Ep. 1613 - The Immigrant Riots Prove Again Why Diversity Is Not Our Strength
01:07:49 Share

This is Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Watch Parenting, available exclusively on Daily Wire Plus. We're dealing with misbehaviors with our son. Our 13-year-old throws tantrums. Our son turned to some substance abuse. Go to dailywireplus.com today. Today on Matt Wall Show, the immigrant riots across the country provide yet more evidence that despite what we've been told, diversity is not actually our strength.

The new talking points have gone out to TikTok influencers. In unison, they're claiming that illegal immigrants haven't committed a crime because coming here illegally is only a civil violation. Is that true? And a bill just passed through a committee that would ban the gender transition, quote unquote, of children across the country. We talk about all that and more today on Matt Walsh Show.

Truth, courage, sanity, just a few things your dad passed down. Return the favor this Father's Day with 40% off a new Daily Wire Plus annual membership at dailywire.com slash gift with code dad40. Do you find yourself tossing and turning all night, constantly flipping your pillow to find the cool side?

Well, if you are a hot sleeper, summer nights can become a battle between exhaustion and overheating. That restless cycle of too hot, too cold, never quite right can leave you longing for the cool, comfortable sleep you deserve. With Bowling Branch's best-selling percale sheets, you'll finally get the cool sleep

that you've been craving. These aren't just any ordinary sheets. They're crafted with special cooling weaves, which use the finest 100% organic cotton that feels crisp and breathable against your skin. Even if you're the sweatiest sleeper in the house, gross, you'll stay comfortably cool all night long. And here's the best part, you can try them risk-free with their 30 night guarantee. No matter your bedroom style or mattress size, Bull & Branch has designs and colors to match perfectly

These all-season sheets start with breathable, unmatched softness that only gets better with every wash. I noticed a huge difference the first night that I added my new sheets to the bed. They feel incredibly soft, and the quality is unmistakable. There's none of that initial stiffness that you get with the cheaper bedding every night. Since then, I've been sleeping more soundly and comfortably. Feel the difference an extraordinary night's sleep can make with Bolan Branch. Get 15% off, plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at bolanbranch.com slash Walsh.

That's BollandBranch, B-O-L-L-A-N-D, branch.com slash Walsh to save 15%. Exclusions apply. See site for details. Now that hordes of illegal aliens have decided to demolish sushi restaurants and liberate iPhones from Apple stores in Los Angeles as a very roundabout way of making the case that California is really Mexican territory and that no person is illegal, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that we're not the only country that's experiencing a series of major riots at this exact moment.

Over in Northern Ireland, the locals have also been taken to the streets all week. In the small town of Ballymena, a population of roughly 31,000, hundreds of rioters have been throwing Molotov cocktails, launching fireworks, smashing store windows with bricks. And these riots have also spread to places like Belfast. Now, some cars have also been destroyed. Trash cans were set on fire. More than a dozen people, including police officers, have been injured.

And even as the police use water cannons to try to disperse the rioters, they keep coming back. On the surface, the mayhem might seem similar to what's happening in Los Angeles. In fact, the noncombatants are using similar tactics. In L.A., some people are hanging Mexican flags outside their stores in the hopes of deterring rioters from attacking. And in Northern Ireland, they are hanging British flags. But

There's at least one very big difference between these two riots, and you can probably guess the difference based on the flags I just mentioned. In Northern Ireland, they're not rioting to demand open borders. They're not angry that the federal government is enforcing immigration law. On the contrary, they are rioting precisely because the government is not enforcing immigration law.

They're tired of the fact that foreign nationals have been allowed into their country with essentially no limitation whatsoever. And their cause gained new urgency over the weekend when two 14-year-old migrant children allegedly attacked a teenage girl in the town and sexually assaulted her. This is just the latest in a string of attacks by so-called, quote-unquote, asylum seekers in Ireland in recent months. And the Irish have had enough. So what exactly can we learn from these two attacks?

events, which coincidentally are happening at the same time in two very different places. Well, it's easy to condemn violence, but condemning violence doesn't prevent violence from happening in the future. You have to address the underlying cause. And what's happening in Northern Ireland and Los Angeles right now give us a pretty good idea what that underlying cause is. It turns out that when you flood native populations with foreigners, you get violence and dysfunction one way or another.

Either the foreign nationals will wage an explicit war of secession as they're doing in California, or the foreign nationals will commit so many violent acts of terrorism, including acts of terrorism that destroy the lives of children that the natives simply can't tolerate it anymore, and then they lash out. In both cases, we're witnessing the inevitable failure of the cult of diversity. In every case, reality disproves the claim that we hear so often that diversity is our strength.

At the moment, Democrats are trying to portray the riots in Los Angeles as anti-ICE protests, but that's not remotely accurate, of course. No sane person believes that it's some great tragedy that ICE is rounding up murderers and sexual abusers. The goal of the riots in LA, very clearly, is to establish the supremacy of one ethnic group over another.

That's generally what happens when very different ethnic groups with very different conceptions of acceptable human behavior are forced to live on top of one another. Now, it's become commonplace to hear accusations of bigotry or white supremacy when you talk like this, but it's essential, especially after what we're seeing in Los Angeles where store owners are now boarding up their windows at night

to understand that everyone becomes an extremist when they're defending something they actually care about. Why do you think the left is suddenly claiming that Mexico actually owns California? What happened to all the Indian tribes who used to live in California? The ones we've been told are the true owners of all the land in the continent. They got there before the Mexicans, but all of a sudden, the Indians' claim to the land doesn't matter.

Instead, the president of Mexico's Senate just came out and threatened to seize land from the United States. Now, he's not speaking English, so I'll read from the translation. Quote, names don't lie. The most spoken language in Los Angeles is Spanish. The United States government has the right to implement whatever immigration measures it deems appropriate, but they have no right to violate the dignity of immigrants. They have no right to separate families.

The politician also said that he told Trump that Mexico would, quote, build the wall and pay for it, but will do it according to the 1830 map of Mexico. So now they're celebrating colonialism suddenly. They're saying that because the Spanish colonized Los Angeles and called it part of New Spain back hundreds of years ago and dished out some Spanish names, somehow that's evidence that California currently belongs to Mexico, never mind the fact that Mexico...

didn't do anything with California when they briefly owned it independently for around 25 years, as we discussed the other day. Never mind the fact that Americans brought civilization and prosperity to that territory over a period of more than 150 years. The important point for our purposes is to underscore the fact that activists and politicians will use any argument they can think of in order to defend their preferred ethnic group and nationality.

They don't care if it's hypocritical. They don't care if it's unfair. You know, they'll do it anyway. And that's why multiculturalism in every context is failing. It's why we're seeing riots everywhere, not just in Ireland and California. Katie Davis at the Postmillennial shot this footage from Seattle, for example. Rioters are besieging federal buildings, torching American flags, blockading officers, throwing rocks at buildings. Watch.

Now, as the day went on, the rioters in Seattle shot fireworks directly at officers outside of a federal building leading to a brawl, which you can see here.

And similar violence is on display in many other cities, including Austin, Dallas, New York.

You'll notice that most of the mayhem isn't even directed at ICE. For example, in Atlanta, rioters have taken turns destroying police cars and shooting fireworks at officers. Watch. Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop. Over there, over there. Hammering, hammering it. This is well-practiced. This is a cone that they smoke grenades in here.

They're putting, it's a perfect, you gotta be careful because of all the smoke grenades. Yeah, they're starting to do it. But they're putting cones, the protesters are putting cones on the smoke grenades. Among many other failures that are evident in that video, this is a failure of assimilation. One culture that doesn't respect the rule of law is clashing with another culture that does. And by the way, the implications of this culture clash are a lot more pervasive than you might realize.

For example, around 15 years ago, the government in the UK ran a study to see if the race of jurors had an impact on the outcome of criminal trials. And here's what they found after conducting a mock trial. Now, it's a really extraordinary chart. As you can see, 39% of white jurors wanted to find the white defendant guilty after hearing all the evidence. But

73% of black and ethnic minority members of the jury wanted to find the white defendant guilty. Now, think about that. It's evidence that black jurors are overwhelmingly more likely to convict a white defendant on the same facts. And by contrast, when the defendant was black or minority ethnic, they were more likely to convict a white defendant.

the numbers were much closer. You had 32% of white members of the jury who wanted to convict, while 24% of black and minority members of the jury wanted to convict. Now, to my knowledge, no one in any government in the UK or in this country or any other country has followed up on this data. And I only saw it because it was flagged recently by Jonathan Pallison, a social science researcher. But you think there'd be a lot of interest in this particular topic. I mean, if this data is accurate...

It suggests that jury systems simply don't function in multicultural societies. They function more like racial tribunals instead. And we've seen signs of that, of course, most famously in the OJ trial. More recent signs of it, Derek Chauvin. But it could be a lot worse than anyone even realizes. Certainly the situation in America's schools has decayed dramatically due to the alleged blessings of diversity problems.

One of the best illustrations of the dangers of the religion of multiculturalism came to us this week from Andrew Cuomo. Now, of course, he wasn't trying to show why multiculturalism is dangerous. He wasn't trying to expose the cult of diversity, but he did unintentionally. So here is Andrew Cuomo, who wants to become the next mayor of New York, celebrating the fact that 180 different languages are now spoken in the New York school system.

And naturally, of course, he says all this while decked out in ethnic garb. But listen to this. The city of New York, we are the capital of diversity. One hundred and eighty languages spoken in our school system. One hundred and eighty different languages, people from all across the world. That makes us stronger, not weaker.

The capital of diversity, he says proudly. Now, if it's true that there are 180 languages spoken in the New York school system, that is not something to brag about. That is rather a testament to the total insanity of multiculturalism. It is proof, as if we needed more, that diversity is certainly not our strength. And that's why Cuomo can only assert that this huge plurality of languages is a strength

but he can't explain or defend that point in any detail. Like, I have a follow-up question for you, Cuomo. It's a very simple one. It's the most obvious one. What exactly is the benefit of having a system where people cannot speak to each other or understand one another? I mean, did you read about the Tower of Babel and think that it's a blueprint to follow? I think you might have misunderstood the story. So please give me an example of a scenario

Where you would walk into a place, hear people speaking all different languages that you can't understand, and say to yourself, wow, thank God. I have no idea what the hell anyone is saying. I can't communicate with anyone. This is great. Why would you ever say that? In what exact scenario? Here's a better question. When have you ever encountered a task that would be best performed by people who cannot communicate with each other?

Well, you've never encountered such a task because making things more confused and unintelligible is never the best way to accomplish any task. Least of all, is it the best way to accomplish the task of building and maintaining a country? There are a few things that are fundamentally necessary in order for a nation to continue existing or to exist in the first place. A shared language is one of those things.

A shared culture is another one which is built on top of your shared language. If you have a country with hundreds of languages and hundreds of cultures, you don't have a country. You have a geographic area where a bunch of people live, but you don't have a nation. You don't have a people. Now this nation is called the United States of America. "United" is right there in the title. We must be united around something, by something.

something more than just mere geographical proximity. But when you see these riots breaking out across the country, what you're looking at is the fruits of diversity. These are people we have nothing in common with, people with whom we are not united and can never be united in any meaningful way whatsoever. Again, a nation regresses when it begins to worship the idol of multiculturalism. In Australia,

Their politicians will come right out and admit it. Here's a remarkable clip from a premiere in Australia from just a few weeks ago. Listen to this.

There's been some that have been agitating in the Parliament to nullify the laws, to remove them off the statute books. Think about what kind of toxic message that would send to the New South Wales community and I think the advocates for those changes need to explain what do they want people to have the right to say? What kind of racist abuse do they want to see or be able to lawfully see on the streets of Sydney?

I recognize and I've fully said from the beginning that we don't have the same freedom of speech laws that they have in the United States. And the reason for that is that we want to hold together a multicultural community and have people live in peace, free from the kind of vilification and hatred that we do see around the world. So he says, quote, Australians don't have the same freedom of speech laws that they have in the United States. And the reason for that is that we want to hold together a multicultural community, cultural community.

Well, at least they're honest about it. Meanwhile, in the UK, Nigel Farage, the leader of the Reform Party, has just announced that if you've lived in Wales for a few years, then you're Welsh. And you're no different from people who've lived there for generations. Watch. You say that you would like to give priority to people from Wales for housing. How would you define a Welsh person?

Well, it's a very fair question from your channel. We hadn't proposed the Welsh language test. No, look, it's got to be somebody who's lived and is settled in Wales, has paid taxes and obeyed the law. And if someone's done that for a five or 10 year period, then I think they've every right to say that they're fully part of the Welsh community. Now, if the former leader of the Brexit campaign is talking like this, then, you know, it's pretty bad.

But at least they're being honest overseas. In this country, we don't have many politicians or public figures who are willing to acknowledge what they're doing. They won't admit that multiculturalism inevitably means the decline of the West and everything we value. We have to sit back and watch our civilization decay in real time. Now, one of the few commentators who did see this coming was Pat Buchanan many years ago. Listen. When whites are a minority in this country in 2041 and Hispanics are 150 million,

What is going to hold us together when we don't have a common religion, we don't have common beliefs about right and wrong and morality as we used to? We are at war over whether or not equality means equality of rights or equality of rewards. That footage is from around 14 years ago. The question that Pat Buchanan asked, what will hold us together? It's a very good question. Has now been definitively answered.

And it's nothing. Nothing will hold us together. All over the world, countries that bought into the lie that diversity makes us stronger are rapidly becoming unrecognizable. And in many cases, the people, people didn't vote for this. It was forced on them by their leaders. And until this disastrous experiment is reversed, which should be the Trump administration's top priority, the violence and dysfunction will only continue and get worse. We can either reject democracy

the cult of multiculturalism and diversity, or one large-scale riot at a time, we can allow it to destroy the United States. And if that happens, we'll be listening to our politicians tell us that the First Amendment is suspended in order to promote diversity, just like they do in Australia. And by that point, as in Australia and many other European nations, including the UK, it will be far too late to rebuild what we once had. Now let's get to our five headlines. ♪♪

If you feel like you keep juggling expensive supplements that are just getting more unaffordable to keep up with, then Everyday Dose will be a lifesaver for you. Everyday Dose transforms your morning coffee into a powerhouse of vitamins, minerals, and amino acids, all in one affordable cup. Just 30 seconds to prepare, and you're getting your caffeine fix, plus all the nutrients your body needs.

One delicious cup, one simple solution. Everyday dose isn't just coffee, it's coffee plus benefits. They've infused their 100% Arabica beans with Lion's Mane, Chaga, collagen protein, and brain-boosting nootropics for clean, sustained energy without the crash or jitters.

You can choose between their Mild Coffee Plus, which is light, smooth, and gentle on sensitive stomachs, or Coffee Plus Bold, which is a rich, full-bodied medium roast with an extra energy kick. Both deliver the same functional benefits and undergo rigorous third-party testing to ensure you're getting the best quality your brain and body will thank you. Get 45% off your first subscription order of 30 servings of Coffee Plus or Bold Plus. You'll also receive a starter kit with over...

$100 in free gifts, including a rechargeable frother and gunmetal serving spoon, by going to everydaydose.com slash Walsh or entering Walsh at checkout. You also get free gifts throughout the year. That's everydaydose.com slash Walsh for 45% off your first order. I just saw this before we started recording, so I wanted to touch on it because I find it to be extremely, extremely disturbing. Trump...

on Truth Social, Truth Socialed this, or Truthed it out, or whatever the verb is that we're supposed to use. This is what he posted. Let's just say post. He said...

Our great farmers and people in the hotel and leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good longtime workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace. In many cases, the criminals allowed into our country by the very stupid Biden open borders policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our farmers, but get the criminals out of the USA. Changes are coming. Yes, I find this very disturbing because...

This is not what we voted for. This is not this is not it. OK, because what he's talking about here is what he's indicating is a pullback, at least if not a full scale, not if not full scale abandoning, at least pulling back from immigration enforcement, because farmers have complained and people in the hotel and leisure business have complained that

that they're losing their workers and that they can't find Americans who are willing to do the job. It's just that same old canard we've heard so many times. And this we cannot tolerate. I mean, this is the kind of thing as conservatives, if you're a Trump supporter, if you're a conservative, if you care about our national sovereignty, the continued existence of our nation, you got to push back against this. We have to push back hard against this. You know, that's a

that employers who knowingly rely on illegal immigrant labor, that we should be catering to them, that we should not enforce our borders and our immigration laws and not try to restore our national sovereignty for the sake of their cheap labor. Absolutely not. Okay, I've got a better idea. If you have employers who are, again, knowingly relying on illegal immigrant labor,

Instead of giving them what they want because they're complaining that they can't find Americans willing to do the job, instead of that, how about we put them in prison? That's what should be happening. That's actually the important next step in enforcing our borders, enforcing immigration laws. Yes, deportations, all of that. But then you've got to also, not even then, at the same time, you have to find the employers who are contributing to this problem and driving it

By knowingly hiring these people instead of hiring Americans, you have to find them and punish them. They should be in prison for that. Backing off of immigration enforcement for their sake is a no-go. Absolutely not. It's an outrageous suggestion. And it's no different from what we've heard from establishment Republicans. It's no different from the establishment Republican talking point for decades and decades. It's exactly what put us in this position.

in the first place. And by the way, I just don't, I don't buy this nonsense about, oh, Americans won't do these jobs. That's, that's, okay. I'm sorry. That's total bull. No, there are plenty of what their Americans won't work in the hotel industry. Like the, the Mexican illegal immigrant that's cleaning out your hotel room. That's it. She's irreplaceable. If she's deported, well, we can't find anyone who could do it. How could we possibly clean these hotel rooms?

But picking crops, cleaning hotel rooms, really? Really? There's no in a country of 300 million plus actual citizens. You can't find anyone who's willing to do those jobs. Really? I don't buy that. That's just not true. You know what it is. This is what it is. There are plenty of Americans perfectly capable of doing those jobs. Obviously, plenty of Americans perfectly willing to do them. But they're not going to be your slave labor. That's the issue here. You have to pay them a fair wage.

is what you have to do. There are plenty of Americans able and willing to work on a farm or work in a hotel. They're just not going to do it for 50 cents an hour or whatever you're paying your army of illegals who can't speak English. Yeah, those people you bring in and they're not legally here, they're not on the books, and they're not going to complain because if they do, they get shipped back to the country where they don't want to go. And so, yeah, you can pay them whatever you want.

And of course, that's why all of these great farmers, our great people in the hotel business, as Trump calls them, well, the quote unquote great farmers who are complaining about immigration enforcement, not so great. Because what they're complaining about is that they're being deprived of their slave labor. And so the response from the president should be, okay, too bad. Oh, is that hard for you to actually pay like a real wage to American citizens who live in this country and are actual legal citizens?

Is that difficult? Oh, you'd rather pay Juan over there 75 cents an hour? Oh, is that tough? Okay, well, how about do it anyway, hire Americans, or you'll be in prison. How about that? Well, shut down your farm, we'll put you in prison. That's the other option. Why is that not the negotiation here? I just have, I have no sympathy for it whatsoever. How can anyone have any sympathy for it at this point? Do we want to have a country or not? Okay, if we want a country, the hotel business is just going to have to deal with it. Oh, what if some hotels shut down? Well, I guess they shut down then. I guess that's what happens.

You know, I guess if that's really I mean, if it's true, like you really can't you if you if you open a hotel and the only way that you can possibly keep it open is with illegal immigrant slave labor. Well, then I guess your hotel shouldn't exist. OK, I guess it just shouldn't exist anymore. If you have a farm and the only way you can get your keep your farm open is with illegal immigrant labor, then I guess you shouldn't have a farm anymore.

I guess you're not a very good farmer, actually. It turns out you can't figure out how to keep your farm going by hiring American citizens in this country. So you want to be an American farmer and you don't want to hire Americans? Well, you're not a very good farmer then. So your farm should just be shut down at that point. I don't know what to tell you. I got no sympathy for this whatsoever. And this kind of thing.

We just can't, you know, there are people in the comments that are saying, oh, no, I don't think he really meant that. I think what he's actually saying. No, no, he said what he said. OK, we can. It's plain. This is plain English. We can read it. It's very clear what's being now, whether Trump will actually act on that and pull back from immigration enforcement for the sake of the farmers and the hotel business. That remains to be seen. But he said what he said.

And if we don't want him to pull back from immigration enforcement, then we need to push back against this and push back hard and say, no, you want to you want to totally destroy your legacy as president. This is a good way to do it. We this this you've got to not only OK, not only would it be under continuing to undermine American sovereignty and destroying our national identity, it's bad. That's bad enough.

But also at this point, if you don't follow through and start and deport these people, if you cave to the farmers and the hotel business and the leisure business, then on top of everything else, you're also giving these rioters exactly what they want. And you're letting them win. And you're emboldening them. Okay, and then what happens? It means we get more of it. That means the next time they're upset about it, what are they going to do? They're going to go burn down some city blocks again, and then they get what they want, which is a pattern that we've seen over the years.

So this just cannot be. This is not acceptable. It's just not. All right. Let's see what else we have here. The the journalist was one of the subject of immigration. I'll also hit this. The journalist Colin Rugg has compiled a montage of TikTok influencers who have all all at the same time.

glommed on to the same talking point. And they've all very suddenly at the same time become fond of claiming that entering the country illegally is just a civil violation, like jaywalking. And it's funny when they all just pick up on the exact same talking point at the exact same time. But watch this.

Being in a country that you're in illegally is a civil offense, not a criminal one. You know what else is a civil offense? Jaywalking. And being undocumented is not a criminal offense. It's a civil one. And if you've ever jaywalked, congratulations because you've also committed a civil offense. Have you ever sped over the speed limit? Have you ever drank or smoked underage? Have you ever drank and then driven a car? What about jaywalking? Being undocumented in America is...

a civil offense. It's not a criminal one. It's the same caliber of crime as a traffic offense. Just a reminder in case anyone forgot, being undocumented is a civil offense, not a criminal one. If you have so much as littered on public property, I never want to hear, oh, but they broke a law, as a justification for your hate. Now this talking point, it's all over X as well. I've seen a million tweets making this claim. Maybe not a million, like dozens, so close enough.

But anyway, a couple of things about this. First of all, it's not true. Entering the country illegally is a criminal offense. OK, entering a second time illegally is not only a criminal offense. Coming back after you've been deported once is not only criminal offense, but it's actually a felony. But yes, it is a criminal offense. The first time is also a criminal offense. It is absolutely a criminal offense. And now the people who are making this claim may be relying on a few technicalities to

Well, I should say they're relying, these people that we just saw in the montage are relying on whoever gave them the talking point. They have no idea what's going on. It's not like those girls in the montage are cleverly devising some way to present illegal entry as a civil offense. They just have no clue what they're talking about. They have the collective IQ of a spatula, no offense to them. But the talking point itself is based on some technicalities, like the fact that, as far as I understand it,

If you're in the country illegally because you overstayed a visa, as opposed to sneaking in across the border, then that is a civil offense. And also, even though, and this is really the technicality that this all sort of hangs on, is that even though illegal entry is a criminal offense, it is usually treated like a civil offense.

Deportation is a civil penalty, not a criminal one. Again, I'm not a lawyer, but I think that's how it all breaks down. But still, the thrust of the point is incorrect. Coming to the country illegally is a crime. It is a criminal offense. So we can rightly call illegal aliens criminal aliens because that's what they are. It is not a violation on the level of jaywalking, despite what you just heard.

Although, side note about that, it's always funny to me that people will use jaywalking as like the prime example of a silly or frivolous law, right? When they're trying to explain why a law is dumb, they'll say, oh, it's just like jaywalking.

Well, actually there's a reason jaywalking is illegal. It's like, if you, there's nothing frivolous about it. If you drive through the city, you'll see pedestrians just wandering out into the middle of a busy roadway, almost causing accidents or causing accidents, almost getting themselves killed or actually getting themselves killed. So we should enforce the laws against jaywalking. That's not a dumb law either, but that's beside the point. The point is that coming into the country illegally is not like jaywalking. It's a, it's far more serious. And, uh,

And even all of that is beside the point, because here we're talking about how, you know, illegal immigration is classified, what kind of violation it is. But all that really matters is that it is a violation, whether a criminal or civil violation. The key word is violation. Right. The people who are here illegally, whether illegal criminally or civilly, are here illegally and they need to go. I mean, that's that's the key point.

It doesn't matter how it's characterized, what label you put on it. It doesn't I don't think it matters how they got here illegally. Did they sneak across the border? Did they overstay a visa? Doesn't matter. However, they ended up here illegally. They're here illegally and they got to go. And if they work on a farm or they work in a hotel and they do a really good job and they're really hard workers and they'll do it for 275 an hour, they still got to go.

OK, Marjorie Taylor Greene just passed through committee a bill to ban so-called gender transitions for children on the federal level. Here is Representative Greene talking about it.

Hi everyone, I have really great news. My bill, Protect Children's Innocence Act, just passed through the Judiciary Committee. Big thank you to Jim Jordan. Big thank you to Harriet Hageman. They did a fantastic job. This is a victory for children. We have to protect their innocence. We have to allow them to grow up. They can choose who they want to be when they're adults, but there should be no medical industry that mutilates their genitals, gives them poisons, and permanently changes their bodies.

Next thing we have to do is get it through Rules Committee and then get it to the House floor for a vote for final passage. This is what we campaigned on. President Trump wrote an executive order to criminalize sex changes on kids. And this is the will of the American people. Stay tuned for more.

Now there were some in this committee who were very upset about this bill, as you would expect. Representative Jayapal, who's one of the more, on this topic, one of the more militant members of Congress. Let's listen to her outburst. What is barbaric is this legislation. What is barbaric is targeting trans kids in this country.

who are not doing you any harm. Show me a trans kid who's doing you harm. And then tell me how many of you are parents that would do anything that you could to protect your kids and to make sure that they didn't commit suicide, that they were actually able to engage in the world in a healthy way. Tell me what you wouldn't do for your children.

Because when you introduce legislation like this, it is not only stupid legislation, it is cruel, it is mean, and it interferes with your own conservative principles. You really want to take away the ability to allow parents to make decisions about their own kids' medical situation with their doctor? That's what Republicans want to do?

So as always, the supporters of trans ideology are just congenitally incapable of being honest. All they do is lie. That's their only move. False framing, straw man. That's all they do. And so we hear from Jayapal that this bill is an attack on trans kids when in fact, of course, the point of the bill is to protect those kids, to protect so-called trans kids and

from the abuse being inflicted on them by people like Representative Jayapal. Now, keep something in mind when you watch a clip like that, which is that Representative Jayapal has a quote-unquote trans kid. She's already shared that her, and I think we've talked about on the show before, that her child is trans.

And I don't know if the child's, I don't know if it's a boy or girl in reality, but she has a trans kid who I believe is now an adult. But even if I hadn't told you that, you would still know it because you can tell. At this point, any adult who passionately, emotionally defends the castration and mutilation of children is doing it because they feel like they have to. They have to because it's the only way, which isn't to excuse it at all, by the way.

It's just to explain that trying to explain a level of like emotional desperation that you saw in that clip there. I mean, Jaya Paul is a total fraud and a phony and one of one of the many Democrats in Congress who's very theatrical. But when you look at that, you could tell it's like there's a real panic in her eyes. She looks like she's about to start crying. And that's real.

Now, what she's saying is false, what she's saying is a lie, but the emotions are real because she has to defend the transing of kids because that's the only way that she can look at herself in the mirror or sleep at night. These kinds of parents, they have to because the other option is to admit that they have personally facilitated or allowed or supported or pushed this kind of horrible abuse on their own kids.

The other option is for them to go back to their kids and say, hey, I got this wrong, and now your life and your body are destroyed, and it's my fault, and I'm sorry, and there's nothing I can ever do to make it up to you. Your life has been irrevocably changed in ways that cannot be reversed because of me. That's what they would have to say to their kids, and they can't. To say that would take a level of moral courage and integrity and

that these people don't have. They're not capable of moral courage or integrity. If they were, they wouldn't have done this to their kids in the first place. So that's why Jayapal is taking this so personally. It's why she's practically in tears over it, because she sees this whole discussion as a personal attack against her. She sees it as an indictment of her as a mother. And

To that fear, I want to personally say to Representative Jayapal that you're right. It is an indictment of you personally. You're a terrible mother. You're a terrible mother and a terrible person. And you have done unspeakably awful things to your own child, or at the very least allowed those things to be done without protecting and defending your child. So yeah, you're a terrible person, a terrible mother. Um...

And if that's if you feel like that's kind of what we're saying, well, yeah, that's what we're saying. And we need to protect kids from people like her. So this bill, this bill needs to be passed into law. There's no excuse for it not to be. It needs to make it you know, it needs to get a full vote and it needs to every single Republican should be voting in favor of this. It's it's not only obviously the right thing to do, but it's also it will cost you nothing politically.

Five years ago, I mean, this should have happened five years ago. They should have passed a ban on this five years ago. They should have passed it the moment, like the first time that a procedure like this was done to a kid. That should have been when when a federal ban was passed. But it wasn't. And even five years ago.

To vote yes on a bill like this to ban the quote unquote gender transitions of kids nationwide would have been there would have been there would have been some political risks involved. Still should have done it, but there would have been some political risk. Now there's no risk.

You've got the American public on your side. Almost everybody's on your side. And a lot of the people who aren't on your side are too embarrassed to even say anything about it at this point. There aren't that many people who are willing to loudly speak up in defense of the chemical castration and mutilation of kids at this point, except for the most hardcore radical activists and people like Jayapal, who are

are committed to this lie for life because of either what they've done to themselves or done to their kids. But everybody else, this is a widely popular position, and so there'd be no excuse not to pass the bill. All right, let's get to the comment section. If you're a man, it's required that you grow up with a sweet baby game.

Pure Talk, my wireless company, a veteran-led company, believes every man and woman who has faithfully served this country deserves to proudly fly an American flag that was made in America. And that's why Pure Talk is on a mission to give an allegiance flag, the highest quality American flag, to 1,000 U.S. veterans in time for the patriotic holidays. Just switch your cell phone service to Pure Talk this month, and a portion of every sale will go to provide these high-quality flags to deserving veterans in

With plans for just $25 a month for unlimited talk, text, and plenty of data, you can enjoy America's most dependable 5G network while cutting your cell phone bill in half. The average family saves over $1,000 a year. I've been using Pure Talk for a couple of years now, and look, it's the best service, and you're also supporting a company that...

believes in your values. Just go to puretalk.com slash walsh to switch hassle-free in as little as 10 minutes. Again, that's puretalk.com slash walsh to support veterans and to switch to America's wireless company, Pure Talk.

Matt, I really appreciate you taking the time to explain Robert E. Lee. I'd really like it if you would add a segment to your show, at least occasionally, to explain other historical people and events, because so much about the past is misunderstood. Don't tempt me. Don't tempt me to add a lengthy rambling history segment to the show, because I will. And you're going to regret. I will make you regret that. Be careful what you wish for.

Matt, I'm one of the conservatives who opposes naming specifically military bases after Confederate generals. It's not because of anything having to do with slavery, but because they participated in armed rebellion against the U.S. and fought to kill hundreds of thousands of Union soldiers. Robert E. Lee was a great man who took up a bad cause for noble reasons, but I don't think the U.S. military should honor men who betrayed and fought against it. Yeah, I just don't think that's an accurate way of framing it. I don't think it's fair to say that the South rebelled in that sense or that they were traitors or whatever.

And you didn't use the word traitor, but it seems like you would agree with that characterization. But I don't think that's true. I don't think that's fair. They were trying to secede. They were not trying to overthrow the government. And that's actually an important distinction. They were not marching into Washington to stage a coup and take control of the government. Now, if that's how this all started and if that's what they were doing, then

then, yeah, certainly it's a rebellion. It's it is it's treason. It's all of those things. But that's not what they did. In fact, they very they very specifically chose not to do that, not to go on the offensive until much later into the war. I mean, after the Confederacy's victory in at Bull Run, they maybe could have gone on the attack.

Right. Even even marched on Washington. The union was in disarray at the time. Could could have totally rewritten history, maybe if they had decided to march on Washington in the immediate aftermath of that. But they didn't do that. And that's because the South was trying to leave. They were trying to secede. They believe that they had the moral and legal right to secede. And that is because they believed that the states were independent entities that

which had entered into a union voluntarily. And for them, not that long ago, right? So for them, it was only a few decades ago that the states had entered, voluntarily entered into a union because they thought it would be mutually beneficial. And their position was, well, we voluntarily entered into it. We can leave. And I think that was a very reasonable position, especially back in 1861. In fact, I think it's a reasonable position even now.

If a state wanted to secede from the union today, I would not support marching troops into the state to stop them from leaving. Would you? I mean, maybe you would. The way people talk about the Civil War, it seems like a lot of people would. But if Texas decided they wanted to leave the union, let's say, would you?

I wouldn't want them to leave. I would be one of the voices trying to convince them not to. There are certain states that if they tried to leave, maybe I wouldn't plead with them quite so much. But if Texas tried to leave, I wouldn't want them to leave. But if they decided that's what they were going to do, I would not support marching troops into Dallas to kill people until they agree to stay. Would anyone support that? Apparently, a lot of people would. But to me, that's

I would, that's crazy. It would be a crazy thing to do, but that's what happened during the civil war. And that's the distinction. This was secession. They were seceding. They were saying, okay, we're going to, we're going to take our stuff and leave because this isn't working for us anymore. Um, and I just think that's a very different thing. Uh, let's see. And also the, the question of whether or not in the 1860s, 1850s,

Whether or not a state has the right to secede was at the very least like I'm taking a more I'm taking I'm like framing this in the most moderate way possible. But at the very least, in the in the mid and early 19th century, the question of whether or not a state had to secede was a live question. It was a real question. And now today you could say, well, that question's been settled. You don't.

But if the question was, quote-unquote, settled, which I don't acknowledge that it was, but if it was settled, it was settled by the Civil War. It was settled by the federal government using force and saying, no, no, no, if you try to leave, we're going to kill you. We're going to bring in troops in, and we're going to kill you. And if that's not enough, we're going to start burning down your homes and farms until you stay. So if it's settled at all, it was settled by that. But that just means that at the start of the conflict, it had not been settled yet. So...

I think that's the way you have to look at it. Walsh, the reason why you can't pay your lemonade stand employees $3 an hour is because such an agreement is void as per public policy. It's inhumane to pay a pauper's wage to someone in 2025, whether it's their career or not. That's irrelevant. Void as against public policy is one of the first things you learn in law school. Ask Ben about it. Well, I think that's ridiculous. Look, we just talked about Trump's, you know, the Trump tweet or Truth Social post yesterday.

About the farms and the hotel industry that they can't find Americans who will do this job. And it's like, well, no, because they want slave labor. You got to pay people a fair wage. So I believe that you need to pay people a fair wage. I totally believe in that. But the way to handle that is not by having this totally arbitrary concept of a minimum wage, especially not one imposed by the federal government.

That's not the way you handle it. And like I said about the minimum wage, you know, this is, we're talking about in most of these, in many of these jobs, in many, many cases, these are kids. These are, you know, kids in high school who are not supporting themselves. They live at their parents' house. And the main reason they're working is just for work experience and for some spending cash. So to use a word like inhumane, I think is ridiculous.

I don't agree that minimum wage should be $15 an hour, but working some of those fast food jobs are a lot more high pressure and stressful than you think, Matt, especially with all these entitled people walking around. Well, I work those jobs too, and they're not high pressure jobs. They're not. Now, they can be tedious, frustrating, irritating. Trust me, I wouldn't want to go back and work those jobs again. No way in hell. So yes, they can be difficult in the way that any monotonous, tedious thing is difficult. Difficult in the sense of being unpleasant, right? They're unpleasant jobs, right?

They are unpleasant, but they're not high pressure. No, because now when you climb up the ladder a bit, there are plenty of jobs you can have in the food industry that are high pressure for sure. But an entry level hourly job in fast food is not a high pressure position. A job is high pressure if your failure in your job would lead to serious negative results. It's like walking a tightrope is high pressure because if you fall, you die. It's a lot of pressure.

High pressure means that there's a lot riding on the successful completion of the task at hand. When you're an hourly minimum wage worker at a drive-thru, again, jobs that a lot of us did, when you're 17 years old working a job like that, it's not a high pressure job. It's a job that almost anyone could do. If you fail in the job, they can easily replace you.

And if you do fail the job, the worst consequence is that the drive-through slows down a little bit and the customers are a little bit annoyed. But then, of course, customers are always annoyed in drive-throughs now because it's always slow anyway. Finally, Matt, let me start by saying you are by far the best DW host. My question is, why is a segment called five headlines? There are almost never five. My best estimation is an average of about three, sometimes two, occasionally four, but five seems to be a bit of a stretch. Just curious. Well, you know,

Five headlines, it's more of a spiritual reality. I think there are five headlines in a kind of a transcendent mystical sense. There may not be five headlines in the literal sense, but I think in my heart and in all of our hearts, there are always five headlines. And I hope that clears things up a little bit.

We all know the gun safe dilemma, lock it up properly and you're fumbling around when you actually need it or keep it accessible and pray that nothing goes wrong. Stopbox USA figured this out with their Stopbox Pro. It's completely mechanical, no batteries to die, no codes to forget, no apps to crash, just five buttons that only respond to your specific sequence.

I've been using Stopbox Pro for several months now, and I couldn't be happier with how it balances simplicity and security in my home, especially with kids around. Plus, the whole thing runs on muscle memory, so when adrenaline kicks in, you're not standing there like an idiot trying to remember your code or your anniversary date or whatever it was. It's finally a lockbox that doesn't make you choose between being responsible and being ready. Plus, for those of you who travel, it's TSA compliant, so you can actually fly with it properly secured and check baggage safely.

So it turns out TSA is not a big fan of just throwing loose weapons into your bag. Definitely don't do that. For limited time only, our listeners are getting a crazy deal. Our listeners are getting 10% off your entire order when you use code WALSH10. And right now, Stopbox is also running a deal on their most popular bundle, the 2-pack, which saves you over 30% and comes with free accessories and shipping that's 10% off and a big bundle discount. Use code WALSH10 at stopboxusa.com. Discover a better way to balance security and readiness with Stopbox.

Did you know that over 85% of grass-fed beef sold in U.S. grocery stores is imported? That's why I buy all my meat from GoodRanchers.com instead. Good Ranchers products are 100% born, raised, and harvested right here in the USA by local family farms. Plus, there are no antibiotics ever, no added hormones, and no seed oils. Just one simple ingredient.

Good ranchers. American meat delivered.

Dad raised you to think critically, to value truth, to reject cultural insanity. This Father's Day, return the favor with a year of Daily Wire Plus. Right now, 40% off new annual memberships with code DAD40. Give dad access to Am I Racist? Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's parenting and daily ad-free shows from the most trusted voices in conservative media. Offer ends on Father's Day, so you don't want to miss it. Go to dailywire.com slash gift today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation.

I have to confess that with everything going on lately, I haven't found the time to binge watch random congressional hearings on C-SPAN. So as much as I wanted to tune in to Treasury Secretary Scott Besson's testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee the other day, I had to miss it. Now, on the bright side, I figured that if something important did happen, I'd probably see a news report or a post on X summarizing the important parts. And then I saw this tweet from a sitting Democrat member of Congress right after the hearing concluded.

And as I read this post, I realized that I must have missed quite a hearing indeed. So here's what this member of Congress wrote. Probably half of this statement is going to be bleeped, so try your best to fill in the blanks. But this is what it's like now when you're reading statements and comments from members of Congress, that you have to bleep half of it. So this is what the person said.

Excuse you. This twat, C-word, pum-pum, whatever you want to call it, represents an organ that gives life and is resilient. So thanks for the compliment. I can take one interruption, but Besant was out of control and I know I look good for my age, but baby, I'm postmenopausal and it still works.

Then there's a twig and berries emoji and a water drop emoji. And that's the entire statement from this member of Congress. Now, as I came across this piece of writing, I didn't have any context for it. So I had to work my way backwards like, you know, like memento or something. But even without the context, it was pretty safe to conclude that there is no universe in which a sitting member of Congress should ever post something like this for any reason. I mean, even if you eliminate the emojis from the equation, it's still quite undignified and unprofessional.

She begins by rattling off a bunch of euphemisms for the female reproductive organ and then proceeds to alert the entire world that her reproductive system, quote, still works and confirms that, quote, baby on postmenopausal. And again, this tweet somehow resulted from a hearing with the Treasury secretary about the U.S. economy.

Now, upon further investigation, as in by looking at the top of the post, I determined that it was written by a woman named Stacey Plaskett, who serves as the delegate from the Virgin Islands, because apparently we allow the Virgin Islands to have representation in Congress, which is something that obviously needs to be rescinded immediately. In any event, Plaskett was responding to a random guy who commented on the hearing with the Treasury Secretary. Here's what he wrote, quote, Do all these twats have their PMS cycle synced?

Someone needs to ship a case of Midol to the Capitol this afternoon. Now, admittedly, it's not the most diplomatic tweet from this random account with 400 followers, but somehow it's still more dignified than what the member of Congress wrote. And then I watched the video that this random account was talking about, and I came to realize that he had a point. This is the relevant footage from the Besant hearing featuring this question from Stacey Plaskett. Watch.

We have seen since January 20th that the stock market overall has gone down 1.3% and gas has gone up. Ma'am, that's incorrect. Excuse me. Let me get something straight with you first here. I've seen you interrupt everyone. When you come to someone's house, you respect their rules.

And in this House, we don't interrupt individuals. And you're not going to interrupt my time. I'm going to give you time to respond. You may want to jot down some notes about things that you don't agree with me on so that you can respond to them at that time. But while I'm speaking,

as the person holding this time, you will refrain from speaking, sir, until I am done. Until I am done, and then I will give you time to speak, okay? I look forward to the facts. Thank you. I'll look forward to your response, whether they're factual or incorrect either. Now, eventually a Republican member of Congress allowed Besson to respond to Stacey Plaskett, and we'll play that moment in a second because it's pretty hilarious. But first, it needs to be said that

That already, Stacey Plaskett is giving the game away. I mean, all you have to do when a witness interrupts you during a congressional hearing is say, I reclaim my time. And then the chair gives you back the time. It's not a big deal. As a devoted C-SPAN fan who would definitely buy C-SPAN Plus subscriptions if they ever were offered, I can speak with some authority on this. But Stacey Plaskett used this as an opportunity to grandstand because, of course, otherwise nobody would pay attention to this hearing.

But it didn't work out for Stacey Plaskett. Here's what happened a few minutes later. Watch. You didn't get a chance to respond to Ms. Plaskett, so I'm going to give you a chance to respond, Secretary Besson. Where did she go wrong in her statement? Well, first of all, I would fire the staffer who did that chart because it stopped in February 2025 and prices are down substantially since then. But that's an inconvenient truth.

Secondly, the S&P, if the Congresswoman would care to check Bloomberg, the stock market, as judged by the S&P, which is the most widely held index by American 401ks, is up on the air. No, no, no, no. It's my time. And we don't interrupt. Excuse me. We don't interrupt is what I learned. Since January 1st,

It is my business for 40 years to know what the stock market does, and it is up on the air. So thank you for that clarification, Secretary. I want to go. Now, the back of your mind when you're listening to Besson dismantle her arguments, you're wondering if she's going to be dumb and impulsive enough to interrupt him while he's speaking. And then it happens. She tries to cut him off without any sense of irony, without any regard for the lecture she just gave three minutes earlier.

It was such a disaster that she promptly hopped on social media to start ranting about her reproductive system. That's how badly she was embarrassed. The whole hearing was like this. At one point, Congresswoman Linda Sanchez from California tried to pull the whole I'm speaking routine as well and didn't go well for her either. Watch.

In fact, we've already seen that prices are rising on many everyday goods. No, Congresswoman, today we had a 1.1 increase. The time is mine. Please don't interrupt me. I will ask you questions and I will grant you an opportunity to answer them.

but please don't interrupt me during my time. - With pleasure. - Okay, I know I'm a woman, but please try to limit yourself to answering my questions. No, I'm sorry, but we get talked over all the time and I don't want that to happen at this hearing. - Yes, that was audible groaning that you heard in the background.

So in this case, Scott Besson didn't have to even say anything. Democrats on this committee are so incompetent that they can't help but embarrass themselves. Now, to be clear, this is not some random unimportant committee. It's the House Ways and Means Committee, which is widely considered to be the single most important committee in the entire chamber. They have jurisdiction over taxes, tariffs, Social Security, Medicare, everything that raises revenue. Each party is supposed to nominate their A-team to this committee.

But largely because of DEI, the Democrats' A-team is a constant source of embarrassment for the entire country. But it's not all DEI related. I mean, at its core, this is a very broken and incompetent party, as this hearing made abundantly clear. Behold, as California lawmaker Mike Thompson attempts to trap Besson with a gotcha question. And then when Besson answers his question, Thompson nervously laughs and says that doesn't count for reasons that he doesn't explain. Watch.

Mr. Secretary, can you point to one independent study, one study performed by an expert Ph.D. economist who is not on the payroll of this administration that says that this legislation will not add to our national debt? Well, Congressman, if...

Yes or no? Can you point to one? If we want to look at the CBO, which is... No, I'm asking you, is there an independent expert that you can point to that says that this bill will not add to our national debt? Yes or no? Yes. There is? What are they? Art Laffer. Pardon me? Art Laffer. Art Laffer?

Great. I don't think that one counts. It's pretty embarrassing, but to be fair, at least Thompson didn't start tweeting about his genitals after this. So that's a that's a point in his favor. But other than that, it's yet another instance of Democrats proving that they are simply incapable of governing. And if you go back a few weeks, you'll find plenty more examples. Here's one of them. This is Stacey Plaskett. One more time.

As you watch this, keep in mind that the official account of the Democratic Party posted this footage online because I guess they thought it made them look good. Watch. But if they're really interested in being fiscally responsible, then don't give such big cuts to the rich. Actually try and balance a budget. Actually try and bring down the deficit. If you want to take away all of those things from the neediest, take away some from the rich as well.

In case you couldn't make it out or it was censored, she's saying that we need to take some crap or some form of excrement away from the wealthy. Again, it's not the most articulate word choice from someone who sits on the House committee that has jurisdiction over virtually all important economic matters in the country. Is this how she approaches extremely complicated legislation on taxation and Medicare? How well does she understand the excrement that's in those bills?

Well, we all know the answer to that question. Stacey Plaskett doesn't have any idea what she's doing. She probably can't even read the legislation that she votes on. She's not a serious person, certainly not a serious representative or delegate or whatever. Instead, she's a shining example of what I've come to refer to as the waffle houseification of American society. She embodies some of the same benefits of multiculturalism that we talked about in the open. She's unintelligent, crass, completely useless, no shame or self-awareness.

And the Democrats who elevated her to this position of power have no regard for the future of this country. And that's why the more you watch congressional hearings, the more pessimistic you unfortunately become about where we're headed as a nation. And it's also why Stacey Plaskett, along with every other legislator who contributes to the Waffle House-ification of American society, is today canceled. That'll do it for the show today and this week. Talk to you on Monday. Have a great weekend. Godspeed.