Ep. 1614 - The "No Kings" Protests Were A Disaster
01:04:12 Share

We interrupt this program to bring you an important Wayfair message. Wayfair has got style tips for every home. This is Nicole Byer, helping you make those rooms flyer. Today's style tip, when it comes to making a statement, treat bold patterns like neutrals. Go wild!

Today on the Matt Wall Show, no King's protests were staged across the country this weekend. The protesters bravely stood up against a monarchy that doesn't exist.

We'll recap the sad and sometimes disturbing spectacle. Also, Trump announces a renewed effort for mass deportations in major cities across the country. But what about amnesty for illegal aliens who work for farms and hotels? Will that really happen? We'll talk about it. Plus, war breaks out between Iran and Israel. Will we get involved? Should we? We'll talk about that. And the media celebrates Father's Day the same way they always do, by lecturing and scolding fathers. We'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.

Ever wonder what gives elite athletes, business moguls, and high performers their edge? Many are turning to Armra Colostrum. This remarkable superfood is nature's original whole food supplement containing over 400 bioactive nutrients that work at the cellular level. Armra helps build lean muscle, speeds up recovery time, and enhances overall performance without relying on artificial stimulants or synthetic ingredients.

Whether you're running a company, pushing your limits in training, or simply looking for a natural advantage in your daily life, Armoura Colostrum optimizes your body systems for peak performance of sustained energy. Research has demonstrated that colostrum does more than just strengthen performance. It enhances your body's ability to absorb essential nutrients, supports the developments of lean muscle mass, and improves endurance.

At the same time, it works at the cellular level to accelerate repair and generation, helping you bounce back faster after intense physical exertion. Plus, Armoura Clostrum can also support your microbiome and balance and strengthen immune defenses throughout the body. And who doesn't want a stronger immune system? Well, we've worked out a special offer for my audience. To receive 15% off your first order, go to tryarmoura.com slash Walsh or enter Walsh to get 15% off your first order. That's T-R-Y-A-R-M-R-A dot com slash Walsh.

If you were working for some shadowy left-wing non-profit that receives large amounts of taxpayer money from untraceable sources and you had to come up with a slogan to capture the imagination of the modern left and kickstart a wave of national protest to undermine the Trump administration, it's a safe bet that the slogan, no kings, probably wouldn't occur to you. For one thing, it sounds like something out of the revolutionary war era. It's a few centuries too late.

You half expect these people are going to start throwing boxes of tea into Boston Harbor. For another, the slogan doesn't remotely capture what Democrats claim to be upset about.

They're not worried about the revival of the monarchy. They don't think we're suddenly about to transform into Cambodia or even worse, Canada. They prefer they actually prefer that outcome. Actually, these people crave authoritarianism, as we saw during the covid lockdowns. The multiple criminal prosecutions were brought against the leading presidential candidate, the mass censorship and surveillance they endorsed and so on and so on and so on.

In reality, they're angry that we've adopted a system of government that has ensured that we haven't had a king for hundreds of years. They're furious that this constitutional republic has produced a president they don't like who's enforcing laws that they find inconvenience. That's what they're actually rebelling against, the republic itself. And yet, over the weekend, no kings protests were held throughout the country. And at various points, as we'll discuss, they turned violent. But first, from a strategic perspective,

There are two elements of these riots that are worth talking about. The first is that, as we've discussed before, the left has been searching desperately for an excuse to riot ever since Donald Trump won the election. They've been looking to replace their BLM messaging with something else, and now they found it. They don't care that the messaging makes no sense. They're just happy they have an excuse to cause civil disturbance. And the second important thing to keep in mind here is that

These riots illustrate a growing divide among Democrats. And this is a divide that's going to become very hard to reconcile going forward. Because on the one hand, you have young people who want to transform this country at a fundamental level, putting it mildly. On the other, you have Democrats who came of age during the administration of Lyndon Johnson or Gerald Ford. These are people who 20 years ago

were voting for Democrats like Bill Clinton, candidates who promised, dishonestly perhaps, but they did promise, to secure the border and minimize abortion and uphold the meaning of marriage and balance the budget and all these kinds of things, these radical right-wing agenda items. Now today, these same Democrats have stuck around, remaining loyal voters, even as their party has radically changed and in some cases, at least in theory, reversed its priorities.

The most notable characteristic that these older voters share is that, thanks largely to the corporate press, they are very confused. In their earlier years, they came to trust the media as a relatively fair and nonpartisan source of information. And now that the corporate media is telling them that Trump is Hitler, they believe it without any hesitation. So here's just one example of many from this weekend's No King protests. Watch. I just, I just...

I'm just so scared. I'm 74 years old. I worry about everything. And I just am so scared and upset. And I don't understand why people do that.

voted for this person. Now, as pathetic as this is to watch, it's hard to look at somebody like that and conclude that she actively wants to destroy the U.S. by replacing its native population and suspending law enforcement. You know, it's it's you might want to look at that and say, oh, this is all an act. This is this is she's this is a big this is a you know, she's pretending she's acting.

But I don't think that's the case. I think that the tears are insane, but they're genuine. She actually believes this stuff because she believes what the media tells her. She's been convinced that Trump is something he's not. She's been persuaded that he wants to crown himself a king or worse. Many voters who are past retirement age, something like 60 million people, fall into this category.

That's the demographic that the No Kings branding is really meant to appeal to. And on that count, the branding was arguably a success. Most of the people who showed up to these demonstrations were between the ages of 50 and 75. To give another example, here's one scene from the Beverly Hills No Kings protest the other day. An old man stops by a Trump-induced anxiety help stand and proceeds to verbally berate and physically abuse a small effigy of Donald Trump.

And as he slams the doll's head into a stool, his satisfaction becomes more and more evident. So just watch this if you can bear the cringe. No! No! No! Bad boy! Bad! Bad! Bad! Bad! Bad! No! Good. You feel better?

Pretty inspiring. You know, truly, I have I have never seen someone so valiantly stand up against a doll. The human characters in the Chucky films never showed an ounce of this courage and resolve. If they had, the movies would have been a lot shorter. The most fascinating thing about a clip like that, though, is is to observe the nexus between corny and crazy.

And prior to the modern Democratic Party, I think, you know, most people assumed it's not really possible for a person to be both corny and crazy. Those seem like either or personality types. I mean, one of the benefits, at least, of being crazy is at least you're not, you know, at least you're kind of interesting. But these people are somehow they found a way to do it. They're somehow extremely painfully corny and also clearly insane at the same time.

In any event, as insane as some elderly people behaved at these demonstrations, none of them were particularly threatening, unless you're a 12-inch doll. Instead, they put on a very confusing display more than anything else in places like Pittsburgh and Fredericksburg,

which you're seeing on the screen now, attendees were generally middle-aged or older. They spent most of the time milling about, holding some signs, looking sort of disinterested. This was not a young person's protest. Like the Tesla takedown riots, which were organized, coincidentally enough, by the same exact left-wing nonprofits, the No Kings events were intended to appeal to a faction of the Democratic Party that still pretends to care about the rule of law, about our constitutional system of government, and so on and so on.

They've been duped into thinking that the Democrat Party is also interested in all of that stuff. Now, put aside the fact that nonprofits obviously should not be able to organize protests like this in the first place. They're supposed to be nonpolitical, but they're clearly organizing political rallies, which means they're not nonpolitical. What's important to recognize here is that throughout the No Kings rallies over the weekend, the older voters in the Democrat Party

came face to face with younger Democrats. And unlike the older generation, younger Democrats do not pretend to care about kings. They are not shaking uncontrollably because MSNBC told them that Donald Trump will end our democracy or whatever. They're simply intent on securing power for themselves and for their preferred demographic groups. This is the dichotomy that now defines the Democrats. The party is a coalition that's made up of two groups.

incompatible ideologies. On one hand, you have the older Democrats who have been conned into thinking that Donald Trump represents a threat to the rule of law. And then you have the younger Democrats, the future of the party, who explicitly oppose the existence of the rule of law. They want to bring about chaos at every opportunity. And over the weekend, that's exactly what they did. In Salt Lake City, for example, the No Kings rally erupted into mayhem and violence. And here's what that looked like.

We just heard shots, everyone's running. Shots or fireworks, but... Someone's saying that there's a guy with a gun. Someone just got shot in Salt Lake City at the No Kings protest. Right there. Someone just got shot. Dude, they're on major damage control right now. Like, ten people saw a protest organizer in a yellow vest shoot someone. And the organizers are on damage control running around saying that they're not affiliated with it.

We had some of our medics like tend to him and then 20 minutes later, he's dead in the road. It was a homeless guy? No, it was literally a homeless guy. That wasn't even one of ours. Now, as tragic as this incident was, you can tell that on the bright side, at least some people involved in the protests finally got some exercise. So there's that. There's gunfire and then there's a lot of running. And this is the kind of thing that didn't happen at the Tea Party rallies back in the day, if you remember. But it's commonplace whenever there's a mass gathering on the left.

So how did they spin this one, you might ask? Well, here's a report from the local news station KUTV. It says, quote, So yes, an alleged peacekeeper at the No Kings rally unintentionally killed an innocent bystander. Now, if you're confused by that headline, you have good reason to be. For one thing,

Once you shoot an innocent person, it's fair to say that you're not a peacekeeper, allegedly or otherwise. Secondly, why do political rallies need peacekeepers exactly? I mean, it evokes images of United Nations peacekeeping forces patrolling in the third world. You'd think there'd be no need for vigilantes to roam around in major cities in this country, especially if your city has a police force to begin with. But as we all know, very few of these Democrat-run cities have functioning police forces anymore. And therefore, by design, of course, that's the case. And

Therefore, when violence erupted, a peacekeeper was on the scene. And then the peacekeeper attempted to keep the peace and he, I guess, missed his target. So who was this peacekeeper shooting at exactly? Apparently, the peacekeeper was trying to take down a man named Arturo Gamboa, who had just allegedly killed someone. As the Postmillennial reports, quote,

Arturo Gamboa, the man charged with murder after a deadly shooting in Salt Lake City's No Kings protest, appears to be a self-described anti-government radical who publicly supported Antifa, rejected the U.S. electoral system, and once said that justice should be taken by any means necessary.

This is the kind of messaging that the boomers chanting no kings and playing around with the Trump effigies probably aren't on board with. But it's the default position among many young leftists in many parts of the country. And that's why Seattle once again has descended into anarchy over the weekend. Check it out.

Towards the end of that footage, you saw fireworks being shot at a federal building. They also tried to set the building on fire, but the police did not intervene at any point.

Of course, none of the people who pretended to care about January 6th have said a word about this. They also haven't said a word about the fact that Cam Higbee, a journalist whose footage we've played a few times on the show, was just assaulted in Seattle by Antifa militants. He received a concussion simply for reporting on what was happening. Again, the police did not intervene. Here's a clip that Cam Higbee with Today's America posted. Watch.

You may remember when Jim Acosta's microphone was taken away in the White House eight years ago as he ranted and raved at the president in a desperate bid for attention. There was universal outrage on the left. There were court cases. They were crying on CNN.

It was a year-long news cycle. But when leftist militants beat an actual journalist on camera, no one says a word about it. And the police certainly didn't intervene. Actually, I'll correct that statement. At one point last night, the police in Seattle did attempt to contain the mob. They didn't help Cam Higbee, but they made some effort to shut down the rioting. But very quickly, they realized that they were outnumbered. And instead of using force to quell the mob, which they obviously should have done, they just ran away. Watch.

Back up! Back up! Press it up! Press it up! Yeah, you better fucking move back here, sir. Move back! Move back! Move back! Move back! Back it up, Terry! Back it up!

A.C.A.B.! Play your job! As always, the absence of police involvement and the cowardice of Democrats commanding these departments is endangering people's lives. And to give just one more example, in Riverside over the weekend, rioters began attacking a car. The driver tried to escape, so the mob tried to kill him. And now, of course, the driver is being investigated. Watch. Watch.

What the f***?

they keep for occasions such as this and perhaps for their own personal use in the off time. I mean, we're not gonna speculate what that might involve. They also have a sign that reads, "We the people were not meant to kneel." And the second video is Cory Booker using the same kind of language in a particularly painful attempt to grandstand. - And this son of Mexican immigrants who clean homes and serve food

This man with equal dignity in this body today was driven violently to his knees as if made to kneel before the authority of the executive because he was so-called disrespectful. That should offend the consciousness not just of the other 99 members of this body, it should offend the conscience of this country.

Because if you can make Alex Padilla forcibly kneel before this executive, when does it stop? He's a United States senator. This is obviously the prepared talking point they're going with. Everybody from Cory Booker to the women who like dressing up as sex slaves for reasons that Freud could only guess is saying that Donald Trump is forcing people to kneel before him.

Never mind the fact that Alex Padilla charged towards the DHS secretary while she was speaking and deliberately provoked the Secret Service. That's not important. What matters, according to Booker and the women wearing the costumes, is that Trump wants everyone to kneel. Now, one of the reasons why it's so easy to see through this messaging, aside from the fact that it's transparently phony, is that, you know, everybody listening right now, I think we can assume, was alive five years ago.

And because we were alive five years ago, it's very striking that the No Kings crew has only now discovered their aversion to authoritarian rule. I mean, these were the same people applauding and cheering when we were locked in our homes and forced to wear muzzles on our faces and inject experimental drugs into our bodies. And when I say the same people, I mean the same exact people.

One of the leaders of these No Kings rallies over the weekend was Randi Weingarten. And you're seeing her on the screen right now. We're going to do the mercy of sparing you the audio of that. But she's the head of the teachers union who made sure that children couldn't attend school during the COVID lockdowns. Was a big, big fan of the COVID lockdowns. A big advocate for it. Demanded that they continue even longer than they did. And now with a straight face, she's telling you that she's terribly afraid of an authoritarian holding power.

I mean, the irony is overwhelming. If you were to make a Venn diagram of the people who cheered the lockdowns and the people who are now chanting no kings, the Venn diagram would just be a circle because, again, they're all the same people. People who, of course, also had nothing to say when the previous regime imprisoned its critics for posting memes, tried to throw a former president in jail. Now, suddenly, they're concerned about fascism.

At the same time, ironically, they're accusing Trump of being a weakling who always chickens out. That's the other part of their messaging. This is messaging that being charitable is hypocritical, contradictory, confusing, contrived, unintelligible, and completely hollow. The BLM race hysteria was built on a lie, one of the most damaging lies told in modern times, but at least it was internally consistent. Democrats claimed in defiance of reality that police officers were going around abusing black people.

And as a claim, it's obviously false and ridiculous, but as a call to action, it was effective. What we're seeing now is different. With the No Kings rally, Democrats are simultaneously demanding that voters ignore their own very recent authoritarian behavior, while also imagining that the current administration is trying to enact a monarchy because they're enforcing immigration law.

Now, it's no surprise that the only people who buy into this narrative are elderly and very confused. They're the kind of people who would pay a nickel to beat up a Trump doll. This is the state of Democrat messaging at this point. And at the same time, we have to recognize that not too long from now, these old people will die and then we'll be left with everyone else, the rioters and the left-wing NGOs who openly crave authoritarianism. That will be the only constituency of the Democrat Party that

within the next decade or so. And by that point, no kings will not be the messaging. Instead, they'll be demanding that you recognize their total and absolute authority over every aspect of your life. They'll attempt to turn the entire country into Seattle, where Antifa militants can attack journalists and overpower the police at will. That's what rule by Democrats will look like. And if there's anything that we can glean from this disaster of a protest this weekend and all the violence and mayhem left in its wake,

It's that these people don't want you to bow to a king. Instead, they want you to bow to them. Now let's get to our five headlines. Remember the 90s? The internet was supposed to be this virtual world of equals, free from government and corporate control. We're obviously far from that promise now. Big tech and advertisers have completely taken over, with companies not just running ads but controlling what you see to sway your vote.

The internet was meant to put you in control, giving you the freedom to learn what you wanted. But there's a way to take back that control and freedom with ExpressVPN. Every time you go online, your internet service provider is quietly tracking everything you do, building a profile that data brokers then sell to advertisers and even government agencies. It's honestly unsettling how we're constantly being watched and monitored online. That's why I use ExpressVPN. It routes all my internet traffic through secure encrypted servers,

so no one can see what I'm doing, not even my internet provider. Gives you the freedom to browse without Big Brother looking over your shoulder. Plus, ExpressVPN hides your IP address, that unique number that identifies you online so companies can't use it to track and manipulate your browsing experience.

I especially enjoy using my VPN while traveling. It gives me peace of mind knowing my information is safe, even on sketchy hotel or airport Wi-Fi. ExpressVPN works across all your devices and couldn't be simpler to use. One tap and you're protected. Right now, you can get up to four months free if you go to expressvpn.com slash Walsh. That's expressvpn.com slash Walsh for an extra four months free.

You know what this country needs more of? Strong men, mentally, physically, and morally. But most men these days aren't operating at full strength, worn down by long days, poor sleep, and worse nutrition. That's why I recommend Responsible Man, a new line of supplements built for men who lead. No fluff, no fads, just what your body actually needs to perform. Starts with the Emerson multivitamin. 33 physician-formulated ingredients to support your energy, focus, heart, and immune system. It's not your grandpa's centrum. And now,

Theodore Protein. Named after Theodore Roosevelt, it's built to fuel the kind of strength and grit that modern men are sometimes missing. With 25 grams of premium American-made whey protein and no junk fillers, it closes the gap fast. Here's the deal. Go to ResponsibleMan.com, use code WALSH, and get 50% off your first order. Strong men build strong families and a strong country. ResponsibleMan.com, code WALSH.

So last week, we talked about a post from Donald Trump on Truth Social indicating that some kind of amnesty might be given to illegal immigrants who work in the leisure industry and the agricultural industry. And he was asked about that on Friday. And here's what he said at the time. Peter. Thank you, President Trump. I have two. First, on immigration.

What made you change your mind about targeting in California farmers and people in the hotel and leisure business? Well, we're not targeting. In fact, if you look today, I put out a statement today about farmers. Our farmers are being hurt badly by, you know, they have very good workers. They've worked for them for 20 years. They're not citizens, but they've turned out to be, you know, great. And we're going to have to do something about that. We can't take...

and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have, maybe not. And you know what's going to happen and what is happening? They get rid of some of the people because, you know, you go into a farm and you look and people don't, they've been there for 20, 25 years and they've worked great and the owner of the farm loves them and everything else and then

You're supposed to throw them out. And you know what happens? They end up hiring the people, the criminals that have come in, the murderers from prisons and everything else. So we're we're going to have an order on that pretty soon. I think we can't do that to our farmers and leisure to hotels. We're going to have to use a lot of common sense on that. We can't do that to our farmers, he says. But do what? Well, I guess enforce the law, require them to actually follow the law.

require them to hire American workers. We can't do that, says Trump. Although to this point, you know, no amnesty order has actually been put out. So that hasn't happened yet. But then on Sunday, Trump put out a different statement, which is more encouraging. Daily Wire reports, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have been ordered to broaden the single largest mass deportation operation in U.S. history, targeting crime-ridden and dangerous areas and large Democrat-led cities.

Trump declared on Sunday. Trump made the announcement in a post on Truth Social after teasing a few days ago that he would ease up on farmers, hotels and leisure businesses who say they have been hurt by this administration's immigration crackdown across the country.

The president said, quote, In order to achieve this, we must expand efforts to detain and deport illegal aliens in America's largest cities, such as Los Angeles, Chicago and New York, where millions upon millions of illegal aliens reside. He added these and other such cities are the core of Democrat power center where they use illegal aliens to expand their voter base, cheat in elections and grow the welfare state, robbing good paying jobs and benefits from hardworking American citizens. So they're going to be stepping up mass deportations in these major cities, which is great.

And announcing this in response to all of these anti-ICE riots is also exactly the right thing to do. You know, you've got rioters demanding one thing. Well, the right thing for Trump to do is to come out and say, oh, you know what? I'm going to give you exactly the opposite of what you're asking for. How do you like that? OK, so that's all great, although it's not exactly walking back the amnesty idea. I mean, it's focusing on the right things, but it's not walking back amnesty.

And as for the amnesty idea, like I said last week, there just cannot be any form of amnesty at all. All conservatives, anyone who considers themselves America first, has to push back against any amnesty plan that might be floated. Because, you know, by the way, there's a reason why these plans are floated and not just enacted right away. It's because the White House wants to see how well it's received, which is politics, right?

But that means that we need to make clear that it is not well received. We are not receiving that well. We don't like that plan. Now, there's a difference between amnesty and having a priority list for deportations. If you want to say that our first priority is to round up the dangerous illegal aliens, like the ones who've committed additional crimes, and I say additional crimes because coming here illegally is already a crime, so they're all criminal aliens. But if you want to focus first on the ones who have committed additional crimes, then

while in the United States and get rid of them first. And then we'll do mass deportations of all the other illegal aliens after that. That's fine. Provided that phase two actually happens, provided that it happens like immediately after phase one, not 10 years from now, provided that it's not just a stalling tactics that we never get to phase two. So if that was the actual plan and if it was carried out, then great. But that's not what Trump floated.

He was talking about basically making these certain industries exempt from immigration enforcement because his friends in those industries have been on the phone yelling at him about it. And that cannot be accepted. That can't be tolerated. Trump was elected to carry out mass deportations. And just deporting some of the more egregious illegal criminals while allowing the rest to stay is not what Trump was elected for. That's the same kind of policy that every other president has adopted.

supported and enacted. I mean, we could have elected literally anybody for that. We elected Trump to go all the way, to do the thing that the other politicians would not do. There cannot be any half measures here. And it's really not complicated. It's not difficult. People act like it's a complicated, difficult issue. It's not. If you're here illegally, you got to go. That's it. Oh, but what about these people? What about people in this industry? Are they here illegally? Well, they got to go.

What about they're a nice family? Well, are they here illegally? They got to go. Which, by the way, is the same standard that's applied to all the rest of us for any other law. Okay, I don't get to any other law that any of the rest of us as American citizens might break. We're going to be held to account for it. Well, in some cases, anyway.

If you're a non-white criminal and you have a woke DA, then you might get off the hook too. But for me, a white male American is like, well, you got to obey all the laws. And if there's anything that you don't obey, they don't care about your tears and your sob stories. It doesn't make any difference. So we're not imposing any unfair burden on farmers or hotels or their illegal immigrant workforce.

The burden is the same that we're all expected to carry. It's called the law. Follow the law. We're not going to sacrifice our country just so that you can have cheap labor. We're not going to sacrifice our country because you have a sob story. And if you work in these industries, if you're a business owner in one of these industries, hire Americans, pay them a fair wage. Again, not simple, not difficult, I should say.

And by the way, I want to address one other thing, because last week, earlier in the week, we talked about the minimum wage. And I explained why I'm opposed to any kind of government mandated minimum wage. I explained why we can't have the government decreeing what constitutes a living wage or fair wage and then imposing that decree primarily on the kinds of jobs that are actually meant for teenagers in high school to perform. And the next day we talked about amnesty.

And I and I responded to the claim that, you know, Americans won't do the jobs that immigrants will do. And I said, Americans, as many others have said, Americans won't do those jobs for slave wages, maybe, but pay them a fair wage and they'll do it. And there were some rather dumb people who tried to kind of dunk on me for this. And as if there's some kind of contradiction between these two points. Oh, you're one minute you're saying you don't care about fair wages. The next minute you're saying fair wages. Right.

So let me, for the dummies, let me break this down. I am opposed to the government mandating an arbitrary standard for a quote-unquote fair wage, especially when the federal government does it without any consideration for local economic conditions and so on. I am also opposed to companies illegally hiring foreign workers as a way of obtaining cheap labor. So what does that mean? It means that a fair wage...

should be determined by the marketplace. The market determines what your labor is worth. But as a business owner, you shouldn't be allowed to get around the market's determinations by breaking the law and importing illegal workers from the third world. That's where I stand. It's very clear. I think it's a very consistent position. There's no contradiction here. It's very easy to hold both of these views in your head at the same time. So to be specific,

farmers should be prevented from hiring illegal aliens to pick their crops. And once the illegal aliens are gone, they'll probably have to raise wages to attract American labor. The market in America will decide what wages for Americans are. So this is very specific. This is for Americans in this country, not globally. Um,

And one other point, you know, there's a lot of panicking and hysteria over the alleged economic harms that will be caused by mass deporting illegal aliens, especially the ones who work for farms and hotels and all that. And I don't necessarily buy these dire predictions. But even if that's true, even if there is in the immediate aftermath some economic pain to be felt, OK, then.

We're willing to deal with that. We're willing to make that sacrifice. Americans are willing to take the hit for the sake of restoring our sovereignty and getting our country back. Where do we get this idea that Americans are unwilling to make sacrifices? We've always been willing to make sacrifices. Americans have a long history of making sacrifices. We just don't want to make sacrifices for causes we don't believe in. But we believe in this. And besides, our economy will be harmed either way.

There are serious economic harms of importing illegal immigrants to do these jobs. And one of the big harms that we're experiencing right now is that Americans are unable to get jobs. Like, that's a pretty big harm. That's a pretty big problem. Maybe there will be some short-term harm from deporting them. Maybe. Well, we're in for hardship either way in that case. And if that's the case, we'd rather have the hardship for the sake of saving America rather than for the sake of destroying it.

Again, not complicated. ABC News has this. President Donald Trump said Sunday the United States is not involved in Israel's military strikes against Iran, but it's possible we could get involved. That's a quote. That comes after reports that Israel had urged the U.S. to join the conflict with Iran to eliminate its nuclear program. In an interview with ABC News' Rachel Scott, Trump declined to comment on whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a personal plea for the U.S. to get involved.

President said, we're not involved in it. It's possible we could get involved, but we're not at this moment involved. Okay, well, my take on this will not surprise you. Israel is its own country. It can do what it wants. I'm certainly not crying any tears for the Iranian regime. I mean, they can go to hell. Many of them are already there, no doubt. But

This is not America's fight. We don't need to be involved in this. We should not be involved in it. It's pretty clear that Israel launched this attack of its own accord without our approval or involvement. I mean, the initial statement from the Secretary of State, from Rubio, in the moments after the attack makes that pretty clear. It was a noticeably cold statement that just said, basically, we had nothing to do with this. We didn't. This is not us. And so Israel did it. Okay, fine.

You could say, well, they don't need our approval. All right, fine. But then that means that we can't be expected to hop into it just because they decided to make this move. You decide to make this move, then that was your choice. We're not morally obligated to jump into any war that Israel wants to fight. We're not legally obligated. We're not morally obligated. We're not obligated in any way whatsoever.

And yet now there's a real effort to drag us into this, to drag Trump into it, even though he was the guy who ran on a platform of no new wars. He was elected precisely so that he would not do what the neocons are demanding that he do now. He did not run on a platform of invading Iran or getting involved in a war with Iran. He did not run on that platform.

Just like he didn't run on a platform of amnesty for illegal aliens who work for farms or hotels. He ran on the opposite of that platform. I mean, the two main things he was elected for, no new wars and deport all the illegals. Those are the main things. One and two. You can rank them however you want. I'd say deport illegals first and then no new wars. But those are the things.

And now you've got people, ostensibly, quote unquote, conservatives, who want them to go back on those two promises, the two key core promises. Look, the United States has been, and I know the arguments, whoa, this is different. It's different this time. No, no, Matt, you don't understand. It's different this time. No, it's totally different. Totally. Oh, yeah. They say that every time. The United States has been at war with one random Middle East country after another for my entire adult life.

if you're a millennial or younger, then your entire adult life or just your entire life period has seen one war after another, one regime change after another. And all we want now is to focus on our own problems. Okay. I'm almost 40 years old and for not even really my entire adult life, actually basically my entire life, it's been one war after another in the Middle East. So 40 years of this, can we take a break? Can we get a little break?

All we want now is to prioritize our country and our families and our people. So I don't want to hear about, yeah, well, this is what some other country needs. I don't care what another country needs. It's not my country. This is my country. That's not a radical position. But whether you consider it radical or not, it doesn't matter. It's the position that a vast majority of Americans hold. We're sick of this. We don't want any part of it.

We don't want to, I mean, you go up to just stop a hundred people randomly on the street in any part of the country and ask them, Hey, what do you think? You think we should jump into a war with Iran? Is that what you, is that what you, did you vote for? Stop any random a hundred Trump voters. Is that what you voted for? Is that what you were hoping for? How many of them do you think will say, Oh yeah, definitely. Will you get five out of a hundred even? So, um, I don't want any part of this. We don't want any part of this and we shouldn't have any part of it.

Uh, okay. And, and by the way, the, the, you know, there's like the argument that I, one of the arguments I hear in favor of the United States jumping in is that, well, this is different. This will not be a 20 year, uh, forever war. Uh, Iran is a different situation. Iran is, this would be, this is a cakewalk. This'll be easy. Well, again, I've heard that before. Okay. I'm, I'm, I'm old enough to remember mission accomplished. I think we all do, but if that's true, if that's actually true, it's a cakewalk. It's easy. It's nothing. Well, then what do you need us for?

So either this is a really hard thing and it could become a 20 year war, in which case I don't want to be involved, or it's super easy, in which case I don't want to be involved. Either way, I don't see why we should be involved. All right. A singer named Neza, who no one's ever heard of, performed the national anthem at Dodger Stadium. And despite being specifically told to sing it in English, she decided to perform it in Spanish anyway. And she did this to protest ICE and the restoration of American sovereignty. She was protesting that.

So here she is being told to sing it in English, which really, you shouldn't even need to be told that. And then, of course, doing precisely the opposite at once. All right, so very revolting, very disgusting to hear our great anthem defiled in that way, being used as a

you know, a platform for a protest. And here she is after the fact making herself the victim predictably. Listen. All right. Bear with me because I'm still very shooken up and emotional and I just...

anyways i just got home from singing the national anthem in spanish at the dodgers game and it is the official star spangled banner in spanish you can google it so i'll just read it to you really quick but it was officially commissioned in 1945 by the u.s state department as a part of president franklin roosevelt's good neighbor policy to foster a better relationship with latin america because of this i didn't think i would be met with any sort of like no

especially because we're in LA and with everything happening. And I've sang the national anthem many times in my life, but there was today out of all days. I could not. I'm sorry. Yeah, I just could not believe when she walked in and told me no. But I just felt like I needed to do it. Para mi gente. For anyone who's been following me for a while, you know, everything I do is out of love. Like, out of love.

good energy out of love and I'm proud of myself for doing that today. Because my parents are immigrants and they've been citizens like my whole life at this point. They got documented really early but I just can't imagine them being ripped away from me even at this age like let alone like a little little kid like what are we doing?

Anyways, sorry. This is a whole different side of me that y'all never see, but thank you for all the sweet messages. I love you guys so much. Safe to say I'm never allowed in that idiom ever again, but I love you guys so much. I love you guys. Oh, she can't believe it. She can't believe that they told her no. She really can't. It was inconceivable that anyone would ever tell her no about anything because she never has been told no. So...

When she was told no, she didn't know what to do. She thought it was like some kind of practical joke. What is this? No? What do you mean? You're telling me no? What do you mean? What do you mean? I can't do what I want to do, but I want to do it. What don't you understand? I don't know. Don't you understand? I want to do it. So what do you mean I can't do it? It doesn't compute. So obviously this woman should be banned from ever performing the national anthem at another baseball game or anywhere else. Again, turning our anthem into a protest song on behalf of the

foreigners is disgusting, revolting, reprehensible. But it's a sense of entitlement that is most disturbing here. We're often told about the hardworking immigrants who come here to search for a better life. And that's been true in many cases. In many cases, immigrants have come here and worked hard. Nobody denies that. I don't deny it. There's plenty of hardworking immigrants. Now, they should still be deported if they came here illegally. And there should still be a moratorium on even legal immigration.

But holding those positions doesn't preclude me from acknowledging that plenty of immigrants are hard workers and they come here or have come here to work. That's been the case in many cases. Sure. Again, it doesn't at all mean that we should not enforce our immigration laws. But as I've said many times before, it's like it's nothing personal. If you're here illegally, you got to go. You got to be kicked out. It's not personal. I understand why you came.

So when people say, well, don't you understand? Don't you understand why they come? You would do the same thing in their shoes. Yeah, probably. I mean, maybe I would. But God forbid, I was born in Mexico. Trust me, I'm very thankful that I was not born in Mexico. God forbid I was. Yeah, I'd want to come here. And if I thought I could just come here illegally without dealing with the hassle and the paperwork and all the rest of it,

If I thought I could just like walk across the border and next thing you know, I'm signed up for welfare. Yeah, I'd probably want to do that too. Because in this case, I'm Mexican, right? So I care about myself and my family. I don't care about America or its laws. It's not my country. That's the whole point. So sure. But you still got to go.

It's like this doesn't I can I can concede all of that. And it does not change my position on immigration in the slightest. You still got to go. This is our country. These are our laws. That's it. And you could say that even while acknowledging the hard work and all of that. But the immigrants that Trump's talking about on the farms, that's hard. That's hard work working on a farm. I don't deny that. And, yeah, they're working hard on the farms. Sure. Great. Good for them.

they could go work hard on a farm in their country. Like, you don't belong here. You're an illegal immigrant. That's it. But even the hard, see, even that, though, the hard work thing is rapidly changing. The hard work mentality is being replaced, especially as we get into, like, second and third generations, by this kind of overwhelming sense of entitlement. And this is what happens as, you know, what we saw, this is what you can hear in this video of this woman. And she's second generation. So she says her parents came here

I don't know if legally or not, but she's second generation. And this is what you get, this incredible sense of entitlement. And it's what happens when you send the message that everybody on the globe has a right to come here, that they have a right to come into our country in whatever way they want without respecting any of our laws. And we as Americans have an obligation to accept them and welcome them and provide for them. This is what happens. The immigrant

The way that this is framed now is that the immigrant has no duty to us, no duty to America, doesn't even have a duty to respect our laws. All of the obligation goes the other way. And that's been the approach and the message for decades now. And what do you get as a result? You get this woman. You get insane levels of entitlement. You get people coming here asking not what they can do for us, but what we can do for them. And then you get the national anthem in Spanish to top it all off.

What started as an idea is now the podcast and business blasting through your earbuds. Launching your own business is pretty much on everyone's bucket list, but most people let it collect dust right next to learn a language and get abs. Stop hiding behind lame excuses like, I don't have the skills, I can't do it alone. Turn those what-ifs into bold why-nots with Shopify backing your ideas.

They've got the tools, you just need to take the chance. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the US. We even use it for our own daily wire shop to make sure things are running smoothly and efficiently so you all can get the goods

You might be asking, what if I can't design a website or I'm worried people haven't heard of my brand? Well, not a problem. Shopify has got you covered from the start with beautiful, ready-to-go templates that match your brand's style and help you find your customers through easy-to-run email and social media campaigns and

If you need a hand with everyday tasks, their AI tools create specifically for commerce, can help enhance product images, write descriptions, and more. Plus, their award-winning customer support is available 24-7 to share advice if you ever get stuck. Turn those dreams into and give them the best shot at success with Shopify. Sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at Shopify.com slash Walsh. Go to Shopify.com slash Walsh. Shopify.com slash Walsh.

The mob is back in the streets, burning flags, torching cars, attacking cops. And once again, the media is calling it justice. But we've seen this movie before. At The Daily Wire, we don't sit back. We fight. We build platforms they can't cancel. We tell stories they can't control. We create the future they can't burn down. Join millions of people who still believe in truth, courage, and common sense at dailywireplus.com. This is Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Watch Parenting. Bailey.

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. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Father's Day used to be a time for expressing thanks, showing gratitude, giving Texas Roadhouse gift cards to the dads of the world. But

Things have changed. Father's Day is different these days. Now, Father's Day is most often the time for celebrating women. And the Toronto Star made that clear with the article they ran on Father's Day yesterday. Headline, on Father's Day, it's crucial to recognize the importance of mothers. Now, the astute observer might point out that we already have a day for that. It's called Mother's Day.

We also have many other days set aside for women. There's International Women's Day, Equal Pay Day, Women's Entrepreneurship Day, International Day of Women and Girls in Science, International Day of Women in Mathematics, International Women in Engineering Day, International Day of the Girl, and of course, Women's History Month, and just for good measure, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, which even the NFL observes by outfitting their players in pink all month long. And amid all these days set aside to remember, celebrate, appreciate women,

talk about raise awareness for women, there is just one dedicated to heterosexual men. And the Toronto Star wants to make sure that we take even that day away and give it to women. Because heterosexual men cannot have a single day for themselves. But I may be slightly exaggerating because, of course, it is okay, even encouraged, to spend a little time on Father's Day acknowledging your father

That is, provided that you are lecturing him about all of his many flaws and scolding him for all the ways that he let you down. That was the theme of an op-ed in the New York Times, also posted yesterday, Father's Day, and written by the paper's senior staff editor, Susanna Meadows. The piece is titled, What My Dad Gave Me.

Now, I don't mean to spoil the ending, but apparently her dad gave her a bunch of stuff that she didn't want and didn't give her things that she did want. And Susanna, who from the looks of it is in her 50s now, still has not gotten over the disappointment. So she decided to publish her indictment of her father in the pages of the New York Times while her father is still alive in a nursing home.

Meadows writes, quote, My father gave me his freckly skin, and, like him, I had melanoma. He gave me asthma and protruding elbows that are identical to his own. He gave me reddish hair that's kindly reluctant to go gray. He gave me an aversion to drinking by not having one himself. He did not give me the seat next to him at the San Diego Chargers game. He had season tickets when I was a kid, but I only found out about it years later. He gave me the ability to talk to anyone because I couldn't stand the awkward silences that he provided.

He gave me really nice houses to grow up in, but we moved a lot for his work and things never seemed to be going well, so he gave me financial anxiety too. He gave me the tools to withstand a sexist world. He would say, Hillary looks ugly in her pantsuit. And her voice. Women don't belong on the golf course. This was my exposure therapy. He gave it generously.

So we've learned so far that Susanna blames her father for giving her freckles, skin cancer, and asthma, for drinking too much, for not making enough small talk, for pointing out correctly that Hillary Clinton looks ugly in a pantsuit, though in fairness she looks ugly in anything, for not making enough money at his jobs, and for not taking her to baseball games. Although I can sort of understand why he didn't take her to the baseball games. I can't imagine listening to this kind of insufferable whining while I'm trying to watch the game.

And the whining continues. Susanna informs us that her father also failed to sufficiently answer her questions while he was watching baseball games. Quote, he didn't give me a response when I was little and watching a baseball game on TV with him. Why? I wanted to know. Did the umpire call a strike when the batter didn't swing his bat? He couldn't be bothered to explain. Now, of course, we're only getting one side of the story here, and this is the only side we'll ever get.

She reveals later in the piece that her dad, now in his 90s, had a stroke and can't read anymore. So now that he's brain damaged and unable to read, she's taking the opportunity to publicly unload on him. But remember, she's the good guy here. And still, if her dad was able to get his side of the story, I'm guessing, based on what I know about kids, that he probably did answer her question about the umpire like the first 15 times she asked it. It was on the 16th time that he started ignoring her. Or maybe he ignored her the first time.

I mean, that would be rude, but it wouldn't justify publishing a hit piece about your own father in the New York Times on Father's Day. In the whole piece, there's only one allegation of misconduct that she makes against her father that, if true, would be seriously bad. She writes, quote, Some things I took from him. His Fox News when I set up his cable. Copies of love letters he'd written to a woman who wasn't my mom that I found when I was helping him move. I gave him things, too. I gave him disappointment when I was born a girl.

Then I gave him grandsons. Now, if he was having an affair at some point, though we don't know if this claim is true or if it did happen, how long ago it was or for how long it went on, or if these love letters were even written while the mother was even still alive, because apparently she's not anymore. But if there was an affair, that'd be a very bad thing. Yet that's all the more reason that you don't publicly shame your father by publishing it in the newspaper. Confront him about it privately.

Yell about it, cry about it, do what you feel you have to, but don't make it public. The world doesn't need to know and shouldn't know. Susanna tries to wrap things up on a hopeful note, but it's not nearly enough to justify the disgracefulness of publishing all this in the first place. Quote, on a recent visit, we had coffee together in the dining room of the assisted living place. Refusing his eternal gift of awkward silence, I kept the conversation going. I don't remember what we talked about, but I am sure he eventually asked questions about my husband, my boys, and David Brooks.

At one point, I reached across the table and gave him my hand. I'd never done anything like that before, and I'm not sure why I did it then. He took it. That's the end of the piece. So, the lone positive note about her dad is really a positive note about herself. Susanna is congratulating herself for being so tender and loving and forgiving, though not forgiving enough to forego the opportunity to castigate her sick elderly father in front of the entire world.

And in the process, uncovering embarrassing details about his life without having giving him the chance to explain any of it or provide any context or correction. Now, this article is obviously part of the anti-male agenda that insists on turning every occasion, even occasions meant to celebrate men, into man bashing sessions. But it's also part of a deeper trend, and that is the trend where infantilized adults are

never stop whining over the relatively minor shortcomings of their parents. And this is a pretty modern phenomenon. When you have adults that just never stop at any point in their lives, they never get over even the smallest thing that their parents did wrong. Now, if her dad really had an affair, well, that's a far more serious shortcoming, although she can't really claim to have been traumatized by that as a child if she only found out about it as an adult. But all the rest of these complaints are absurdly trivial.

If you're an adult and you have these kinds of complaints about your parents, there is only one solution. There's only one therapeutic treatment plan that can be effective or appropriate. And the plan is this. Get over it. Get over it, you whiny child, and move on with your life. This is a middle-aged woman still sitting around and weeping over the fact that daddy didn't take her to a baseball game when she was 12.

And she's not alone. I mean, there's a whole legion of narcissistic adults out there who spend their entire lives blaming all their struggles on the mistakes and alleged mistakes of their parents. And they're often conditioned into this way of thinking, of course, by the therapy industry, which pushes whiny narcissists to never get over anything and instead rehash the same slights and misfortunes over and over again forever.

Like when she sits down with a therapist, and I assume she's gone through like 50 of them. And when she sits down with her 50th therapist and starts telling her whole life story again, and women like this, they just love it. It's like they get a high off of, they get to tell their whole sob story to a whole new person. This is great. And she tells us, and when I was 10 years old, I found out he had seasoned tickets and he didn't take me to one baseball game.

When she does that, the therapist is going to sit there and say, oh, that's interesting, and start jotting little notes in the notepad. When really what the therapist should say is, why are you telling me that? But he didn't take you to a baseball game. How old are you now? This is 40 years ago. You're still complaining? How do you even remember that? You got nothing more important going on in your life? Are you kidding me? That's never the response, although it should be.

It's likely that nobody has ever rolled their eyes at Susanna and told her to stop crying like a baby because dad didn't give her enough attention. Instead, they've encouraged her to believe that her complaints are somehow poetic and tragic and profound. Now, here she is writing about them in the New York Times, but there's nothing profound about them, Susanna. Your dad was a human being. He was not perfect. He made mistakes. He had flaws and weaknesses.

I bet he also had strengths and virtues, which you don't mention in your diatribe at all because they would interfere with your martyrdom narrative. See, for someone like you, even the things that a person does for you are recast in your mind as sins against you. For example, you tell us that you moved around a lot because things didn't seem to be going well at your dad's jobs. And yet you also say you always lived in nice houses.

So it sounds to me like your dad was a hard worker who kept striving and struggling. And even amid his difficulties at work, he always made sure that you were comfortable and cared for. But you give him no credit for that. Instead, you blame him for giving you, quote, financial anxiety. And you haven't stopped to consider that maybe the much greater financial anxiety fell on his shoulders. Maybe that's why he was a little quiet sometimes. Maybe he was dealing with enormous burdens that he didn't tell you about.

Maybe he was doing his best to give you the kind of life that he never had as a child. Maybe he did his best, but it wasn't perfect. Or maybe not. Maybe the guy was a total scumbag. I have no idea. I don't know him. But I know enough about you, Susanna, just based on this article alone, to know that the man could have been, on balance, a great father, and you would still be writing this self-pitying soliloquy. You're the kind of person who remembers the smallest slight committed against you 40 years ago.

Yet someone could have done a great act of generosity for you five minutes ago and you've already forgotten. You keep a tally of the mistakes everybody else makes. Meanwhile, you make mistakes too. You're making them right now. You made one when you decided to shame your elderly father in front of the entire world. So maybe you should focus on your own current faults for a change and leave the past in the past. And that is why you are today, Susanna, canceled. That'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to you tomorrow. Have a great day. Godspeed.