The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1201 - Race Hustler Judge Throws Cop In Prison For Being In The General Vicinity When George Floyd Died

Episode Date: August 9, 2023

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, another police officer has been sent to prison for the death of George Floyd. This one never even touched Floyd. His crime was simply being in the vicinity when he died. We'll tell you about this case, and the race hustling activist judge who presided over it. Also, Mitch McConnell worries that impeaching Joe Biden might "not be good for the country." The media celebrates as white people go extinct. And a new alleged miracle drug will make it possible for you to be a gluttonous slob and not lose weight. Is that actually a miracle?   Ep.1201   - - -    Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm    - - -    DailyWire+:   Watch the latest episode of Master’s Program with Dennis Prager: https://bit.ly/3NvHehC   Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj    - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Genucel - Get Genucel 3-Step Dark Spot Luxury System for 70% off today at https://bit.ly/428Hmtq   ZipRecruiter - Rated #1 Hiring Site. Try ZipRecruiter for FREE! http://www/.ZipRecruiter.com/WALSH    - - -   Socials:   Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF   Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA   Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA   Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today in the Matt Wall Show, another police officer has been sent to prison for the death of George Floyd. This one never even touched Floyd. His crime was simply being in the vicinity when he died. We'll tell you about this case and the race hustling activist judge who presided over it. Also, Mitch McConnell worries that impeaching Joe Biden might not be good for the country. The media celebrates as white people go extinct. And a new alleged miraculous drug will make it possible for you to be a gluttonous slob and not lose weight at the same time. Is that actually miraculous? We'll talk about all that. And more today on the Matt Wall Show.

Is that dark spot on your face still bothering you? What about the liver spots on your hands, neck, and chest? Well, they're bothering me. So get rid of them. And now you can watch them disappear safely and quickly in three quick minutes. Introducing the Genusel Dark Spot Corrector, their three-step, three-minute dark spot luxury system, which does exactly what it sounds like. By using their crystals's microdermibration before the dark spot corrector and finishing

with a touch of the collagen building Genusel 15, you'll see the dark spots disappear before your very eyes. instantly, smoothly, and luxuriously. But don't take my word for it. If you're not blown away with the results, you get 100% of your money back. No question is asked. Free shipping and free returns. All three products are included in GenuSel's most popular package for August.

So you get your GenuSel bags and puffiness serum also included for 70% off retail. So go to genuSel.com slash Walsh. Order the new dark spot treatment system today and say goodbye to those pesky spots tomorrow. That's genucile.com slash Walsh. Peter Cahill is a judge in Minneapolis. He was appointed to the bench by Tim Palente in 2007 and re-elected several times by voters. Kay Hill first gained national attention two years ago when he presided over the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, who made the mistake of trying to restrain a violent felon named

George Floyd, who was attacking police officers while overdosing on fentanyl and meth. After the trial in the fall of last year, Cahill delivered something called the Justice Jackson lecture before a large audience of judges at the National Judicial College. As far as we can tell, no news organizations covered his remarks, but the clip is online. You can find it. And the lecture begins with Cahill playing, you know, sort of playing to the crowd, making jokes about various parts of the Chauvin trial. It's very funny to him. It covers a variety of banal topics, including the importance of upgrading technology in courtrooms.

But then as the lecture winds down, something remarkable happens. Cahill starts talking like a BLM activist. He drops all pretense of objectivity. it's almost as if he forgets he's a judge. I want you to watch, as Cahill explains, to the roomful of judges, that actually every single case they hear should be, quote, about racial justice.

It doesn't mean that we ignore racial justice. Every case that you deal with should be about racial justice. Even if everybody in your courtroom, if you're white, old white guy like me, and everybody else in the courtroom is an old white guy, even the defendant on the speeding case, You still have to figure out, am I treating this person the same way I would somebody who is younger, different age, or different ethnicity, different race?

You have to constantly do that. So as what can you control? Well, number one, you can check your bias. How many have you been through implied bias training? If you haven't, make sure you do it. It's very valuable. Check your bias. This is the off-bench stuff.

If you have any opportunity to help in the hiring process for a court staff, if you can serve on the Equal Justice Committee, if you can go out to the community, we've done listening sessions in some of the communities of color and just to listen, just to hear what their issues were with the judiciary. And obviously you can't promise anything, but even hearing what their concerns were. was I older. Every case should be about racial justice, Peter Cahill says. Work for equity. Take your implicit bias training. Hire people based on their skin color. Think about race all the time in all of your cases.

That's what Peter Cahill wants. At one point in his lecture, Cahill says that the way to restore trust and confidence in the judiciary is through this method of always thinking about race. But of course, the opposite is true. When judges start talking like race hustlers, when they fixate on the skin color of people in their courtroom instead of, oh, I don't know, the law, then they destroy all trust and confidence in the legal system. It's disqualifying.

Traffic court judges shouldn't act like this, much less famous judges handling murder trials. What Peter Cahill is saying is that if you're a defendant in his courtroom, it would help to be a member of a racial group that he thinks is oppressed. Otherwise, you might have some problems. You know, everybody's familiar with the image of Lady Justice holding the scales, right? What Cahill and his fellow activist judges apparently haven't noticed is that Lady Justice, in all of those images, is wearing a blindfold. Because the law is supposed to be impartial, unbiased, objective. It's not supposed to take things like race into account. You're not supposed to be thinking about that. But Cahill rejects this idea. He wants to throw away the blindfold and the scale, actually, and decide his cases based on his own subjective, ambiguous notion of racial justice. Now, this is not theoretical for this judge. It's how he runs his courtroom.

Just a few years ago, Cahill dismissed charges against the organizers of a massive riot that shut down the Mall of America for hours. And why did he dismiss the charges? Well, Cahill claimed that the mall somehow approved of the riots. Nobody believed that reasoning, even at the time. And now it's clear that Cahill himself didn't believe it. He was just working for equity and advancing racial justice. This is the mainstream position among judges in America, by the way. That's why Cahill wasn't forced off the stage by all the judges in the room during that lecture. They all agree with him. So do the voters in Minneapolis.

They've just kept on electing this guy, and so he's kept on dispensing race-based justice. Following the conviction of Derek Chauvin, and Cahill oversaw the cases of every other police officer who was involved in arresting George Floyd. That includes Thomas Lane and Alexander Kang, who helped Chauvin restrain Floyd as he resisted arrest. Well, this week, Cahill sentenced yet another officer who was at the scene that day, named two, Tutsau's case has not attracted nearly the attention that the Chauvin case did, but in many ways the verdict in the sentence are even more egregious. Like if you thought that the Chauvin verdict was a gross miscarriage of justice, then you should be especially outraged by the treatment of Tutow, an officer who never even laid a hand on George Floyd. Chauvin should not have spent a day in jail. Tau shouldn't have even been under investigation, let alone arrested and convicted and sent to prison.

Two Tau's crime was being a police officer in the vicinity of George Floyd's fatal overdose. That's it. All he did was hold back the crowd as they became more agitated. You've probably seen the footage. I'm sure you have, but here it is. You're doing. You call what you doing. Are you really a firefighter?

Yes, I am from Minneapolis. Bro, you think that's okay. Check his pause. Check it right. The Tau is false. The man ain't moved yet, bro. The man ain't moved yet, bro. Where?

Midiathlete. Bro, you're a bum, bro. You're a bum, bro. You're definitely a bum, bro. So the crowd gets angry as the video goes on. At trial, prosecutors argued that instead of waiting for EMS, Tao should have somehow checked that woman's credentials and determined that she was a firefighter and then let her save George Floyd.

In other words, their theory of the case is that, Tau should not have done his job. You know, if he hadn't done crowd control, they said, George Floyd might have been saved, which is preposterous. If Tau had not held back the crowd, then there would have been more violence, that is, violence aside from George Floyd fighting with the police officers. There's no question about that. During Derek Chauvin's trial, a parked police officer who was at the scene testified that the crowd was becoming aggressive to the point that he was worried about the officer's safety. Watch. And as Mr. Floyd and the officers were across the street, did you notice any changes in the area? Yeah, as the, there was a crowd,

and I guess the crowd was becoming more loud and aggressive, a lot of young across the street. Did that cause you any concern? A concern for the officer safety, yes. Did you go over to try to help them? No, because I asked my child was to watch the car and the two individuals that were by the car. Now, in terms of as the crowd or the group of people were congregating around Squad 320, did you notice anything in terms of the tone or tenor of the voices of those people? They were very aggressive, aggressive towards officers, yes. Did the volume increase? Yes.

And so how were you reacting? How were you splitting? How are you reacting to that? Yes, I was focused on car, but then it distracts me, and I was concerned for the officer safety, too. So I kept an eye on as officers and the car, and individuals, as a person. So that testimony, in addition to the video,

makes it clear that Tao's focus on the crowd was reasonable. It was reasonable for Tao to pay attention to the crowd instead of George Floyd's vital signs. You know, he didn't have any drugs on, him to help reverse the effects of Floyd's overdose anyway. So he did his job, which was keeping an angry mob away from the other officers who were handling Floyd's arrest. What else was he supposed to do? You know, they're in the middle of, from Tao's perspective, which is the correct perspective, they're in the middle of arresting a suspect. Is he supposed to just let the crowd?

There you go. Get as close as you'd like. Go ahead. Yes. Go ahead. Descend on these other officers who are in the middle of conducting an arrest. Is that what he was supposed to do? If he had done that, And then that led to more violence and someone had gotten hurt, then he'd be in trouble for that. And in that case, probably rightly so. So, of course, we know that this is the way that goes. The moment that this man and all the other officers, the moment that they arrived on the scene that day, they were in a lose-lose situation, no matter what happens, they lose. So why did both the state and federal government charge to tell? At his trial, the prosecution suggested what some of their own possible motives might have been.

They repeatedly criticized Tao for telling the mob, don't do drugs. And that line in particular really upset politicians in Minneapolis. After all, these were the same politicians who deliberately hid body cam footage of George Floyd saying, I can't breathe multiple times while he was in the back seat of a police car. Long before Chauvin's knee was anywhere near his neck. You remember that? until that footage was leaked to the Daily Mail, nobody saw it because officials in Minnesota realized that it destroyed their whole narrative.

So maybe that's why they charged Tutow. He pointed out something forbidden, which is that Floyd killed himself by taking enough fentanyl to kill a horse. Or maybe Tutow had to be punished simply because he's a police officer and powerful forces in this country want to dismantle police departments at every opportunity. Throwing a cop in jail for doing his job, as Tao was, would certainly help accomplish that objective. That could be why Peter Cahill convicted Tao in a bench trial.

Perhaps he wanted to advance racial equity by discouraging any sane person from ever joining the police department ever again. There's probably a lot of truth to both of those explanations, but Tao's greatest sin became obvious at his sentencing hearing this week. It's the sin that most enrages of totalitarians in power. He refused to bend the knee. He didn't cave to the mob. At no point did he say something he knew was false.

instead at great personal cost, Tao stood there and quoted scripture and told the truth, which is that he committed no crime. He did not kill George Floyd. Watch what Tao said and how Peter Cahill responds. You know, First King 15 says, To obey is better than sacrifice. Luke 6, Jesus says,

but why do you call me Lord, Lord, and not do the things I say? John 8. Jesus said, If you abide in my word, you are my disciple. And finally, blessed are those

who hear the word of God and keep it. Keep it. God's looking for doers, not sayers. James 417 said, if you know what is good and do not do it,

to him, it is a sin. Also, scripture tells us that it is not good to go against your conscience. And despite what this court has ruled, I know we cannot hide our thoughts or intent from God, for we must give an account on the day we appear before God. Therefore, I must obey.

Hold on to the truth that I did not commit these crimes. My conscience is clear. I will not be a Judas, nor join a mob, in self-preservation, or betray my God, nor the true faithful countrymen who are not faithful countrymen who found this country under the fear and majesty of God. And Jesus reminds us who we should really truly fear. And this is what I learned. And for those under persecution.

To be perfectly honest, after three years of reflection, I was hoping for a little more remorse, regret, acknowledgement of some responsibility, and less preaching. Quote, I did not commit these crimes. my conscience is clear, I will not be a judas nor join a mob and self-preservation or betray my God. Now, what you just heard and saw there is real heroism. That's true courage. This is not a man facing some Twitter mob, and we've seen how most people don't even have the guts to stand against that. But this man is facing years in prison. His life and freedom are on the line.

And still, he chose not to grovel, not to confess to crimes he didn't commit, not to apologize for things he didn't do. Instead, he spoke about it. is love of Christ and the value of truth. You know, watching that, you might be reminded of the end of the crucible when John Proctor refuses to sign the false confession and chooses to face the gallows instead because that's the level of heroism. And if we lived in a sane society, there'd be a movie about Two Tao and his courage in the face of political persecution.

Of course, that's never going to happen. You don't have to imagine how infuriating Tao's words were to a worshippers of St. George Floyd. You can just look at how Judge Cahill reacted to it. Notice his slimy, smug little smirk as he tells the defendant that he wanted to hear less preaching, more false confession. Notice how utterly impressed with himself, Cahill is. How much fun he's having as he throws an innocent man's life away. He can barely contain his glee. This is a Judge Cahill, truly evil man, and he barely bothers hiding it. Of course, he doesn't mean it when he says that he wants to hear less preaching.

In fact, Peter Cahill wants to hear the kind of preaching that he does in his spare time when he's talking to other judges. He wanted Tau to talk about racial justice and equity and affirmative action. He wanted Tau to speak in praise of the Messiah George Floyd, not Jesus Christ. And by the way, if Tau had done that, he probably would have cut his sentence in half. He might have gotten no prison time. If he had just debased himself in front of this egomaniac judge. I'm sure Tau knew that. but he didn't do it. He didn't go along with it. He didn't accept the prosecutor's hagiography of

George Floyd. Instead, he honored God. And he said what everyone knows is true. And for that, Peter K. Hill sentenced him to nearly five years in prison. Now, all the major news outlets wrote up pieces attacking Tao. The AP called him unrepentant. Of course he was. He has nothing to repent of. They said that he was rambling during the hearing. They all know it was a show trial. They know that he didn't break any laws by holding back the crowd. He was doing his job. But they also know that once they made George Floyd a saint, they had to punish anyone who blasphemed him. And Tao, during both his trial and his sentence, he blasphemed George Floyd. In Minnesota, that's the greatest crime imaginable. It's even worse than, say, raping children. Which is not an overstatement,

by the way. These are prosecutors in the state ensure that a man who raped girls between the ages of four and nine received a sentence of just 180 days in jail. That happened this. This is a year. Two-Tal got half a decade. Judges like Peter Cahill would probably call the sentence of that pedophile a win for racial justice based on the skin color of the suspect. This is the system of equity that's replaced the rule of law in this country for for the most part without any resistance. Unlike the leaders of the supposed opposition party in Washington who march in BLM rallies and fall over themselves to commemorate Juneteenth, Two-Tal refused to regurgitate the lies that are the foundation of this godless and deadly movement.

And for that, his conscience is indeed clear. Unfortunately, there aren't many people in power who can say the same. Now let's get to our five headlines. There's a moment when you start to wonder, what's the right next step? Not about changing who they are, just finding the right kind of support. At Kingsley Manor, life stays expressive, connected, and full of character, shaped by people who have lived interesting lives and aren't finished yet. So it doesn't feel like a change.

It feels like a continuation. Explore your options at kingsley manor.org, a non-profit month-to-month senior community within the Front Porch family. Start with a little bit of political news. Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, report from the Daily Wire, cautioned against the regular use of impeachment processes, House Republicans float an impeachment inquiry against President Joe Biden. The top Republican lawmaker was quoted in New York.

Times report published on Tuesday that explores how impeachment and censures have become the norm in Congress. McConnell said, impeachment ought to be rare. This is not good for the country. The GOP-led House may be headed toward initiating an impeachment inquiry against Biden, possibly as early as the fall, spurred by concerns about a pattern of millions of dollars flowing from foreign nationals under suspicious circumstances. House Republicans have previously introduced articles of impeachment against Biden focused on other issues, including the border, though these efforts have not gained as much traction. But Senator McConnell is concerned about it. He's very concerned, and it's not, it's a dangerous thing. It shouldn't be the norm. We have to protect the norms. This is not the norm.

You know, those blessed and sacred and oh so important norms. And, you know, he's right, by the way, that impeachment, right about one thing, which is that impeachment should be rare. And it was until the Democrats impeached Trump 46 times, right? Until they impeached him for forgetting to tie his shoes until they impeached them for like not zipping his fly or whatever until the until the democrats did that it was a rare thing it was uh this is a this is a extraordinary step to take and you would certainly rather not do it up until that point but we don't we don't live in that world anymore we live in a different world we live in a world where now it's not rare that's the world we live in now of course Mitch McConnell uh does

doesn't understand the world we live in because he's senile and only half conscious at this point, barely sentient. I mean, we saw him at a press conference. First of all, what is he doing back on the job? We saw him at a press conference last week, unable to speak. He's standing there, zoned out, and he can't speak. And they had to escort him away, shuffle him away because he couldn't speak. And he comes back a week later. And it's like, oh, yeah, what was that all about? there's nothing, you know, just a little minor brain fart is all. You know, that brain fart where we've all been through that. Where you just stand in front of a crowd and stare straight ahead and say nothing at all.

It barely even, it's like there are no follow-up questions about that because we all know. We understand that our whole country now is being run by geriatric vegetables. And so we just, it's like, okay, yeah, you're senile. There's just another one. Throw them in the pile. That's our whole country's being run by these people. Let's not change that at all. You know, let's have our next presidential election where two 80-year-old guys are running against each other.

Let's, let's, it's a good idea, America. Let's make sure we learn nothing at all. That's the best thing. Let's make the minimum age. At this point, why don't we raise the minimum age for any of these national offices to 75? make that the minimum age because apparently that's all we're interested in. We just want all of these positions being held by people who barely even know where they are. Anyway, what were we talking about? Impeachment.

Yeah. So the world we live in now is one where impeachment is no longer a rare, extraordinary step. And Republicans can either decide to acknowledge that reality. and respond accordingly, or they can still live in a fantasy world. Mitch McConnell, again, being senile, but also just being an establishment, milk-toast establishment guy, he wants to live in the fantasy world. He wants to live in this world where, well, Republicans will respect the norms that don't exist anymore, and Democrats will learn from that, and they'll say, oh, well, you know,

remember how nice the Republicans were, we should do the same. We should be the same. Now, of course, the corruption with the Biden administration is such that even if we still lived in a country where impeachment was an extraordinary and rare step, he should still be impeached. When you've got money pouring in from all of these foreign interests and all this kind of stuff, I mean, it's, it's, obviously this is a, this calls for an investigation, this calls for impeachment. But again, that's not even the country we live in. And we also know, if you have in your mind this idea that, well, for the Democrats, Trump was a special case, and they're treating him this way, they wouldn't do this to anybody else. Just they really, really hate Trump. And so that's why they do it.

As if that makes it okay. No, they're setting the precedent for themselves. Do you think whoever the next Republican president is, whoever it is, whoever it is, do you really have any, doubt that they're going to impeach that guy no matter what? Let's say the next Republican president is DeSantis. What if DeSantis gets in there? Are they going to revert back to pretending it's 20 years ago and treat him that way? Is a Democrat Party going to become the Democrat Party of 20 years ago all of a sudden? No. Is there any doubt they would find a reason to impeach DeSantis right away? Look at what they're doing now to him. Every week they make up some new lie

that, oh, he's got a curriculum that teaches that slavery is good. So that's what they're doing to him now when he's just the governor of Florida. You take that guy and put him in the White House, it's going to be the same thing. Any Republican is going to be the same thing. And I talk about the Democrat Party of 20 years ago, like they were much better. But, I mean, this has been the Democrat playbook since forever, actually. Like, it's easy to forget that the Democrats tried to turn Mitt Romney into this mess. sexist, barbarian, racist bigot.

They tried to do that to him. So it doesn't matter who the Republican is. It's pretty clear. All right, the Hill has this report. Generation Z will be the last generation of Americans with a white majority, according to census data. The nation's so-called majority minority arrived with generation alpha, those born since 2010.

Who, by the way, of course, get the best generation name. It's going to be many, many centuries until anyone gets to have a generation name as good as that. We're really bad for the generation comes after generation alpha. They get a raw deal in a lot of ways, but also given what their name is going to be. Anyway, barely two decades from now, around 2045, non-Hispanic white people will fall below half as a share of the overall U.S. population. Those conclusions and the numbers behind them seem simple enough, yet some scholars contend that the numbers are wrong or at least misleading, on that the looming assent of a majority-minority America is a myth. America's white majority in its numbered days is a lightning-rod topic

given the nation's history of slavery and enduring patterns of discrimination against minorities and immigrants. Demographers and economists celebrate the nation's growing diversity is vital to a prosperous future. Other voices vilify racial change as a threat to the nation's white heritage. So, you know, this very objective news report, those are the two options that they give you. So you can either, when you look at the disappearance of white people, you can either celebrate diversity and a prosperous future.

So that's the one, so you're celebrating it, or you can vilify racial change. Those are the two options. There's no other way of looking at it, according to the Hill, and any other media report. And so there are really two parts of the story. The first is the story itself, which is the demographic trend where whites are trending towards extinction in the United States. Like that's the way it's headed. And then the other part of the story is the veil of silence around this issue, the wall that is erected around it. And I know you're going to say, well, you just read a story about it, so it's not a silence.

They can report on it. So you report and you celebrate diversity and then you just move on. We don't talk about it. We don't think much about it and that's it. You aren't allowed to talk much about it. You certainly can't be concerned about it. You're not allowed to express any concern. That's unthinkable.

To hear that whites are on their way to minority status and the white population is declining, the worst thing you could possibly do is to talk about it at all is already a problem. but to suggest that there's any reason at all to be concerned about that or to be anything less than thrilled by that development is incredibly racist, we're told. So all you can do, I saw someone, some libertarian, of course, reacting to this on Twitter just now and this news from the Hill and saying, oh, this is great, I don't see any problem with this. Who could possibly have a problem with it?

Who cares if whites are going extinct in America? What difference does it make? I'm a libertarian. I don't understand anything. And that's the only attitude you're allowed to have. But here's what we know also. We know that it doesn't even need to be said, but I'll say it anyway, because we all know that it's true. But we know that the continued existence of any other race of people is considered deeply important.

And the preservation of the historical and traditional racial identity of any nation is considered deeply important. So, for example, if there was an influx of white immigration to a historically black country, and that was resulting in a giant demographic shift wherein it was becoming a predominantly white country rather than predominantly black, this would be considered a major, major problem. And there's no doubt about it. And yet, in the reverse, it is either neutral or cause for celebration. but really it should be a cause for celebration. And you know what?

This pertains even to the animal kingdom. I mean, you can think that there's a particular type of, I don't know, hummingbird that's going extinct. Even for that, we're supposed to panic. And if I were to say, hey, whatever, what does it matter? So we don't have that type of hummingbird, but we've got plenty of other hummingbirds. What does it matter what type of hummingbird it is? The difference doesn't make. So you got this type of hummingbird is there's more of that and there's less of this,

Who cares? If I say that, I'm callous. Because no, it's very important that we have all varieties of hummingbirds. Every variety is very, very important. We have to keep them all around. Every animal in the animal kingdom, we've got to keep them all around. It's extremely important. If any particular variety starts to dwindle,

if any particular type of species of animal gets driven out of its territory, it's a very bad thing. So it's interesting that we can see this with hummingbirds, but not with certain kinds of people. Well, in particular, one kind of person, which would be a white person. The preservation of the hummingbird community is more important than the preservation of the white race. In fact, you can't even talk about the preservation of the white. Even saying that word, that phrase is tantamount to being in the clan. These are the standards that we are all supposed to live by, but it's like we all know.

It's just this game, and we all know that it's bogus and it's ridiculous. We all recognize it at this point, right? I'm not saying anything that anyone doesn't already know. When it comes to white people and talking about any issue pertaining to white people, all kinds of rules that are put in place that do not apply anywhere else. and so it's really up for us and we can complain about these rules usually what happens and the typical conservative response has been mostly to ignore the rules and just follow them and not

point them out every once in a while complain about them but then sort of follow the rules anyway we can do that or we can just ignore the rules which is what we ought to start doing all right let's keep on getting in trouble today the Sun has this report. Scientists working on a fat loss pill that doesn't require dieting have made a major breakthrough in their research. Boffins at the University of Texas have been testing the game-changing drug called CPACC. So it's like CPAC with a C, CPA-C, that wards off weight gain on mice. Experts hope that it will be revolutionary in the fight against obesity and it allows users to shed some pounds without altering their diet.

In theory, people could scoff down as much junk food as they like without the fear of added health risks or not fitting into their genes. The WonderPill increases the body's metabolism to help it break down sugar and fats more efficiently. Now, of course, doesn't seem to be acknowledged in this article, but the health risks from scoffing down junk food, gaining weight is only one of the health risks. It's not the only one. If you're eating fast food all the time, there's just, there's not enough nutrients in that.

It's not the right kind of nutrients. And yeah, it'll make you fat. And so if you take a pill that doesn't make you fat anymore, then you're not going to be fat, but it doesn't magically make McDonald's healthy for you. Which means that this is obviously a bad thing, right? This isn't good. Even if, even if it would have some positive impact on an individual, level, okay, even if it would prevent individual people from having heart attacks and dying

of obesity. Because I would believe that you get a pill like this on the market, there are a certain number of people who without this pill would have obesity-related heart attacks, and now they won't because of the pill. And so you can make an argument that who knows what the number is, but it's like a certain number of people that after this pill goes to market, certain number of people will continue living, whereas otherwise, they wouldn't. And so we might say, well, that alone means that it's good. What can we say about it? It's obviously good. And for everybody else, it makes your life easier and you feel better about yourself and you feel better about yourself and you look in the mirror and you have a better self-image

and everything else. It's all positive. But it's not good overall on a cultural level, on a societal level, because it enables self-destructive behavior, which is bad for the soul. And it's bad for you as a person and also ultimately self-defeating for your physical health in ways that should be intuitively obvious, but we're not going to know all the specifics until they start getting these drugs. And they already have drugs like this. OZempic, you know, it's not quite this miracle drug, but it's the closest thing to the miracle weight loss drug that's on the market right now.

Lots of people are taking that. But as always with these kinds of things. so if you're at all an intuitive person and you hear about any miracle drug, you automatically know that, well, there's really actually no such thing as a miracle drug. It just doesn't exist. Miracles don't exist in the form of a pill. You can't do that. There are shortcuts. There are things that make your life temporarily easier.

There are things that make you feel better about yourself. But there's always a cost. That's the world we live in. That's life. There's always a cost. there's no such thing as a cost-free choice, especially not a cost-free drug. And intuitive people understand that. And so you already know that, well, no, there's going to be, it's not all going to be roses here. There's going to be some problems that come from me. And if you're a little bit more intuitive, but not that much, you can start imagining what some of those side effects are going to be.

and one is that people are going to have terrible diets like they do now. They're not going to get fat because of those diets. And so there's not going to be that immediate incentive to change their diet. And so they won't change the diet. But they still have diets that don't have the nutrients that they need. And they have all kinds of chemicals and preservatives that aren't good for them. And they're still ingesting all of that stuff. And even it doesn't make it fat, make them.

fat, it will still have a negative impact on their health in the end. And we don't even need to know what all the specifics of that are. We don't need to wait to find out. But we will find out because they're going to get these jugs out there. And then it's going to have all kinds of horrible side effects. And there's going to be a lot of suffering that comes with it. And then 10 years later, there's going to be all the studies that come out. And oh, it turns out this, that and this. And in the meantime, aside from the physical ramifications, it just again, it facilitates self-destructive behavior. It makes it easier for people to be gluttonous and weak-willed. And that's not good.

It's for the same reason that miracle drugs that are meant to prevent STDs probably aren't a great thing for society either because they, again, exist to facilitate risky, self-destructive sexual behavior, which just means that you're going to get more of it. And while you have mitigated one of the consequences of having a society where everyone engages in this kind of behavior, you can't mitigate all of them. And for all the other consequences, now we're going to have more of those consequences because you've made it easier for people to do this. And you've made it more attractive. And that's not good. What's better is that, okay, you don't want to be obese, just go in and just do some, eat a salad, okay, go for a jog. It's not that hard to not be obese.

You don't want to get STDs? Okay, well then don't run out and have sex with anyone you meet. Okay, meet a person, be in a monogamous relationship, get married, be faithful. You know, have fidelity to your spouse. You don't have to worry about this. Not something you have to worry about in that case. So that's one way. And it is much better to have a society where people do that, you know, where they get married and that they're in monogamous marriages to avoid STDs.

And they go for jogs and they eat healthy to avoid obesity. Much better to have that, I would say. All right, here's a video from TikTok that went viral after lives of TikTok. posted it. It's almost hard to believe this is real, but it is real, and these people still exist in the world. Let's watch a little bit of this. I don't remember the last time I went to see a movie because I don't love going to the movie theater, but I'll tell you what, it pisses me off that I can't go see Barbie. I want to go see it, even if it is white feminism. I want to be able to go. So I'm doing a thing. And if you live in the Pacific Northwest, you can do a thing with me. Here's what it is. Next

July 31st August 1st someday next week on a weekday I am renting out a theater in Northwest Portland the entire theater the whole theater the theater the theater seats 46 people I think we're only gonna do 20 tickets so me and 19 other people that's it in addition to that there will be one employee so the entire building the entire cinema is going to be one employee plus 20 attendees that's it And we are the only people in the building and every single person including that employee is going to be wearing an N95 the entire time. The employee is going to put it on before they enter the building.

They've been chosen specifically for this purpose. They seem to get it. If you show up because you bought a ticket, I need to see a KN94 well fitted or a 95 well fitted or a P100. And if I see a baggy mask, I'm going to tell you to take it off and put on one that I hand you. I'm holding onto a bunch of masks. the one you like best. There are no concessions during the movie. They're not even going to open it up.

Do not bother bringing food or drinks. You may not take your mask off in the movie. If you need to scratch your nose or you need to take a sip of water, you need to get up, exit the theater, do that, and then come back. They're going to be medically fragile people there. This is their first opportunity in like three and a half years, so we are not f***ing around here, folks. No kids that can't wear a mask solidly for two hours. Like, I'm not going to do a little kids because I don't blame them, but it is what it is. This is going to be a morning showing. We are the first people in the building, so we will be in and out well before any other employees or other people. Well, I mean, how can you turn down this invitation? This just

sounds like a thrilling time at the movie theater. If you would like to get up early in the morning to go watch a two and a half hour movie about Barbie with a bunch of lonely feminists who have not left their homes or apparently showered in three and a half years. And if you would like to be alone in this haunted theater with these feminists, eating no snacks, wearing a muzzle the entire time, and required to leave the theater in order to scratch your nose, if you'd like to do that, then get in touch with this woman. I mean, it's a little late because I guess this already happened. So unfortunately, you missed out on that opportunity. But as she says, you know, you could do the same thing.

It just sounds like actual hell. It's what hell would be for me. This is what Satan is watching this and getting all kinds of ideas, I think. Maybe Satan would actually be at the theater. You never know. You watch that. You know, I watched that. And there was a part of me.

Actually, I had to go to this woman's TikTok. I had to brave that. I had to make the perilous journey to her actual TikTok account. Because as a part of me is like, there's no, this can't be real. People are actually still living this way? Everything about it, this has to be a parody. Even the throwaway lines about, even though it is white feminism, it's like, you're, you can't be a real person. This is AI.

This is not, this is a joke. But what you realize is that, no, this is real. People really do live this way. And probably more people live this way. way than we would like to think. In fact, there was another tweet yesterday with a similar theme from a person who also appears to be real. This person tweeted, relationship ending argument with my partner of 17 years. She stopped wearing a mask today. Let me make my own decisions and stop trying to control me, she said, when I gave her the facts about the virus. I'm not trying to control.

I'm trying to save everyone in this house. F everything. So this is someone who just, Of course, he calls I don't know if it's his wife, but he's been with a woman for 17 years and refers to her as my partner and broke off this romantic relationships of 17 years because she's not still wearing a mask

three and a half years later. And presumably we're talking about in the house. So he's been wearing a mask in his home all the time for three years. another thing that when you first see that you think it's got to be a parody there's no way how is this possible um but it is possible and these people do exist because as we we talked about all throughout covid you know um we learned a lot of things about human nature and about our leaders that run this

country and none of it was good you know i'm afraid to say like we the covid experience and the lockdowns and everything that happened. It didn't teach us anything good about human nature, about people, about this country, about our culture, about society, about our government. All of it was quite bad. But I think the kind of the underlying lesson is that for a lot of people, COVID was the first time in their lives that they had confronted their mortality. And it's not because COVID posed for them this grave risk that they weren't already facing, you know, as we know for a lot of people, you already have obesity. That's more likely to kill you. It's a drive around your car every day, you get in a car accident.

But just COVID and the way that it was reported and the way that it was treated, all of that together, the hype around COVID meant that for a lot of these people, it was just the first time that they'd even know. thought about the fact that, oh, yeah, you know, I can, I can die. I could actually die of something. They were mortal the whole time before that. They just never, they really never thought about it. And because in the modern world, you're able to live this very insulated life, and we don't talk about death and we keep death away from us, we shield ourselves from it. It's not like the old days when you, you know, if you got to adulthood, you would have seen people die around you're going to be around death. You're aware of it, right? You've got family members who are buried like on your property. And so there's no way to avoid it. But that's not the way we live in

modern society. We're very insulated from the reality of death. And so for a lot of these people, the first time they'd ever even thought about it. And it's for a certain percentage of those people, it broke them. That confrontation with mortality broke them. And they haven't recovered. And they never will until they die, which they will, and it's not going to be COVID, it'll be something else because it was always going to happen. So that's how you explain what you just saw there. Let's get to the comment section. If you're hiring, you know that it's incredibly hard to attract top talent and with the current labor market conditions, even harder than ever, that's why you want a partner like the zip

recruiter who gets it. ZipRecruiter knows how tough it is right now, but they figured out solutions. for the problems you're facing. Try them for free at ziprecruiter.com slash walt to reach more of the right people. Zippercruiter posts your job to 100 plus job sites. ZipRecruiter's smart technology finds great matches for your job and then lets you invite the most qualified people to apply for your job. Their price is really straightforward. You can stick to your budget with no surprises. Team up with a hiring partner like ZipRecruiter who understands what you need. Four to five employers who posted ZipRecruiter to get a quality candidate within the first day. Just go to this exclusive web address to try ZipRecruiter for free. ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh. Again, that's ZipRecruiter.com slash W-A-L-S-H. ZipRecruiter,

the smartest way to hire. All right, a lot of people disagree with my take on the Neo-Situations. I'll read through some of those comments, and then I'll respond at the end. So these are a sampling of the comments. First comment says he's not apologizing for apologizing. His publicist apologized for him. Lisa says, apparently his publisher tried to save him by apologizing for him, I'm happy to realize what was important and spoke his truth. Another one, man, you can't make anybody happy in this day and age. During his video, he says he apologizes if people get offended because he doesn't mean to offend anybody.

However, he stands by his opinion on the matter. You don't know what's going on between him and his publicist team. Maybe he thought they were going to do just that. Apologize for offending people. But after his team, the team posts, his team's post, he realized that they go against his belief. So he posts his video to stand up for himself. Come on now.

at this time where things are so crazy, you can at least acknowledge the fact that this father of seven is going against the craziness for the sake of the children. Why can't we just be happy that someone with a platform and a fan base is at least being vocal and has common sense? Gosh. Listen, having the courage to go against the LGBT call in today's political climate is commendable. Matt does this for a living, so it's easy for him to talk freely about his beliefs. Neo is a pop star. He has everything to lose for speaking his mind. even if he apologized at the end of the day, he stood for what he believes in. I'm not a Christian,

but Matt, it's my belief that Christians believe in forgiveness. Rosia says, yeah, I'm not going to have to disagree, Matt, taking this series of events at face value. I'm proud of him and realize he's not selling a soul and accommodating to the cult, regardless of any backtracking here as publicist might have done. And then getting it, getting to it, says, yep, sorry, Matt, you're doing the same you accuse the LGBT mob of doing. you're saying his second amendment, or rather, second statement, you're saying his second statement is not up to your standards, and now you're bullying him. Not everything is going to fire and humiliate, not everyone's going to fire and humiliate the publicist and say everything exactly to

your liking. Okay. So a few things here. First of all, yeah, it's true that I do this for a living. I can't tell you, though, that even if you do it for a living, it doesn't mean you're not. As we just talked about, we're all still mortal. And so when you've got thousands of people that wish death on you and you've got a file like this thick of credible death threats against you, you know, it's not like there's nothing on the line here. Let me put it that way. And I actually don't think that, you know, being a pop star saying that, well, he's even more vulnerable and susceptible. No, he's not, actually. He's not. not only because of the wealth and the fame already,

but the truth is that, look, if you're a pop star and you're a singer and you put a good song out, people will listen to the song. Like, it actually doesn't. It's, everything will be forgiven if you're in that world, as long as you make good music. Now, I don't know the last time Neo put out a hit song, maybe it was yesterday.

I don't know. I don't follow it. But if you're a pop star and you put out good music, people like it, then all will be forgiven. And that really is the truth. So actually, there's not that much on the line. That's just the truth of it. And on top of that, he's a grown man and a famous celebrity.

I'm a grown man. I'm giving my take on what he said. I'm not bullying him. And I sincerely doubt that he would say that I'm bullying him. So relax about that. Second, he didn't stand his ground. He just didn't. If this is what we now call standing your ground, then we have lowered the standards so far that the standards don't exist anymore.

standing your ground doesn't mean anything anymore if issuing an apology through your publicist qualifies as standing your ground. Again, he never even claimed that the publicist put out that statement without his approval because, of course, the publicist didn't put it out without his approval. I work with publicists. I think many of the commenters have no idea what it goes on in this world. I could just tell you that they're not going to put a statement out without your approval. So he approved it. 100% he did. That's not standing your ground. Okay, if putting out a publicist statement, apologizing to the LGBT community for hurting their feelings, if that's standing your ground, then, well, I guess the good thing is if that counts of standing your ground, then it's very easy to be heroic in that case. Like, if that's the standard, then all you got to do is just, the bar is all the way down here.

All you got to do is just like barely move your foot up and you're a hero of historic proportions. And third, even in his follow-up statement, he apologizes again for offending people. that's not standing your ground either. But more importantly, he says that everyone should be able to do what they want with their own kids. Do you see how that's the exact position that the left has on this? Okay, this is what the left would say. A parent and child should make their own choice about transitioning the kid. That's what they say.

Okay, so he has affirmed that view explicitly. This is not me being a purist. This is me understanding what our position is and recognizing that someone has taken a position that is the opposite of our position. But in the meantime, thrown out a few buzzed words and phrases and whatever that are impressive to some people and says, oh, he's on our side. No, that's just not our view. And I'm sorry, I just think that it's, to me, this is more of this peculiar conservative disease where we're so desperate for mainstream approval. and relevance that any celebrity who comes anywhere within our vicinity, like ideologically,

just latch on to them. And we want to give them the Medal of Honor. And I don't think that that has ever been an effective cultural strategy. I think it's pathetic. And you notice what the left does, okay? and we should not take cues from the left when it comes to their views, right, obviously. But some of their strategies we should, because they're the ones who own the culture. They won everything.

Now we're trying to win it back. And so it behooves us to look at some of the ways they did that. And so when you look on the left, they don't do this. They don't, if somebody says one thing that's like vaguely sort of we agree with, that they agree with, that's not good enough for them. They've got a hard line. This is the line you've got to walk. And if you don't, you're not on our side.

And you look over at us, and we could have someone that's like, on one subject, 99% of what they say, we totally disagree with. But if you get that 1%, then not only do we embrace them, but we hail them as heroes. I don't think it's an effective strategy. I don't think it's the right thing. I also don't think it's an effective strategy culturally. I think it's clearly not.

Whether it's changing the definition of words or trying to convince you that 2 plus 2 actually equals 5, it sometimes feels like the current culture is doing its best to make you stupid. When wokeness is permeating every aspect of your life, it's hard to know where to turn for guidance. But I've got some good news. Our good friend Dennis Prager has all the answers in his Daily Wire Plus series, Prager You Masters program. In Masters program, Dennis Prager has gathered 40 years worth of wisdom and is sharing it a number of wide-ranging subjects. Dennis Prager offers useful advice on marriage, happiness, and how to be a good person, plus so much more. In a world that wants to make you woke,

Dennis Prager's on a mission to make you wise. All episodes are now available, but only for DailyWire Plus members. So don't wait, go to DailyWire.com. Go to DailyWirePlus.com to become a member and watch Prager You Masters program today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Well, staying on the same theme here, we've only barely made it to Wednesday, and already this is shaping up to be a record-breaking week for groveling apologies. It's truly been a dominant performance by the spineless lickspiddle club. The human jellyfish community has set a whole new standard for cowardice. Indeed, we've seen everyone from R&B stars to NASCAR drivers bend the need of the woke mob.

Now an actress joins their ranks. Amanda Abington, best known for her role in whatever she was in, recently deleted her Twitter account and posted a lengthy explanation and apology to her Instagram. What was her offense? Well, she said that 12-year-olds shouldn't perform drag for adults. Yes, Amanda simply suggested that children should not be cross-dressing and dancing sexually for adults. She merely came out against the flagrant sexual exploitation of children, and this provoked a backlash strong enough to send Amanda fleeing from Twitter. And eventually it led to this rather rambling statement. Watch.

Hello, it's Amanda Abington here. I just wanted to quickly come on. Because apparently I'm trending on Twitter. I'm not on Twitter anymore. voluntarily because I don't like it over there anymore. But apparently I'm trending because people are going to boycott strictly. I think it's because of a tweet I made back in March regarding a drag show. Now I need to make this very clear. I love drag.

I think it's an amazing form of entertainment and I like drag queens. I think they're hilarious and brilliant and they have it. It's an art form. And I think there's absolutely a place for it in the entertainment industry. My son played Jamie and everyone's talking about Jamie and he was a wonderful drag queen. He was wonderful in it.

But my tweet back in March was regarding a 12 year old who was doing it in front of adults. And it just upset me because I saw a kid, a little kid, a 12 year old. doing something very over-sexualised and I didn't think it was right. Personally speaking, I don't think 12-year-olds should be performing in drag shows. I did a stupid comment a few years ago. I can't even remember how long ago it was, but it was a while ago when I was ill-informed

and it was a stupid thing to write and I instantly regretted it and I apologised and I did my research and and I'm much more informed now. I'm not transphobic and I love women. I think there's a place for everybody as long as we are aware of each other and we look after each other and we make sure that we don't go for each other in a hateful way. So I'm sorry if my tweet about drag shows made you feel like you can't watch strictly. I'm genuinely sorry. All right, so to use a phrase I hate, there's a lot to unpack here. First of all, you should know that the very dumb and terrible comment she made a few years ago,

the one that she says she has long since repented of and no longer stands by, was that women don't have penises. That's what she said. She said that you can't identify as a woman if you have a penis. Now she says that that was a stupid statement. It was a youthful indiscretion. She was going through a rebellious teenage phase where she believed in biology and understood human anatomy. But she's grown out of that silliness now, and she wants you to know that.

She says now that she's a supporter of the legitimate trans community, and by legitimate, I suppose, she means these people, that those people with penises who are actually legitimately women. What she doesn't mention is that this is a rather small community, and that is it's comprised of zero people in the history of the world. As for the rest, she rather meekly stands by her contention that little boys shouldn't be dressed up like girls and paraded around adult men for their sexual amusement. She isn't ready to give up that position just yet. She reasserts that belief here cautiously and with apology and qualification. Now, a few years from now, though, I'm sure that she'll disavow this bigoted viewpoint too and chalk it up to another stupid phase she went through. One day she'll be slapping her forehead and saying, oh, man, I can't believe I used to think

that the sexual exploitation of children was a bad thing. So stupid. But even today, she hastens to add that drag is beautiful and wonderful, and it's an important art form. She cannot stress enough just how great drag queens are and how fierce and majestic and brilliant. This is another toll that she feels she must pay to the left, the one where she pretends to think that drag is a valid art form, which is something that, of course, nobody really believes. Nobody could watch a bunch of men in clown makeup, jirating on stage and actually

think to themselves, wow, this is so impressive. Everyone knows that it is, at a minimum, awkward and weird. But she makes this concession anyway in hopes that she'll be allowed to continue believing, at least, that the U.S. shouldn't have its own version of Afghanistan's Bacabazi. But the left will not give her that permission. As we have seen this week, and we just talked about, the left demands total and absolute acquiescence. And when it comes to the Alphabet Club, you may not criticize anything that any of them do. So why is it okay for 12-year-old boys to perform in drag for adults? Well, because some members of the Alphabet Club want them to.

That's it. That's all the reason that they can give, or as far as they're going to. or need to give. You either accept this or you are a homophobic bigot. To which the correct response, of course, is, well, then I guess I'm a homophobic bigot. That's the appropriate attitude. But Amanda Abington certainly can't bring herself to adopt this approach. The idea of allowing people to call her a bigot and just being okay with it is unthinkable to her. She cannot be viewed that way. She cannot accept it. And so she twists and turns and apologizes and equivocates while trying desperately to hold on to at least some shred of her common sense and moral values. She clings to one little scrap of it and shows up at the left's door on her knees pleading,

please, can I come in? And they say, yes, but you need to ditch that little bit of sanity and decency that you still have in your hand there. I see it. And I can sneak that in here. So she pleads her case. And that's what's happening in the Instagram video. It's completely futile, not to mention rather unsightly and embarrassing. See, I harp on these kinds of because they provide a great learning opportunity for the rest of us. I'm often scolded for having such a black and white all-or-nothing attitude when it comes to the culture war. You just heard some people scolding me about it. But maybe you can see that I have this attitude because that's the kind of war we're in. We're fighting an opponent that demands unconditional surrender. There will be

no negotiation, no compromise. I wouldn't be interested in it, even if one was potentially on the table, but it doesn't matter because it isn't. Amanda Abington is a perfect example. A few. years ago, she took a strong and extremely rational stance. Men aren't women. Transgenderism is false. Don't castrate children. Don't dress boys up like girls and have them dance and drag shows. The left set to work to destroy her for daring to be a sane and normal person, and so she has spent the last many months gradually abandoning all of those positions in successive order in hopes of appeasing them. Now she retains only that last position that hopes that they'll be understanding and accepting of her. She hopes that she hopes you can say to them, well, can I at least still have this?

Will you at least have me this one thing? Can I at least still think this? And they say, no, you got to give it all up. Every last shred of your integrity and moral sense. Give it all. Nothing less than full, humiliating, self-debasing capitulation will be accepted. So, as we've talked about, you might as well hold every position, give nothing up, make no compromise, and surrender not an inch of land. If it's all or nothing, then give them nothing. At least that makes it easy, nothing really to think about. And while we're at it, here's the important point. We need to recapture a sense of moral indignation, of righteous anger.

Okay? This is one of the great sins committed by the modern church, for example, and spent, decades telling people, I got to be nice, or the worst thing you'd ever be is angry. We must never be angry. And so conservatives and Christians generally have become just that. It's become milk toast and bland and accepting

of everything and we're not going to be angry about anything. You end up with someone like this woman sitting there on the Instagram video, stammering and nervous. Like her rejection of child drag shows is somehow embarrassing. Somehow a position that she must explain and justify. This attitude is not only

pathetic and humiliating, but it sends exactly the wrong message. The more we allow the other side to pretend to be indignant and angry, what we beg for their friendship and apologize for our alleged wrongdoings, the more it appears to the casual observer that they have the moral high ground. But that is not the case. We do. We are in the right. We have the high ground. They're the ones advocating for things that are deranged and crazy and morally abominable. So we not only have the right to be pissed off, but it's also strategically important that we reclaim that ground. Amanda Avington should make a video saying,

Are you people kidding me? What the hell is wrong with you? Children obviously shouldn't be performing in drag shows. You freaks? If you disagree, then you're a degenerate scumbag. I have no respect for you. I don't care about your opinion. All of you people attacking me are filthy-depraved barbarians.

Shame on all of you. You disgust me. Go back to hell, you demons. That's what she should say. Or worse to that effect. Maybe tone it down just slightly, but not by much. The point is that we who oppose child sexual exploitation, we who stand on the side of basic reason, common sense, and science,

we are 100% in the right. And the people who oppose us are not only wrong, but are deeply depraved and evil. And we should always make that clear in the way we deal with these issues. It's the honest way to deal with them, and also the smart way strategically. But Amanda Abington chose the cowardly and dumb way. And for that reason, she is today canceled. And I'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching.

Thanks for listening. Have a great day. Godspeed.