, it doesn't explain why we're spending so much money on providing food and shelter to illegal migrants when we don't even have enough money to fund disaster relief for American citizens. We are in a country now where there could be American citizens in an American town in this country who are stranded in their homes for days on end. I mean, that should not happen at all in this country. It is a disgrace.

That that could happen at all with all the resources that we have, that there could be people stranded for days on end. How are we not in a position where we can get them out within hours with all the money that's being spent? And that's not even getting into the hundreds of billions of dollars we've spent to, you know, we've sent to Ukraine, which comes out to more than $5,000 per Ukrainian. And keep that in mind, $5,000 per Ukrainian, because by comparison, American citizens are not getting nearly as much.

As the Post reports, quote, a relatively paltry $4 million has been paid directly to families and individuals in the week since Hurricane Helene ravaged the southeast, killing at least 202 people, causing severe flood damage from Florida and North Carolina. For her part, acting President Kamala Harris has announced that affected families in this country are eligible for a grand total of $750 in FEMA assistance. Watch.

And the federal relief and assistance that we have been providing has included FEMA providing $750 for folks who need immediate needs being met, such as food, baby formula, and the like. And you can apply now for anyone who's watching this who has been affected. There are FEMA personnel who are going door-to-door.

to interact personally with folks, especially those who do not have electricity. But also that aid, if you have electricity, can be applied for online. And I encourage people to do that. FEMA will just basically verify your address and then process should take hold. Wow, $750. Your home is destroyed. You've lost literally everything. You've lost everything that you've ever owned is gone. And you're gonna get 750 bucks.

which, by the way, is more than five times less than we have spent on Ukraine per Ukrainian.

So 750 bucks, that's what FEMA can give American citizens who just lost their homes. And to be clear, that's not because this hurricane season was unusually catastrophic. And it's not because FEMA has been doing heroic work that turned out to be far more expensive than they could have possibly anticipated. In reality, FEMA has reported that it's been running out of money for a long time now. A year ago, in the middle of hurricane season, FEMA disclosed that it was experiencing a massive budget shortfall of several billion dollars. This is a report from July of 2023. Watch.

Hurricane season is underway, but word comes tonight that the FEMA funds many storm victims count on may soon run out. Western News reporter Greg Fox explains what lawmakers and state emergency managers are doing to make sure that we are prepared.

We're all in survival mode. So far, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has spent more than $9 billion in the wake of Hurricane Ian. But FEMA relief has been spread across the country to areas hit by wildfires, floods, mudslides, and more. And the money is running out. According to the May Disaster Relief Fund monthly report, funds are projected to run out next month.

The immediate disaster funding shortfall is projected to be $2.7 billion near the end of August and $10 billion near the end of September. Now, as you just heard from that report, FEMA's excuse last year was that there was a lot of unexpected disasters, fires, mudslides, and so on. So you'd think that after running out of money, they'd make sure to cover the budget shortfall in time for the next hurricane season. After all, the federal government can print money out of thin air for whatever reason it wants. They don't care about inflation, as we've learned.

They'll just print it if they care enough. So why did that happen here? Was there some issue with the money printer? Did Congress reject the budget for some reason? If so, at the very least, you'd expect the DHS secretary would complain about that. You wouldn't think he'd go on television to brag about how tremendously prepared they are.

That's especially true after FEMA's failed handling of the Maui fires last year. As you might remember, residents said that FEMA's assistance was both scattershot and insufficient after the blaze. They were also outraged that FEMA officials were hanging out in luxury hotels instead of helping. Watch.

FEMA booked themselves in the five-star luxury Hawaiian resorts. These photos making national news headlines, calling attention to FEMA workers on Maui in what appears to show them relaxing in five-star hotels. At the cocktail bar and at a registration desk at the Grand Wailea, another photo shows FEMA workers on their laptops at the Fairmont Kealani.

It's rubbing devastated Lahaina residents the wrong way as they deal with the deaths of more than 100 people and a historic community wiped out. I mean, I feel sick. Dustin Kaleopu lost his home in the Lahaina fire. So they're seeing government employees or government volunteers staying in these luxury accommodations.

being funded by taxpayers. That's where a lot of the frustration comes from. A FEMA official we spoke with does not deny they are staying at five star hotels and that taxpayers money is paying for lodging for employees and survivors, but says it's not what it looks like. FEMA personnel and responders are not here on vacation.

We're all here for the residents of Maui and the survivors of this terrible, this terrible incident. It's not what it looks like, says FEMA. And, you know, maybe that's true. Maybe it was vitally necessary for FEMA to rent out a bunch of luxury hotels in Hawaii somehow for some reason. You know, we really don't know.

But every indication we have now is that this agency isn't capable of managing its budget or responding effectively to disasters. Doesn't seem particularly interested in responding effectively. So there are a lot of reasons to ask questions about this whole arrangement, especially after everything we've seen. Will anyone in the media ask about any of this? Probably not. Deanne Criswell is the woman who runs FEMA. She happens to be the first woman to ever hold that job.

So she has the whole identity politics angle, you know, going for. Maybe that's why as FEMA suffers one humiliation after another, no one's even suggesting that she should lose her job along with the DHS secretary. Or maybe Deanne Criswell is untouchable because the Biden-Harris administration wants her to do exactly what she's doing, which is to sabotage recovery efforts. Maybe that's what the government wants. They're certainly doing everything they can to create that impression.

The local CBS affiliate in North Carolina just reported that 1,000 soldiers in the state are sitting around and doing nothing instead of assisting in disaster relief. There's a bit of a theme here emerging.

Quote, President Joe Biden activated 1,000 US Army soldiers for deployment to Western North Carolina. More than 24 hours later, troops are still waiting to be deployed from Fort Liberty. The soldiers are supposed to assist with delivering food and essential supplies to isolated communities devastated by Helene. The US Army said soldiers with the 18th Airborne Corps at Fort Liberty are standing by and ready if the request for support comes. The North Carolina Army National Guard, which is leading the ground recovery efforts, tells CBS 17 they're

They're still assessing the needs in the area, and they have not made an official request for support from the U.S. Army. So the Army hasn't been called in for something. They're there, they're ready, but they're not being called. A thousand soldiers have been activated, but they're not doing anything because they haven't been given anything to do. Meanwhile, civilians who try to help are being prevented from doing so. Here's Congressman Corey Mills explaining this.

That because Joe Biden was in the area, the federal government just prevented civilian rescue pilots and aid workers from saving lives in the aftermath of this disaster. Watch.

The other thing is that yesterday for President Biden's dog and pony show to come in and see photos, he put a 30 mile TFR, which is basically a restriction in the Arizona, which means that he actually stopped from 12 o'clock until 16:00, 4:00 PM. He stopped air traffic and helos from transferring supplies, dropping SAR teams, picking up individuals from medevacs. So that was not only irresponsible, but if you're gonna come a week later, at least

at least make sure that you're not trying to hinder in any way further the actual operations that are being led by civilian organizations and veterans such as myself and others that are trying to do what is right. And so I found the entire response so far to be not just lacking, but irresponsible and inept.

So to recap, FEMA doesn't provide early warning or timely mandatory evacuation orders. They don't provide any significant assistance after the storm. They divert huge amounts of resources to foreign nationals who have no legal justification for being in this country. They shut down the airspace to block civilian rescue flights. They say they're out of money. And just three months ago, they told us they were tremendously prepared for hurricane season. Watching all this, you have to ask yourself, why?

why you're even paying taxes. Why are we paying FEMA billions of dollars every year only to make disasters even more deadly? Why are we funneling our money to people who clearly hate us and have no interest in helping, doing the job that they're paid to do? Ask yourself, if the Biden-Harris administration wanted to go out of its way to punish American citizens, wanted to actually cause suffering, what exactly would they be doing differently? At some point, complete and total incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

And anyone who's been paying attention to FEMA over the past year, as well as everyone living in the areas that have been decimated by this hurricane, knows that we are now well past that point. Now let's get to our five headlines.

Are you still struggling with back taxes or unfiled returns? The IRS is escalating collections by adding 20,000 new agents and sending millions of demand letters. Handling this alone can be a huge mistake and cost you thousands of dollars. In these challenging times, your best offense is with Tax Network USA. With over 14 years of experience, the experts at Tax Network USA have saved clients millions in back taxes. Regardless of the size of your tax issue, their expertise is your advantage.

Tax Network USA offers three key services: protection, compliance, and settlement. Upon signing up, Tax Network USA will immediately contact the IRS to secure a protection order ensuring that aggressive collection activities such as garnishments, levies, or property seizures are halted. If you haven't filed in a while, if you need amended returns, or if you're missing records, Tax Network USA's expert tax preparers will update all of your filings to eliminate the risk of IRS enforcement. Then they'll create a settlement strategy to reduce or eliminate your tax debt.

The IRS is the largest collection agency in the world, and now that tax season is over, collection season has begun. Tax Network USA can even help with state tax issues. For a complimentary consultation, call today at 1-800-958-1000 or visit their website at tnusa.com slash walsh. That's 1-800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com slash walsh today. Don't let the IRS take advantage of you. Get the help you need with Tax Network USA.

I wanna talk about this case and first I'm gonna read this, well, it's a heavily biased article from ABC News. Biased, but the essential information is in there, at least to set up the conversation that I wanna have about this. So here's ABC News. Former Mesa County, Colorado clerk, Tina Peters was sentenced to nine years in prison for leading a security breach of the county's election system after being inspired by false and baseless claims of voting fraud.

Peters, a Republican, was convicted for giving an individual affiliated with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, an ally of former President Donald Trump, access to the election software she used for her county. Screenshots of the software appeared on right-wing websites. She was found guilty on most of the charges related to election tampering and misconduct. Before being sentenced, Peters took the stand, asked for probation, and told the judge that she never did anything with malice and believed she was serving the people in Mesa County.

I'm not a criminal and I don't deserve to go into a prison where other people have committed heinous crimes, Peters said. And then she said that she's remorseful. But all to no avail, she was sentenced to nine years in prison. Let me play just a clip of this judge. Now, this judge excoriated Tina Peters at length before passing down this sentence. And we'll play just a little bit of the clip of this scene in the courtroom. Let's watch it.

You have no problem trying to kick an officer. Your explanation about what happened is preposterous. It's on video. You have no problem lying to officers. It's happened multiple times. They're recorded conversations. It's just more lies. No objective person believes them. No, at the end of the day, you cared about the Jets, the podcasts, and the people-finding overview. You abdicated your position as a servant to the Constitution, and you chose you over all else.

Yes, you are a charlatan, and you cannot help but lie as easy it is for you to breathe. You betrayed your oath for no one other than you. As to counts one and four, the judgment and sentence of the court is three and a half years in the Department of Corrections. Those sentences will be concurrent to each other. As to count two, the judgment and sentence of the court is three and a half years consecutive to counts one and four.

As it relates to the misdemeanor charges, count eight is 120 days in the Mesa County Detention Facility, concurrent to count nine and 10, which will be six months in the Mesa County Detention Facility, consecutive to the prison sentence. The reason those sentences are consecutive

is because those sentences are, as the prosecution stated, directly related to what it is that you did here in our community, the damage you caused this community, the breach of your oath to the electorate in Mesa County. Your sentence will be followed by three years of parole. You have two days of pre-sentence confinement credit. Count six is criminal impersonation. That's also consecutive. That's 15 months to the Department of Corrections.

So it's eight and a half years total, plus the six months for a total of nine years of incarceration. So nine years in prison, the judge rips her to shreds and then sends her to prison for nine years. This woman's almost 70 years old, by the way, gold star mom, cancer survivor. She'll probably now die in prison. And I'm not interested in debating the merits of the case itself.

Let's accept all the facts the prosecutor presented. She illegally accessed a voting machine, I guess. She, whatever, took pictures and sent them. And she did it because she believed that she was uncovering voter fraud. And I think that there's agreement on that point, by the way. She wasn't accused of hacking into the machines to rig the election. This is all after the fact. And it was done, in her mind anyway, to uncover or reveal a rigged election.

You know, she said in the sentencing that she thought she was serving the people of her county. And I think that that's pretty apparent that that's what she thought. Otherwise, why would you do it? What would be the motive? Now, if you commit a crime just because you thought you were doing the right thing, that's not an excuse. That's not going to get you off the hook oftentimes. But these are the kinds of things that are weighed in sentencing. But they didn't amount to anything here. Nine years in prison.

All of these consecutive, notice he said all these convicted and all these charges consecutive. He could have done concurrent on all of it, but, you know, and even reduced it to three years, which would also be crazy. But no, he wants, he threw the book at her. He wants her to spend as much time in prison as possible. So nine years in prison for a 70-year-old woman who is not in any way a danger to society. A woman with no previous criminal record, a woman who could be let back into society and, and

She could move in next door to you and you'd have no reason to worry, right? There's not anyone in the country who would feel unsafe having this woman in the neighborhood. But nine years, you know, you could pull out a gun and rob the gas station down the street and get less time than that. In fact, you'd almost certainly get less time. You could kill someone and get less time.

You can certainly deal drugs and get much less time, commit assault, abuse a child. I mean, criminals guilty of all of these crimes are routinely given less time. And on top of it, treated with more respect by the judge. It wouldn't be that hard to find child molesters who get more gentle treatment from the judge and get less time in prison. And these are all criminals who actually are dangerous to their communities.

These are the kinds of people you certainly would not want living next door to you. These are the kinds of people who not only are their crimes much more egregious and so they deserve stiffer penalties, but also you can't. It's almost an act of attempted murder to put to not put them in prison. You are you are directly endangering the lives of the community by not putting them in prison for the rest of their lives.

These are actual violent predators who are not reformed, probably will never be reformed, violent, dangerous sociopaths who routinely get fewer than nine years in prison, maybe even fewer than nine months in some cases. You could go out and carjack somebody at a stoplight right now, and you almost certainly would not get nine years in prison. You could carjack someone and kill them in the process, and you might not get nine years in prison.

Well, I say you. I guess that depends because either way, I'm not encouraging you to do any of those things, obviously. But saying you in a general sense, it doesn't necessarily apply because for Peters, the most salient point is not the crime she committed. It's that she's conservative and white. That's what matters. So she's going to jail for nine years, not because she...

you know, sabotaged a voting machine or hacked into a voting machine and took pictures and sent them around. That's not why she's going to jail for nine years. Because if this was a black woman and a Democrat who did this on, you know, in order to prove that Trump supported that the machines were rigged, you know, against the Democrats in that scenario, she's not going to jail for nine years. We all know that like every single person knows that.

She's not going to jail at all. So even in the crimes I just listed, I mean, carjacking, murder, drug dealing. If you're a white conservative and you did any of those things, now conservatives don't generally do those things. But if you're a white conservative and you did any of those things I listed, maybe you would get nine years in prison or more. But if you're black or if you're more politically aligned with the judge or better yet for you both, no, no way.

So this is not justice at all. We don't have justice in this country. We don't have a, we call it a justice system, but justice system implies that there is a system that imposes justice. It's right there in the name. And we don't have that. This is not a shock, of course. We know that in other courts around the country, they are similar sentences have been passed down to pro-lifers. Yet again, for the most part, white and all of them are conservative.

So if you're a white conservative and you find yourself in court charged with any crime, you can just pretty much be assured that, look at what the law says, what's the maximum penalty? You already know that's what you're getting. Let's see, I'm gonna mention this. This is from LOTT Wire, which is Libsyn TikTok's website.

The West Point School Board in Virginia agreed to pay $575,000 in damages and legal fees to Peter Vlaming, a teacher fired in 2018 for refusing to use a transgender student's preferred pronouns. Vlaming, a French teacher, claimed that his termination violated his First Amendment rights, prompting a lawsuit. After multiple court rulings, the Virginia Supreme Court reinstated his case in December, ruling that the school board had indeed violated his rights.

Vlaming was represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which argued that his dismissal was not for something he said, but for something he couldn't say due to his beliefs. ADF Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer stated that Vlaming's refusal to speak what he believed to be untrue should not have resulted in punishment.

Part of the settlement, the school board cleared Vleming's firing record and revised its policies to align with guidelines introduced by Governor Glenn Youngkin's administration. Vleming expressed that he was wrongfully fired for his religious beliefs and criticized the school's insistence on a single perspective regarding gender identity. So we just talked about a grave injustice, and here's an example of justice at least. So there is still justice happening in some places in the country.

We don't really have a system in place for it. It's not consistent. But in this case, Justice, now, I think the guy deserved more than $575,000 for such an egregious violation of his basic human rights, his basic First Amendment rights. Now, he would have deserved $5 million. Or really, there's no, I mean, you can't really put a price tag on your First Amendment rights. $575,000 seems like, if you are going to put a price tag on it, seems like a pretty low one. But still-

He was vindicated. He's getting the payment and the school board has to eat crow on this one, which is as it should be. I will say that as I've tried to argue before, when you hear about these kinds of cases and they're framed as a religious rights case, I understand why they're framed that way legally. And obviously in this case, it paid off.

So an alliance defending freedom they know a lot more than I do about how to approach things like this legally so from a legal perspective when you have these crazy cases of somebody at school teacher or in another line of work being forced to use preferred pronouns and Framing it as a violation of of their religious liberty. It is that it is certainly that and so that makes sense But it's also much more than that. You know, it's not just that because

Peter Vlaming, the reason why he didn't want to use the preferred pronouns, he didn't want to use inaccurate pronouns. It's not just that he's Christian. It's that it's just not true. It doesn't align with his Christian values, his Christian beliefs, but it also doesn't align with basic biological reality.

And so really, where's Christian beliefs come into this? It's not like, well, I'm a Christian, and therefore I believe that if you're a man, you're a man, and if you're a woman, you're a woman. You don't need to be a Christian to believe that. But as a Christian, you can't lie. That's the part. That's really where the Christian values come in. Again, it's not a Christian value of mine that says that

Men are men. That's just physical reality the Christian value is I cannot tell a lie and I can't cooperate with a lie and I certainly cannot cooperate with this delusional idea that is Also causing great harm to the person that I'm sort of lying on behalf of and so that's that's the Christian belief and

And I'd like to say that this is part of a trend. When you look at this case and how it turned out, I'd like to say this is part of a trend. And I think maybe it is part of a trend where the kind of delusional fever dream that society's been in for the past decade or so is maybe starting to break. I saw someone on Twitter yesterday, I don't remember who, but

remarking on this point that it seems like culturally, like on the left, the Democrats, it's sort of noticeable that during this presidential election, they're not talking about trans rights, like at all. I mean, when have we heard Kamala Harris say anything about trans rights? Has she even used the phrase one time? Maybe she has. I'm sure we could find video of it, but it is not coming up. They aren't talking about it. We've watched multiple presidential debates. They're not bringing it up.

The closest they'll get is when they talk about things like supposed book bans, and really the book bans are just efforts to keep LGBT and trans propaganda out of the schools, pornographic materials out of schools. That's the closest they'll get, but that's it.

It was only a couple of years ago they were going around screaming about the totally invented made up trans genocide that's going on and all of this kind of thing. And they were going around accusing their opponents of being transphobes. Haven't heard that very much recently. So it does seem like a great retreat is underway on the left and they have basically lost on this issue. That's how it seems. I think it's still too early to declare, to kind of plant our flag and declare total victory.

It's certainly too early for that. I mean, the trans agenda is still happening. It's still a real thing in this country. But there is a retreat and they're losing ground and they're not even trying to defend a lot of the ground that they're losing at this point. And elected Democrats in particular are embarrassed of it. That wasn't the case four or five years ago, but now they're embarrassed. They don't want to talk about it because they know how crazy it sounds. But that didn't just happen on its own. That wasn't, this didn't just happen.

It's not dumb luck that it happened this way. This is because conservatives fought back and were winning. So there's something positive. This is important. Politico published an article analyzing the body language and facial features of both of the candidates in the debate on Tuesday, Walls and Vance. Completely insane, as you would expect, but this is the worst part. Can we pull up this? So this is real, by the way. This is not a joke. This is Politico.

It says, yes, Vance's beard matters. Vance is the first White House wannabe to wear facial hair in 80 years. Research indicates that voters see beards as more masculine. That can be positive to some, but to others, especially women, it can be negative, conveying aggression and opposition to feminist ideals. So that's the significance of Vance's beard.

Women might be afraid of it. First of all, any woman who is categorically opposed to beards or has a negative view of them in general is confused, possibly deranged. It's a very unnatural thing. A woman should not prefer that a man have a childlike baby face. Now, a woman might think that a particular man doesn't look good with a beard or looks better without one.

I'll allow for that. Now, even that is questionable at best because really every man looks better with a beard. I don't think there is a man who could not be improved by a beard. But okay, we'll let that go. For a woman to just flat out see all beards as upsetting, that's demented. I mean, that would be like a man who prefers for women to look less feminine.

Imagine a man saying, yeah, she's attractive, but she's a bit too feminine for my taste. I need a bit more masculinity in my women. No man would ever say that. So call me a mansplainer, but ladies, I mean, if you prefer men without beards, then you're wrong. Get it together. Get a grip. All right? Calm down. Calm down and get a grip. Your tastes here are wrong. And I'm just telling you. It's not mansplaining. I'm just telling you.

And I know you might think, well, I'm biased. I'm only saying because I have a beard. But I have no skin in the game, right? I'm not saying this for my own sake. I have a wife. She understands the value of a beard. So I'm just saying this in general because I'm concerned about you. I'm worried about you, ladies.

And I realize that you need me to, sometimes you need a man to come and guide you and help you through moments of confusion. So second thing is, I'm sure that will all go over really well. So I'll wait for the Twitter. I'll wait for the Twitter clip. Media Matters, they're on the case on that one. They are on the case. I didn't even finish saying it and they had already clipped it. I didn't even finish.

Hang on, media. I have more sexist things to say. Just hang on. Let me finish my whole thing before you, and then decide what you're going to clip. My second point is, Politico mentions a problem here that up until now, I think I'm one of the only ones who talked about this, but they don't see it as a problem, of course, but it is a problem. They say that Vance is the first candidate on a presidential ticket to have a beard in like 80 years. And that's true.

Right? And so it's been like 80 years. Okay, look at what's happened to this country over the past 80 years. We've been in decline since the beardless took over. Devastation and decline. That's what a smooth face gets you. Is it a coincidence? Is it a coincidence that we've just been trending like this ever since we kicked the beards to the curb?

Now, the truth is that it's really been over 100 years since we had a president with facial hair. Never mind vice president, since we had a president. Now, I think Truman had facial hair for a brief moment in time, but the last president to really lean into the facial hair was Taft. So for almost the entire 20th century, we have had no beards and no mustaches in the Oval Office, which is crazy. And also, it just so happens the 20th century was a century of chaos and bloodshed.

And I think that at least in part is because there were no bearded or mustachioed men around to lead with masculine strength and calm. Cuz one thing we know is that with bearded men, you don't get the bloodshed. I mean, look at the Vikings, for instance, famously peaceful. So I don't know, would the Great Depression have happened if we had presidents who were bearded? Would the Challenger have exploded? Could we have avoided World War II?

If there was more facial hair involved. I realize that's a little bit of an awkward one, given, you know, Hitler. But anyway, I don't know. I don't know for sure. I just think there's something here we need to look at. And you do have to wonder. You have to wonder about this. Anyway.

Every year for Halloween, I dress up as me. And now, so can you. Get the all new Am I Racist Halloween costume and you too can dress as the beloved anti-racist DEI certified Matt Walsh as seen on CNN's coverage of the National Democratic Convention. Embark on your anti-racist journey and do the work this Halloween. Go to dailywire.com slash shop to get your Am I Racist costume today.

We're just 31 days away from the 2024 election. Now is the time to join DailyWire Plus. Get 47% off with code FIGHT at dailywire.com slash subscribe. DailyWire Plus gives you unlimited access to the truth with uncensored daily shows free from ads or moderators.

Stay informed with live breaking news coverage and the kind of hard-hitting investigative journalism the left doesn't want you to see. This deal is for a very limited time, so don't wait. Join the fight now and get 47% off new memberships. Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code FIGHT for your exclusive discount. That's dailywire.com slash subscribe, code FIGHT for 47% off new Daily Wire Plus memberships. Now let's get to our daily cancellation.

Now, you might not have known this, but every once in a while, and by that I mean once every four days or so, the internet gets really mad at me. And sometimes the internet is mad because of a stance I've taken on some serious cultural or political issue. But in many cases, the outrage is in response to opinions I've expressed about issues that are

Arguably less important. Long time fans of the show will recall some classic examples, like the outrage that ensued when I said that mermaids wouldn't be black in real life because they'd really be translucent. Or the overwhelming anger that followed after I declared that all anime is satanic. Some of the greatest hits there. More recently, just a few weeks ago, I was at the center of a firestorm that raged for days and days when I boldly declared that raw milk is gross.

And in a follow-up tweet, I revealed that I personally conduct surveillance at my local grocery stores to make sure that they're not selling any raw milk. And if they are selling raw milk, I call the police. And screenshots of that tweet in particular have been plastered all over Twitter as proof that I am a deranged fascist. The most recent fury revolves around comments that I made about sick days. So on this show a couple weeks ago,

I said that sick days are for children. Adults who take sick days should be embarrassed. And Media Matters, of course, posted the clip of that segment. Not the full segment, but just the 70 to 80 seconds that they consider to be the most outrageous. The peanut gallery on both the right and left dutifully responded by being outraged about the thing that Media Matters wanted them to be outraged about. Now, you might think that by now, conservatives would just flat out refuse to ever respond with outrage to a Media Matters clip under any circumstance.

Given that Media Matters are a bunch of left wing vultures whose whole entire mission in life is to clip conservatives out of context and gin up outrage against them. But you think conservatives by now would have realized that and would say, well, that's a Media Matters clip, I'm gonna ignore it. No, many conservatives are still more than willing to play the game with Media Matters. Media Matters goes to them and says, hey, you should be mad about this, mad at one of your own people on your side. And they go, okay, I'll be mad, thanks for telling me to be mad.

Which is all great, of course. Well done, everyone. Well done. In any case, this week I was interviewed by the talented comedian John Crist on his podcast, and he asked me about this sick day controversy. I clarified my stance, but somehow my clarification has only made people more upset. Let's watch that clip. So my basic... If you're...

If your body temperature is below 105. 105. And you can still walk. Get your ass to work. 105 is crazy. And as long as you don't have a fatal communicable disease. Yeah. Because if I'm the boss and someone calls me and says, I can't make it in, I'm sick. Yeah. I say, what? My first question, are you dying? Yeah. Because you're paying them. Right. And then they say no. I said, okay, well, whatever you have, will I catch it if you come in? Yeah.

If the answer's no to both of those, they're coming to work. So you just don't want to work. Right. Yeah, well, that's what you're kind of saying. I don't think in high school, I never took a sick day. First of all, I liked going. You liked going to high school? I thought it was fun. I've never missed a day. I promise you right now, I'd never miss a day. So I'm going to go to fact check, like Miss McHugh, call her up.

That's crazy. I missed so many days in high school. What if it's not for being sick? Right, I just didn't want to go. So there are hundreds of comments in response, again, many of them from people on the right who are incensed by that statement. They say that it's unreasonable and callous and insane and unchristlike. Many of them say that I should not talk about this subject at all because I don't know what it's like to work hard. How dare I speak about a subject like work given that I've never worked a real job in my life?

I'm a billionaire trust fund baby. I don't know what work is. Now, they have me on that last point, I must admit. Sure, I have in fact worked many what they would call real jobs in my life. I've worked two or three jobs at once to make ends meet. But that was a long time ago. In the past three years, I haven't really done anything. I've made two feature films while also doing a daily show and supporting a family of eight.

Which is obviously a total breeze. And certainly any of the people mad at me on the internet right now could easily do the same. Never mind the fact that many of the people accusing me of not having a real job are themselves social media influencers. But we won't get hung up on those details. Let's just get to the substantive point. So first, let me get one thing out of the way. There have been a few commenters, a minority, but they're out there.

who have assured the outraged masses that I'm not being entirely serious. According to these people, I'm doing something known in some circles as joking. I am, they say, employing the comedic device of hyperbole and exaggeration. As evidence, they point to the fact that in the clip that we just played,

I'm talking to a comedian who is laughing at what I'm saying as one does when they hear a joke. Now they also claim that I in fact use dry humor and sarcasm all the time. They point to the fact that I have a comedy film in theaters right now as we speak where I use exactly that device.

You can get your tickets now at miracist.com. Indeed, these contrarians claim that all of the outrages I listed at the beginning, calling the police on people who drink raw milk, claiming that anime is satanic, translucent mermaids, etc., and many more are all examples of comedic exaggeration not meant to be taken entirely literally. According to these people, my long-established style and pattern, one that, again, I have made entire movies around,

is to start with the core of a point that I actually believe, and then on occasion to take that point to intentionally absurd extremes as a joke. This is something that you might argue normal people do in everyday conversation all the time. It's a very common type of humor, one that should be familiar to most earthlings. For example, I was recently talking to a friend who was very distraught because the Steelers were in the process of losing to the cults.

And he declared that he was so frustrated he was about to throw his TV out of the window. Now, I did not respond to that declaration by saying, are you crazy? Don't throw your TV out the window. What if you hit someone? Besides, that's not gonna help the Steelers win. I didn't say any of that. Instead, I said, yeah, man, they suck. And that was it. And that's because I recognized that although it was true that he was upset about the Steelers losing, he wasn't actually going to throw the TV out of the window or throw it anywhere.

It was hyperbole. He was exaggerating. He was upset, but he was exaggerating the degree that he was upset. Why did he do that? What is against something called a joke, spelled J-O-K-E, a joke, a thing that human beings do from time to time? Why? Well, just to be funny, I guess. I don't know, but they do it. Human beings are interesting like that. You should meet one sometime. With all that said,

I want to make one thing absolutely clear. These contrarians are wrong. Now, it is true that people joke sometimes. I am not joking. I'm not joking about any of it ever. I don't tell jokes. Jokes are satanic. You know who told jokes? Hitler. Well, he probably didn't, but other people have. John Wayne Gacy was a clown and also a serial killer. That's where humor gets you. Think about it.

So if you've taken my point about sick days completely literally, then you have the right idea. No, you are not a brain dead moron going along with Twitter outrage ginned up by Media Matters. You're not that. Don't worry. You're right.

I am not exaggerating to be funny in an attempt to make a point about the lack of work ethic in society. That's definitely not what's happening. I do in fact literally think that you should come to work with a 104 degree fever. And let me clarify one other thing. I meant 104 degrees Celsius. If your fever is 104 degrees Celsius or below, which translates to 212 degrees Fahrenheit, then you're lazy, good for nothing ass, better be at work.

Essentially, you need to come to work unless you are literally on fire. And even then, if I'm the boss, I'm gonna wanna know how much of you is on fire. Is this a full emulation Aaron Bushnell style or are there parts of you that aren't on fire? If you call me up and say, boss, I can't come in, I'm on fire. I say, what do you mean you're up? What part of you? I need more information. If your head isn't on fire, then I see no reason why you can't make it to work. What if you have a fever?

of 106 degrees and you're literally minutes away from death. Well, minutes away from death is not dead. Who's exaggerating now? Get to work. What if you just got home from Africa and it turns out that you contracted the Ebola virus? Should you go to work in that case? Well, obviously not. I wouldn't want you in the building with a lethally contagious disease. But there's no reason why you can't be in the parking lot. Go to work, sit in the parking lot in your car. We'll have one of the more expendable interns bring your work out to you. If you can't do your work in the car,

then you're fired. You didn't have permission to get Ebola in the first place. What are you doing getting Ebola? That's a violation of your employment agreement, specifically page five, section three, which says in clear language, employee agrees to not get Ebola. Now, what if rather than sick, you suffer some kind of gruesome accident? What if on the way to work, you get into a car wreck and you somehow impale yourself on like a fence post or something? Well, again, what part of yourself did you impale? It didn't impale all of your limbs, did it?

I don't care if you're a human shish kebab, get to work. And even if you have to go to the hospital, is there any reason why you can't hop on a Zoom call on your way there so you don't miss the 10 o'clock meeting? So I'm pretty reasonable about this, I think. And along with being reasonable, I'm also, again, entirely serious about everything I'm saying or have ever said in my entire life ever. And most of all, you should listen to me about this because I know about work. I'm a podcaster.

And I'm also serious when I say that anyone who has ever taken a sick day for any reason at all, ever, is today canceled and should frankly be thrown in prison, if not executed. Okay, that'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to you on Monday. Godspeed.

Republicans or Nazis, you cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people. Growing up, I never thought much about race. It never really seemed to matter that much, at least not to me. Am I racist? I would really appreciate it if you left. I'm trying to learn. I'm on this journey. I'm going to sort this out. I need to go deeper undercover.

Joining us now is Matt, certified DEI expert. Here's my certifications. What you're doing is you're stretching out of your whiteness. This is more for you than this for you. Is America inherently racist? The word inherent is challenging there. I'm going to rename the George Washington Monument to the George Floyd Monument. America is racist to its bones. So inherently. Yeah, this country is a piece of...

White folks. White trash. White supremacy. White woman. White boy. Is there a black person around here? There's a black person right here. Does he not exist? Hi, Robin. Hi. What's your name? I'm Matt. I just had to ask who you are because you have to be careful. Never be too careful. In theaters now. Rated PG-13.