The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1311 - I've Obtained Internal Footage Revealing The FAA's Plans To Reduce The Number Of White Males In Aviation

Episode Date: February 8, 2024

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, I have obtained internal footage from the FAA revealing their plan to reduce the number of white people in their ranks. According to my investigation, the effort to make the airline industry less safe and less reliable goes farther than you think. Also, the NBC absurdly blames Libs of TikTok for dozens of alleged bomb threats. And with comedian Shane Gillis hosting SNL this week, the media has made sure that "offensive" jokes from his past have "resurfaced." Plus, Apple just released their augmented reality nerd goggles that they hope you'll wear on your face for the low price of more than 3 thousand dollars.   Ep.1311   - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Bet Online - Use code "Walsh" to receive a 50% instant deposit bonus of up to $1,000 at http://www.betonline.ag    PreBorn! - Help save babies from abortion: https://preborn.com/Matt    Windshield WOW - Exclusive Discount for my Listeners! Use promo code WALSH at checkout. http://www.WindshieldWOW.com    - - -   DailyWire+:   Want to work at The Daily Wire? For more information, click here and select “Careers”: https://bit.ly/3lfVtwK   Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, kids entertainment and more: https://utm.io/ueMfc   Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj   #MattWalsh #TheMattWalshShow #News #Politics #DailyWire #WhatIsAWoman Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Tell you the Matt Wall Show, I've obtained internal footage from the FAA revealing their plan to reduce the number of white people in their ranks. According to my investigation, the effort to make the airline industry less safe and less reliable goes farther than you think. We'll talk about that. Also, NBC absurdly blames libs of TikTok for dozens of alleged bomb threats. And with comedian Shane Gillis hosting SNL this week, the media has made sure that offensive jokes from his past have quote-unquote resurfaced. Plus, Apple just released their augmented reality nerd goggles that they hope you'll wear on your face for the low price of, more than $3,000. We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Wall Show. If you're getting ready to watch the big game this weekend, you need to check out Bet Online. Bet Online has the largest offering of betting odds in the world. You can bet on virtually anything

from how many total passing yards Patrick Bahomes will get, whether Reba will forget a word in the national anthem, or if you think Taylor Swift will make it from Japan to cheer on Travis, bet online is the best online sports betting platform. They pride themselves on their higher than average betting limits of up to $25,000. You can increase your wagering amount. by contacting their player services desk by phone or email. So don't be the odd man out when everybody around you is talking about their betting predictions on the biggest sporting event of the year. Go to betonline.ag to place your bets for the big game this Sunday.

Use promo code Walsh for a 50% instant deposit bonus of up to $1,000. That's betonline.ag and use promo code Walsh, bet online. The options are endless. If you've listened to this show regularly over the past few months, you know that I've done a couple of monologues on the aviation industry, The frequency of near disasters in the sky has increased dramatically in recent years, and as I've noted, the increase began around the same time that the Obama administration began a concerted effort to diversify the FAA, including air traffic control. Now, according to a NASA database, which tracks self-reported data from pilots, we now average roughly five near misses per week, more than double the number from a decade ago. And that's not even getting into the obvious maintenance issues that have been, you know, popping up, including doors and wheels that have been flying off of planes, mid-finding.

flight. Now, given how terrible all this looks from the outside, I wanted to get a better idea of what's happening internally at the FAA and major airlines in this country. We hear a lot about DEI in the abstract sense, but we rarely get a glimpse of what it looks like in practice. We don't often hear firsthand testimonials from people affected by DEI because they're worried about protecting their careers so they don't talk about it. They know if they speak out, they'll face termination. They'll probably be blackballed from the industry forever. But with social media, some level of anonymity is possible. So to take a closer look at how far this DEI rot has spread,

I tweeted this. If you're an airline pilot and have firsthand knowledge about the DEI agenda being forced into your profession, send me a DM and tell me about your experiences, curious yet terrified to see how bad it is at this point. Now, I sent that out a couple weeks ago. To say that in my inbox was completely flooded would be an understatement. I received too many DMs to count from pilots and other professionals

in the aviation industry, virtually every message that I read told me the same thing, that the ideology of diversity, equity, and inclusion is the top priority in their workplaces. It goes without saying, but this is an industry where one mistake can kill hundreds or even thousands of people. This is not comparable to DEI departments in universities or corporate America, as destructive and wasteful as those departments are.

DEI in the aviation industry could lead to a catastrophic disaster. And that's why, even though it was a risk, Several of these sources provided me identifying information to validate their identities, along with permission to post some of the internal documents and footage that they obtained and shared with me. These people knew that they might lose their jobs, but they decided to, you know, that getting the word out was more important. Yesterday I posted some of this material on my Twitter feed. They reveal that at the very highest levels of the FAA, there's an effort underway to reduce the number of white men who work in the aviation industry. This is a priority of the FAA.

In April of 2022, the FAA's acting deputy chief operating officer, woman named Angela McCullough, led a meeting with the FAA's Flight Operations Division. This division is responsible for all aspects of aviation operations, including overseeing airline maintenance. So it's a pretty important division. But McCullough did not spend the call talking about ways to make sure that airplane doors don't fly off mid-flight.

She didn't say a word about the importance of keeping the wheels attached to jetliners as they're taking off. Instead, McCullough talked extensively about DEI. And as you'll see, she was prompted to do so by a man named Will Riggins, who's the FAA's vice president of flight program operations. And if that name does sound familiar to you at all, it's probably because Riggins is the same guy who conspired to find ways to hide Pete Buttigieg's spending on government aircraft. So we've seen him in the news before for all the wrong reasons. And then this, we know, it means that this is a completely corrupt group of bureaucrats who have come around and assembled here to talk about the problems of white men in aviation. And here's a little bit of that much.

And we're looking at that, but we're also looking at really a need across the agency to recruit and retain a diverse population of votes. And as you mentioned earlier, you know, how much that adds to the process. What do you think are some of the key points that we need to remember as we embark on this challenge going forward? That's a pretty good question. I think one of things we need to know is that everyone else is embarking on the same thing, right, just across the system. So competition is going to be, competition is going to be, it's just going to be really heavy. Right. So A, I think we need to know that. I think it's going to take some some creativity. You heard Tim Say and he and I have talked about and we're going to you all with, you know, are there opportunities for any partnerships with universities or trade schools that specialize?

We kind of talk about from, you know, ramp to cockpit. Is there some things that we would want to look at there? So Will Riggins says we're looking at a need across the agency to recruit and retain. a diverse population of folks. And in response, McCullough talks about the arms race of DEI that's occurring in the industry. And she mentions partnerships with universities. And then she says that the FAA wants to look at something called ramp to cockpit. Now, let's think about both of these things for a minute. When she's talking about partnerships with universities in the name of diversifying aviation,

McCullough is referring to relationships that airlines have established with historically black colleges and universities. And for example, United Airlines has allied with Elizabeth City State University. The airline describes this as a, quote, partnership that seeks to not only train future pilots, but also bring more women and people of color into the ranks of commercial aviation. In case it's not obvious, Elizabeth's City State University is not a hotbed of engineering or aviation talent. In fact, it's not a hotbed of any kind of skill whatsoever. The average SAT score at the school is 960 out of 1600, which is one of the lowest scores you'll find anywhere in the country as an average score for a university. The only reason for partnerships

like this is because of the racial makeup of Elizabeth City State University, which is overwhelmingly black. This is the kind of partnership that, based on this video, senior FAA officials want to see more of. They want to partner with the worst, most mediocre, least impressive universities in the country. They're not interested in seeing the best pilots in the cockpit. They're interested in seeing more black pilots and, quote, quote, diverse pilots in the cockpit. But also could explain why McCullough is promoting something called ramp to cockpit in that footage. When she says ramp, she's referring to ramp agents who are responsible for loading and unloading baggage on airplanes.

So evidently, the FAA believes that these employees deserve some sort of specialized program to encourage them to become pilots. But nowhere in this footage does McCullough explain why this makes any sense whatsoever. It does not follow. This doesn't follow in any way. The job of a baggage handler is completely different from the job of an airline pilot. They are totally different. There are precisely zero transferable skills or even interests.

The only thing that makes them the same is that you're both working around a plane. Just because you have a job working around a plane doesn't mean you should be flying them. This is like having a janitor to surgeon pipeline at a hospital. or setting up a program so that the window washer cleaning the outside of the skyscraper can one day become an architect designing skyscrapers. These two lines of work have almost nothing to do with each other. So what's the point of this? Well, a few seconds later, McCullough provides something of an answer.

She tells the FAA's senior leadership in flight operations that their whole division is, quote, white male dominated. Then she says that, well, that should change. And Will Riggins, rather than reacting with surprise to this suggestion, question, of course, agrees with her. Watch. We need to be willing to have a conversation about kind of what's standing in our way from approaching some of these things differently than we have historically approached them. And just even the internal bias, particularly in flight ops, your whole program is very heavily male dominated. It just is. And really, it is white male dominated. I mean, let's just say what it is.

And so let's be willing that is today what it is. And then let's talk about what could the future look like if you really had this program that was representative of the whole country, right, of the whole world. And sometimes those are challenging or, you know, difficult or I would say people get a little bit uncomfortable talking about that. and like, hey, we're not going to make change unless we get a little bit uncomfortable. And let's be uncomfortable together. And let's do the right things and support each other moving forward. So I don't know if you wanted all that, but you got it, sir. That's great.

Honestly, those are some words that we really need to spend some time, I think, kind of digging through and thinking about. Now, one thing you know that if you hear somebody on the left use the phrase, we need to have an uncomfortable conversation. You know that the dumbest thing in the world is about to follow from that. Whatever comes next is going to be the dumbest thing you've ever heard. That's the way it always works. And of course, there's no pushback from anybody in that clip as they listen to this. Nobody says, well, wait a minute, why should baggage handlers become pilots?

What's wrong with having a lot of white men in flight operations exactly? What is the problem? What problem has been caused by the disproportionate number of white men? What issue are you trying to solve, lady? They don't say that. Instead, this woman gets complimented for her insights. But of course, not everybody on that call was an agreement. They didn't want to speak up because they'd be fired, but they knew that this was going to happen.

So one individual recorded the meeting, and this source had seen several white men get passed over for jobs because of their skin color. And he or she heard these kinds of remarks all the time at the FF. That's why they saved it and saved the video, and that's why we have it now. As of this morning, neither the FAA nor the Secretary of Transportation, Pete Buttigieg, have responded to this footage. That's because it reflects exactly what they believe. This is what they talk about behind closed doors. They want fewer white people flying planes and working in flight operations, including maintenance. They want fewer white people doing everything.

They want more baggage handlers to become pilots. And they're not remotely concerned about professional standards or competence or safety. That topic just doesn't come up in their discussions. This is what DEI is all about. It's not limited to Pete Buttigieg's agency. In response to my post, I received several other tips from sources outside of the FAA who say that they are seeing similar policies all across the aviation industry. Airlines are promoting DEI, just like the FAA is, even when it clearly endangers passengers.

So here's another example. One source piloted at Delta Airlines told me this. Quote, we recently had a transgender pilot repeatedly received negative reviews during his first year probationary period from captains he flew with regarding attitude, CRM, and judgment. Yet the chief pilot officer, office, CPO, was unwilling to address the issue. Had this not been a transgender pilot, the individual would likely not have successfully completed their probationary period. Quasantly, that CPO has a management pilot on staff who recently transitioned, who was able to weigh in on these matters. This is what the airlines in the FAA will never admit publicly. We'll never admit that they're lowering standards and endangering the public in order to get more diverse pilots flying planes. And from an official standpoint, it's because they haven't passed a policy officially saying the standards are being lowered.

Instead, what happens in practice is exactly what this pilot told me and many other similar stories I've heard. That they kind of unofficially look the other way when incompetent people who are in a preferred group are screwing up. And that's what's happening. The source also sent along this internal Delta Airlines manual that's designed to help Delta pilots, quote, transition into another gender. And here's what that looks like. It reads helpful steps for transitioning at Delta. And of course, there's the pilot with the gay trans pride flag or whatever. It draped over his body, like exactly what you want to see, right?

It goes without saying that, I mean, this is incredibly irresponsible for several reasons. Put aside the fact that Delta is discriminating. qualified pilots on the basis of their skin color and their gender and promoting incompetent pilots instead. This document shows that Delta is also going out of their way to recruit trans-identifying pilots, people who have extremely high rates of mental illness and a propensity for suicide. Remember, these are people who, according to the trans activists themselves, are at risk of killing themselves if they're misgendered or if they don't receive all the affirmation they feel they need. I mean, this is a category of people with suicidal ideation rates that are like exponentially

higher than the general population. And the FAA and Delta want more of them flying commercial aircraft? In fact, in private, they're open about the fact that they're willing to endanger the public in order to hit diversity goals. Recently on Twitter, somebody named Trace Woodgrains has been looking closely at FAA documents that were unearthed in a long-running class action lawsuit filed against the agency back during the Obama years. And he found proof that the agency does not care if diversity, quote-unquote, costs people their lives. Like, they've put it in writing.

In 2013, for example, FAA leaders reviewed this slide, and the slide reads, key questions for leadership. What are the relative values of diversity in the prediction of performance slash outcomes? There is a trade-off between diversity, adverse impact. and predicted job performance outcomes. How much of a change in job performance is acceptable to achieve diversity goals. So there it is, as clear as possibly could be. They are willing to trade job performance in order to achieve diversity goals.

And what does job performance mean when you're an airline pilot? If you perform poorly in your job as an airline pilot, it means like 200 people die. Now, I can answer the question that they've asked rhetorically, what kind of tradeoff is acceptable? Well, no tradeoff in job performance is acceptable to achieve any diversity goals in any industry, especially the airline industry. Like, the whole mission of the FAA is supposed to be to make sure that people don't die on airplanes. Really, it should be summed up that way. But increasingly, it's clear that that's just not important to the FAA.

I didn't mention this on Twitter, but one of the sources who DM me sent me, this is information as well. This is another DM I got, quote, I was not aware of this until recently, but the FAA has authorized special issuance medical certificates to individuals on SSRIs. The FAA and the Airline Pilot Association are looking to broaden slash expand the SSRI and mental health on ramps back to being able to exercise a first-class medical certificate. In other words, the agency is doing everything it can to ensure that pilots taking antidepressants can fly. These are pilots who are struggling with depression and who need medical assistance with their depression that they can be flying people in the sky. At the same time, the source says, quote, the FAA just sent a letter requesting Congress not to raise the mandatory retirement age from the current age of 65 and the FAA primarily states safety as a justification.

Obviously, there's zero safety data that shows a switch is flipped when you turn 65 and you're somehow instantly less competent. we all know competent 70-year-olds and incompetent 50-year-olds running around. The point is that the FAA and the Pilots Association are much more willing to go along with the idea that SSRIs and transitioning pilots should be at the controls, and that's somehow more safe than someone who just woke up on their 65th birthday. So these are the kinds of incoherent medical standards we've come to expect in the FAA. A year ago, for example, the FAA abruptly lowered its medical certification guidelines for pilots with heart block. And this is a serious condition. It makes it harder for the heart to pump blood effectively. Before the change, pilots with first-degree block had to provide medical documentation proving

they had, quote, no evidence of structural function or coronary heart disease. Now, many pilots with first-degree heart block can fly without this documentation. There was a lot of speculation that this was due to complications of the COVID shot or that this might implicate the safety of passengers. The FAA denied that. But of course, we have no reason to believe anything they say anymore. this is what we can expect from the federal government at this point. Even on matters of life or death, they have just no credibility. There are some more documents I posted on Twitter along these lines,

including some insider information on how the FAA awards contracts to various small businesses. These small businesses handle important engineering and logistic tasks for the agency. But it turns out that these contracts, like everything else these days, often prioritize socially disadvantaged businesses, which according to federal regulations typically means that they aren't owned by white people. In the FAA's E-FAST contract system, these disadvantaged businesses get first dibs

at contracts valued under $150,000. And what this means is that the FAA has adopted a gender and race-based spoil system for pretty much everything. At every step, whether you're a baggage handler, a pilot, a contractor, you will get priority treatment if you look a certain way.

The only way to bring an end to this madness is for more whistleblowers to do what these whistleblowers did yesterday and speak out about it. Record the meetings where they tell you they don't want white people working for them. Save the document showing they're promoting incompetent pilots because they're trans. If we expose enough of this that might finally collapse the whole scheme under the weight of its own absurdity, if we don't, if we allow it to fester, as everyone on that FAA video conference, did. Then before long, as I've been warning now for months, a lot of people are going to die as a result. Now, let's get to our five headlines.

USAA knows dynamic duos can save the day, like superheroes and sidekicks or auto and home insurance. With USAA, you can bundle your auto and home and save up to 10%. Tap the banner to learn more and get a quote at usa.com slash bundle. Restrictions apply. Tragically, it's been reported that the number of infant deaths caused by abortion is greater. attributed to the next seven causes of death combined. Preborn is leading the charge to turn this around. Every day, Preborn's network of clinics rescue 200 unborn babies.

By introducing a mother to her child via ultrasound, a baby's chance of survival could double. I met someone and I got pregnant and I wasn't ready. When I was at the clinic, after they told me how far long I was and that the baby had a heartbeat, I cried. And it gave me a minute by myself in the first. room, I broke down and I prayed to God. I asked the Lord to, when I walk out of those doors, to just give me the strength, to be able to go through the pregnancy.

Made my decision at that time. Treasure I chose because I know that she was a gift from God, and she's just going to be a treasure. I'm super grateful that I'm able to go down this journey with my daughter. And I'm just super glad that I didn't have abortion. Preborn's work has only just begun. By the time I finished this life-saving message, two unborn babies will be aborted in this country. Will you join Preborn and the Matt Walsh show and make 2024 the biggest baby-saving year in history? One ultrasound is just $28 and $140 will offer five babies a chance at life. Just dial pound 250 and say the keyword baby. That's pound 250 baby or donate securely at preborn.com slash Walsh. That's preborn.com slash walsh.

Okay, we jump right off unfortunately with the most horrifying thing you've heard. in some time. This is another blood-curdling story from Redux, which is an outlet that I reference all the time on the show, because they're among the very few outlets that are doing actual journalism in this country. And so here's the story. A trans-identified

male in Kentucky has reached a plea deal after being charged with sexually abusing a baby and will avoid prison so long as he meets certain conditions. Maria Childers, a former daycare worker, hired a prominent trans activist lawyer to represent him in the sickening case. As previously reported

Redux, Childers was arrested in February of 2023 after the Department of Community-based services received an anonymous tip detailing an alleged incident of abuse that had occurred in November of 2022 at Explore Learning Academy. The tip reportedly written by one of Childers' coworkers accused him in making inappropriate comments towards an infant while changing the child's diaper and touching the baby inappropriately. Redux has now obtained court records detailing the full complaint against Childers, which showed that he was accused of both physical and sexual abuse. while employed at the daycare.

And you could go to Redux and read the specifics of the actual abuse that was inflicted. I can't even read it. It's just infuriating and disgusting. But the point is that he was saw witnessed sexually abusing a baby, whether it's changing the type. The police were contacted, going back to the report, after being taken to the police station, For questioning, Childers initially claimed that he had not changed the infant's diaper at all. He later admitted to having done so after an officer presented him with evidence in the form of a text that he had sent to the daycare's director confirming the baby's diaper had been changed. He then tried to deny he had ever said anything inappropriate, but admitted he often said things that were taken out of context.

So he lied, and there's a lie was found out. He lied some more. Lie was found out. You know, you start to see what happened here. Childers was placed under arrest and charged with one count of first degree sexual abuse of a victim under 12, and three counts of first degree criminal criminal abuse of a child under 12. He was then booked at the McCracken County Jail. And he was initially marked as male by both the police and the jail, because he is a male.

But then they switched it to female because, of course, we have to respect the pronouns and the gender identity and lived experience of this guy who sexually abused a baby. And then childers goes and he gets this trans. activist lawyer, who's also a man who identifies as a woman, gets representation from this lawyer. After taking on the case, the lawyer Leach is his name, last name Leach, submitted a motion to reduce Childers Bond, complaining that he did not have access to estrogen while in solitary confinement at McCracken County Jail. After some negotiation with the court, the motion was ultimately approved and Childers' bond was reduced from $100,000 to $5,000. The bond conditions included no contact with children to remain away from the daycare where they had been employed, where he had been employed.

On January 29th, childer struck an apparent deal with prosecutors. In exchange for a guilty plea, his charge of first degree sexual abuse of a victim under 12 was amended to Class A misdemeanor sexual misconduct. And the remaining abuse charges were dropped. and what that all means is that he's going to get probation and he's not going to serve any prison time at all. And it's possible he may not even have a criminal record. Will he at least have to register on the sex offender registry? I don't know. It sounds to me like probably not.

That isn't mentioned in the story one way or another. But given that they're reducing everything, they're calling it a misdemeanor. He might not even have a criminal record. He's not going to prison. It seems like a good chance he's not even going to be on. the sex offender registry. And either way, you know, it is, it's bad enough that actually I had to go back and read the first part of the article twice just to confirm that this did happen in Kentucky and not

in Canada. Because this is the kind of moral insanity that we often see out of Canada, unfortunately, but now it's made its way down to Kentucky. Or someone who sexually abused a baby won't even go to prison. And, I mean, this is someone who, it should go, without saying, should be put at the front of the line for the electric chair, if we still had one, which we should. This should be like a, you know, a cut the line pass at Disney World that, but takes you

right to the front of the line for the electric. You get right in front, and that's it. But instead, he isn't even going to prison. Like, insaneer times the townspeople would be gathering right now as we speak to watch while this piece of garbage is let up the steps where the rope is, waiting for him, instead he's not even going to prison. If he had just gotten life imprisonment and solitary confinement for the rest of his life, I would be upset about that because I would say that that is far too generous. That's far too lenient. But this, I mean, this is just a farce.

It's a sick, horrific joke. Now, we should acknowledge, of course, that our justice system already has a habit of letting the worst scum in existence off the hook with a slap on the wrist or even less. This is already happening, was already happening. And before you take into the account the trans factor, there's a good chance that this animal would have gotten a sentence much, much lighter than he deserves, regardless of how he identifies. But then you add that into the picture, you add that into this mess of anti-justice, which is what you get from the justice system these days. You add in the victim tokens, the identity politics, the trans card that he can play.

and that's how you end up with a baby rapist who doesn't go to jail. Once you add in the left-wing victim politics, there's just no chance. There's no hope of any kind of justice actually happening. Here's a related story. At least it stays in the world of gender identity and sanity. This is the NBC News headline. Headline is, after libs of TikTok posted, at least 21 bomb threats followed. Story says last March, police in Coralville, Iowa investigated a bomb threat targeting a junior high school.

Authorities brought in specially trained dogs to sniff for explosives and start looking into why someone might try to target the community's teachers and students. Law enforcement quickly determined that the threat was a hoax. Detective Hannah Vorak from the Coroville Police Department arrived at a theory. Quoted, it appears this all stems from a post made earlier this week by Chia Reichick and her libs of TikTok account. Wrightchick 29 is not accused of making any bomb threats in Iowa or anywhere else. But about a day and a half before authorities responded to the threat at Corroville Northwest Junior High, Reichick posted that the school offers a pornographic book in its library that teaches kids about gay sex. She wrote on the platform, these are the books they're giving your kids to read in school. This book is gay, a coming out guide for LGBTQ teens with book bans going back years.

They called a book band. It's not really a book ban. Coralville was not alone. Officers and government officials and four other jurisdictions. Burbank, California, jurisdictions in Minnesota, Oregon, Oklahoma City, told NBC News that they believe Wrightchick sparked threats in their localities with her posts on social media that digitally heckle people, such as drag performers, LGBTQ teachers, and doctors who treat transgender patients. So it's quite a long expose. But this is the basic idea.

Back to the familiar game again of trying to blame conservatives, Chaya Reichick in this case, of being responsible for bomb threats. But think about, and what was it, 21 bomb threats, they're trying to pin on her in this case. Think about all the assumptions you have to make in order to blame libs of TikTok for a bomb threat called into a school or a school that had gay porn in the library or a hospital that was mutilating kids

or drag queen that was exposing themselves to children. Like these are all the kinds of situations where you allegedly get these bomb threats after Libs of TikTok exposes it. But in order to blame her, think about the assumptions you have to make. You have to assume really three things. Number one, you have to assume that the bond threat actually happened, which is a big assumption. In many cases, it's an entirely unwarranted assumption. In other words, most of these are reported bomb threats.

The media might say, oh, a bomb threat happened. But mostly, these are reported bomb threats. So what happened is that we were told that a bomb threat happened. Most of the time, we don't have any proof that the bomb threat even actually occurred. So it just as easily could be the case that the person reporting the threat made it up. Why would they make it up? Well, for the obvious personal, political, and ideological reasons, they have all the motivation in the world to make this up. But you have to assume.

So you have to assume the bomb threat actually happened. Next, you have to assume that if the bomb threat happened, it was a conservative, a libs of TikTok follower who made it. it. And this is another massive assumption. And most of the time, it is the least likely of all possibilities. It could be true. I'm not saying that it's impossible. You know, you look at all the supposed bomb threats that have happened. And it's probably true that some of them were from somebody on the right, some delusional stupid person who does this and calls in a hoax thinking that they're helping in some way. And they're obviously only helping the left in actuality. you know, that could be the case.

But most of the time, the more logical assumption is that if the bomb threat even really occurred, which again is an assumption in and of itself, that it was probably somebody on the left who called it in. Obviously, the left has much more to gain from a bomb threat than the right. And so we know something about the left. First of all, we know the left are very willing to do these kinds of hoaxes. is they do it all the time. I mean, constantly. Every week it's another hoax from these people.

They, they, it's their favorite thing to do in the world is a hoax. And then they have everything to gain from it. You know, if a little bit of TikTok exposes a hospital and says, oh, they're mutilating kids, and then a bomb threat is called in, no one on the right gains anything from that. All of the advantage from that goes to the left. So if you don't know who did it, the first thing you should ask yourself,

if you're a smart person is, well, who would gain from this? Who would have motivation to do this? And it's almost always going to be the left. But you have to assume that's not. You have to assume that the bomb that really happened and that it was a conservative. Then finally, you have to also assume or just flat out claim that lives of TikTok somehow had a responsibility to not report on these things. due to the theoretical possibility that someone might call in a bomb threat as a result.

That's what the media is implying here. It's not like Chaya Reichick is lying about these cases. These are schools that have pornographic material in the classroom. That is true. These are hospitals that are mutilating and butchering kids. That is true. The drag queens that are exposing themselves to kids, performing for kids.

All that is true. She's telling the world about it. She's reporting on it. But they're saying what? It's her duty to keep it to herself because of what might happen if she tells people? because what she's talking about is so horrific and the behavior of these people is so evil that if you tell people about it, it might provoke this kind of response.

Well, you notice how they never apply that logic the other way. Like they never apply, they never apply this logic to themselves, certainly. In fact, it stands to reason that printing an article blaming Chaya for bomb threats will lead to threats against her. It almost certainly will happen. Is that, so the guy who wrote this article is that his fault when those threats come in? Every time the media runs a negative article about me, there's a chance that I will get threats, and I oftentimes do. That's, is that their fault?

What happens if Donald Trump is eventually assassinated? Right? That's certainly not outside the realm of possibility. That's a very plausible possibility. Will the media take the blame because of its incestant, insensitive? excessive negative coverage of Donald Trump? Of course they won't. So the whole thing is pretty much on every level that you inspect this, you find that it is a, that it's just one false narrative after another. All right, TMZ headline comedian Shane Gillis, comedian Shane Gillis is racial ethnic slurs resurfacing before SNL hosting gig. article says comedian Shane Gillis is back on the microscope with S&L announcing he's hosting.

It reminds some people of the racial epithets that he used in his podcasting days. Shane's known for his edgy stand-up comedy. He's very popular on YouTube and Netflix. And while he hasn't shied away from his past controversial humor, it's jarring to hear him dropping slurs in the middle of anecdotal jokes. Lauren Michaels and S&L hired Shane in 2019 but fired him before he ever appeared on the show due to backlash over anti-Asian jokes he made on a different podcast. The offensive content here comes from a podcast called A Fair One, and Shane delivers some controversial jokes, or at least the language was controversial, as he unloads the N-word, the homophobic F-word, and a particular Jewish slur.

Okay, so this is a story. The comedian Shane Gillis is hosting S&L, and now his offensive jokes, quote-unquote, have quote-unquote resurfaced, which to begin with, can we stop using the word resurfaced in this way? it drives me nuts when I hear resurfaced. These clips of Shane Gillis did not resurface. They didn't just happen to float back up to the surface accidentally. It's not like you were looking. The internet's a giant vat of water. And, oh, look, that's a clip of that podcast. It just bubbled up to the surface.

Who knew? Just floating on the surface like a leaf. Driftwood. No, resurfacing is what happens when you, you know, it sounds it's like if you dump a body in the river but you don't use enough cinder blocks and it resurfaces a week later and next thing you know the cops are knocking on your door and I know that sounds like a very specific and detailed example but don't worry about that my point is that these clips did not resurface the media very intentionally and specifically went back and found them and in this case it's not even so the clips of Shane Gill's that have gone viral this time because of his hosting the fact that he's going to host SNL in a couple weeks It's not the same clips of him making the quote-unquote anti-Asian jokes before that got him fire from S&L. These are new clips.

And so what the media did is they said, well, let's go find, let's go, let's go find some offensive things that he said in, you know, in the meantime. Since the last time we found the offensive jokes and they went looking for it and they found it. Because apparently horror of horrors, a comedian has a history of making jokes, if you can believe it. And what are these jokes? Well, TMZ helpfully included clips of some of these resurfaced jokes from one episode of his podcast a few years ago. And let's listen to that. The driver of the bus didn't show up for two hours. We were all sitting on the bus hot-h-h-h-buss for two hours. Was he a white guy? Nah, he was... Yeah, no, I'm kidding. Ethnic. Woo! Compound media, dude. We in the house, baby. White people. White people. White people. White people.

Why the fuck is CNN on in here? You guys gay now? We're on Fox, dude. This is right-wing white shit. Get this CNN Jew shit off in it, dude. I need some alt-right Fox News, dude. Yo, Rafe, I f*** with that, dude. Yeah, wait a minute.

Heavy with that. And they're like, this next song was because, it was a real sad song, and we wrote it because, 2016 was such a hard year for us because of the election and I was like you know these guys are so gay

and it was I turned around to this chick that I'm seeing and I was like yo I fucking love Donald Trump and she's young and like you know she's young so she's like what did you say? This is the first she's hearing of this? This is the first time I genuinely turned to her

and was like for real this these make me love like 90% of the time I'm like man I wish someone else was the president so there it is it's you know

quite traumatizing are we gonna pretend that like that wasn't funny first of all I mean that it sounded to me like funny people having a conversation and joking around so it sounded like to me TMZ says it's it's jarring

it's jarring that's jarring it's very jarring to hear that kind of language used. So jarring. Is it really? Is it actually jarring for you, TMZ? You've, really, you've never been in a conversation where people are joking around and using colorful language and being on PC and all that. You've never encountered that in your life. Really? You've never encountered that. So sometimes I'm still, I'm still not quite sure whether these people are pretending to be offended or whether they really are such absolute dorks and losers that they've never encountered this kind of thing in real life.

Maybe it's a combination of the two. I don't know. But I guess the good news, really the takeaway from this is kind of a positive, which is that when the supposedly offensive clips first resurfaced a few years ago and Gillis lost the S&L job, there was a fair amount of outrage in the public against Shane Gillis himself because of his jokes. just looking at the kind of reaction on social media, that sort of thing, it did appear that there were a fair number of people

who were actually pretending, at least pretending to be upset about it. But now it's completely flipped. I haven't seen anyone. I'm sure there are some people, but I've seen very, very few people who are offended by this, who are saying,

well, he shouldn't be allowed to host. That's inappropriate. Shouldn't use language. I can't believe. I've seen very little of that. almost everything that I've seen, almost all of the reaction is like, okay, guys, give it a rest. These are jokes. Okay, it's vulgar.

It's a comedian. He's making jokes on a podcast. We don't care. Like, just go away now. Move on. Doesn't matter. And that does seem to what the vast majority of people are saying to this. Because I think people are simply sick to death of this whole game.

They are tired of it. Cancel culture. I'm not going to say that it's, the cancel culture is dead, but I do think that it's dying. And it's dying from pure exhaustion, right? People are exhausted with it. And at this point, I think everyone, no, I've been, this is where I've been the whole time, but I think everyone kind of is at a point now where the moment you hear resurfaced or, oh, they said this 10 years ago, it's like, the moment you hear that, I don't even care what it is, Honestly. If someone is on the radar because they got some job or whatever and then the media comes along and says, well, listen to what they said 10 years ago, I automatically say, I don't care. I honestly don't care what they said. Whatever they said, it doesn't matter to me. The fact that you went and dug this thing up, I don't care what they said. Makes no difference. It is inadmissible. I think that's where we are now, right? Court of Public opinion, I think we're at a point now where the Court of Public opinion, this is inadmissible evidence to begin with.

When you play this game and you dig up the old things, inadmissible, we don't care. We're not going to do it. And then with something like this, I don't even know. Most of that, do you not understand the stuff he's saying about white people? It's actually more of self-deprecating the jokes that he's making. If anything, he's actually making fun of white people, like calling Fox News alt-right, that's not a...

If he's making fun of anyone there, he's actually making fun of... It's like self-deprecating and he's making fun of the right. Do you not? Well, they don't. They don't understand it, or at least they're pretending not. All right, let's get to it was Walsh Rohn. Keeping windshields clean is always a pain, especially in the winter. That's why I'm so grateful to have windshield wow.

Windshield Wow is an innovative windshield cleaning device that uses two magnetic cleaning paddles, one on the outside, one on the inside of your car, to clean both sides of your windshield, all from the outside. Being able to clean both the front and the inside of your window at the same time is a game changer, which I had one of these years ago. Seriously, all you've got to do is just push around the outside paddle, and the inside follows automatically leaving your windshield squeaky clean. We had a pretty big snowstorm here in Nashville,

and with all the dirt and salt piled up on the road, washer fluid, just couldn't get the job done. Luckily, I had a windshield wow in my trunk to save the day. That's what's awesome about windshield well. It's so easy to throw these in the back of your car, so you can always have a clean windshield. The windshield wow applies firm cleaning pressure. It's super thin to get into those tight dashboard areas.

So what are you waiting for? Go to windshieldwow.wow.com. Use promo code Walsh. check out for a special discount. That's windshieldwow.com and use code walsh. Mr. Reality says, Crumbly's parents knew their son was dangerous and disturbed and they left a gun around that he had access to.

It doesn't matter that he was charged as an adult. He was fully culpable, but they were also culpable for negligently making it much easier. Someone else agrees, yes, we should charge the parents too. We should also allow victims to sue them. As long as the parents of children who are shot by cops during the commission of a crime are allowed to sue the cops, then the parents of criminals under 18 should be both charged and liable for damages.

They created these monsters and should be punished for it. There's a lot of comments like this that I don't even necessarily disagree. I don't think these comments are actually responding to my argument because I'm not disagreeing with the culpability. I'm saying that Crumbly's parents, the school shooter, you know, their parents are culpable. definitely. That seems very obvious. They're culpable in the sense that they're at least partially to blame. And if they had done things differently as parents, if they had made different decisions, if they had put in like even just maybe 5% more effort as parents, probably this doesn't happen. So I don't, my position is that, yeah, I think that they're culpable and I think they're partially to blame. But no, I don't think they should go to jail for it. because none of this is, if this is all in a vacuum, then, sure, there's nothing to talk about it. It's happening in a vacuum, but it's not happening in a vacuum. It's happening in a courtroom where precedents are set.

And my concern is that the precedent your setting is something with no limiting principle, and I can easily see, you don't need some far-fetched, slippery slope, theoretical hypothesis of where this is, is going to end up. It's really connecting very simple dots here, which is that if their actions make them legally culpable, it means that they can be legally charged, then by the exact same logic, exact same logic, you could legally charge probably thousands of parents of violent criminals today. There should be thousands of parents that are being frog marched into a courtroom right now today.

and is that prudent? Does that make sense? To just start tossing thousands of parents in jail, along with their kids. All right. Responding to my ice spice segment, Sarah Senn says, you're smarter than everybody. We all give it by now. You're incredibly lame and an absolute prick,

but you're smarter than the Internet. Congrats. Well, I never said I was smarter than everyone. I am smarter than anyone who's a fan of Ice Spice or any music like that. Like, I am smarter than all of them, for sure. But, I mean, that's a low bar to get over. You know, that's like, it's like saying I'm smarter than every squirrel in that tree over there. It's just not, that's not saying much, but yes, I'm smarter than every Ice Spice fan.

Other comments says, 90 music was better, but definitely not less raunchy. NWA, two live crew, Lil Kim. come on. Yes, I think we covered this yesterday. Yeah, the music back then was plenty raunchy. It was also very often quite stupid. But I do think that it has certainly gotten much more explicit, even than it was in the 90s. When you have now female rappers, like making entire songs describing their bodily orifices,

okay that is and these are just these aren't like little stunts or jokes or something that are on an album so it's like these are hit songs that have hundreds of millions of streams on Spotify I think that that does represent an escalation from what you found in the 90s keeps getting more and more depraved finally blank drug says oh man you love counting crows in that terrible song mr jones should have kept that truth hidden from the public. It's like admitting you like to get punched in the scrotum by fire trolls. They're not that, but look, I'll fully admit. Yeah, I think Mr. Jones by Count of Crows is a great song. I have no shame. No shame in my game at all. I will admit that it's impossible for me to judge it. Like many, like a lot of the 90s music, I cannot judge it objectively. So I don't know. It could be an awful song. It could be absolutely terrible. But when you grow up in the 90s, you have that, you have that nostalgic attack. attachment to a lot of this stuff. But I'm at least, and everyone, every, you know, every millennial, you hear them going on about

the 90s all the time. It's super annoying. I understand to hear us talking about it. The 90s was not as great as we make it out to be, but this is just, this is, this is what we do. I can at least admit that this stuff was probably, like, we're judging it on a massive curve because, just because of the nostalgic attachment we have to it. It could all be terrible. I don't know. I can't. I'm usually pretty objective, but when it comes to that, I just can't. I can't tell you. I don't know. The DailyWire is looking to add an experienced senior social media manager to our marketing team. This unique position will provide leadership and guidance on various DailyWire social media pages.

If you have over four years of experience managing social media teams, apply right now. Don't miss out on this extraordinary opportunity to do brilliant work that matters every single day. Join us in shaping the future of conservative media as our senior social media manager. If you're interested in joining our team, visit dailywire.com slash careers. That's dailywire.com slash careers today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. There's been a long-running effort by the big tech companies in Silicon Valley to convince Americans that they need to strap expensive devices to their faces in the name of augmented

reality. The idea is that instead of just looking at the world and the people in the world, like a normal person, you can instead overlay information in real time over everything you see. Because who wants to look at the world, right? The world, who wants reality? Who wants the world and like the earth and, like, the earth and, like, the earth and all of the splendor of nature and the universe. Who wants any of that? We need, no, we need to spruce it up a little bit. So you can look at like sports scores while you're outside

on the beach. You can answer text messages without pulling out your phone. No matter where you go, you can have an app right in front of your face, floating in front of you. Now, most people spend 10 hours a day looking at their phones already, but big tech says we need to pump those numbers up. We need to make sure that we are using their products, literally, every waking moment of the day. Those very few hours of autonomy and independent thought and actual engagement with the physical world that most people get these days, even that has to be claimed by our Silicon Valley overlords. They see that as a problem. The fact that we still have any of that, the fact that we have two hours a day when we're not looking at screens, that's like

they're saying, we got to get those two hours. We can't let them have the two hours. They want it all. All of it. That's the idea. And inside the bowels of Silicon Valley, marketing departments, you can tell that they've never been totally sure about this pitch and how to go about it. They understand how unnatural all of this sounds. So they've always done their best to paper over kind of the nerd factor, the loser factor of needing to have this screen in your face at all times in order to make augmented reality seem cool. So 12 years ago, for example, Google unveiled its first big augmented reality product called the Google Glass. But the centerpiece of their demo was not some overweight guy secretly scrolling through the internet as he sat alone on his sofa. Instead, Google decided to portray Google Glass as the product of choice for skydivers and daredevils who, for some reason, want to broadcast extremely low-quality video of their jumps over the internet.

So here's a few snippets of the demo, which we can conclusively say 12 years later, is a textbook example of trying way too hard. Here it is, watch. That looks like the view down. It looks like a long way down. You can turn it sideways. Oh yeah, there's the ballpark. This is good. Stop here. Yeah, Moscow Center. I got a visual on you. You know, it's pretty exciting. Hopefully they landed.

And they're coming in. First one's coming in. All right. And, you know, there's only one good way down the side of a building. Have fun. It's pretty high up there if you haven't been up there before. Don't try this at home kids. These are trained professionals. All right, now we've got to get down there.

One unplug me. All right, are they going? Oh, wait, wait, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. No, no, no, we're on the third. Okay. I was like, you can picture of the marketing meeting that led to this. They knew they had a weird kind of nerdy product.

They knew that nobody wanted to wear this outside. It's an aesthetic nightmare. So they decided to pay some people to jump out of an airplane while they're wearing Google Glass, and then they repel down the building like they're in a Mission Impossible movie, and they race around with it on bikes, and they do everything possible to make you forget about the actual product, which does precisely one thing during this whole demonstration. It streams an extremely blown out, low-quality video over the internet. It does what a $20 webcam would do, basically.

Needless to say, Google Glass was a failure. Google shut down the entire product line shortly afterwards. But big tech was not deterred. A company called Oculus started releasing their own headsets before they were bought by META. And these headsets were not designed simply for augmented reality, but also for virtual reality. This means that you put VR goggles on your face. They completely then replace your normal vision. They don't simply complement what you see in the real world, although they're all capable of doing that as well.

In many cases, these VR goggles can completely replace the physical world that you're looking at. Now, to market these VR headsets, META went exactly the opposite direction of VARGELA. Google. Instead of trying to desperately appear cool, META decided to be as aggressively weird and creepy as they could possibly be. It was a bold marketing strategy, we must say. To give you an example of what it looked like, here's how META announced

one of their exciting new VR software updates a little over a year ago. The point of this new update was to announce that within the metaverse, which is the company's VR universe, people will soon be able to see each other with legs. So pretty soon they'll have legs. That's the big update.

They'll no longer be floating heads with no limbs. And to announce this breakthrough, VR Mark Zuckerberg struts out with his VR legs while his adoring audience, still legless, applauds enthusiastically, and tosses confetti in the air. It's like a real-life black mirror episode. Here it is, watch. There's one more feature coming soon that's probably the most requested feature on our roadmap. Legs. Legs. I know you have been waiting for this. I think everyone has been waiting for this. But seriously, the legs are hard.

which is why other virtual reality systems don't have them either. And the perceptual science behind this is actually quite interesting. And we discovered early on... So you see, the little people are overjoyed that the founder of their VR world has legs now. Maybe one day they too will have VR legs. Now, the Metaverse, needless to say, was an unconditional failure. When it was announced,

City valued the Metaverse at $13 trillion. That's how much value they said it could bring to the world. 13 trillion. But after it launched, nobody used it. The most popular platform in the Metaverse had just 38 active users every day. Horizon Worlds, which was supposedly the killer app for the Metaverse, reportedly made just $470. That's $470 and zero cents total. Like, you can make more money if you filmed yourself lighting random objects on fire and uploaded it to YouTube.

And Meta spent like $40 billion on this. In fact, they could have lit the $40 billion on fire. put that on YouTube, and they would have made a lot more than $470 back and ad dollars. Now, as I say this, I know there are some people who, you know, say that, well, these are just early iterations of a technology that eventually is going to become ubiquitous. That's certainly what Silicon Valley things. They're not stopping with these products. They're continuing to pour money into it.

And that's why Apple has just released something called the Apple Vision Pro. The Vision Pro is essentially a slightly more advanced version of META's VR headsets. So it's a giant hunk of metal and plastic that you put on your face. It tracks your hands. It allows you to interact with virtual apps. So you may have seen videos of people, influencers, using this thing in public, and here's what that looks like. Okay, good.

So if you want to look like a schizophrenic on the subway, you wear one of those, as if there aren't enough schizophrenics on the subway already. Watching these clips, it's not hard to imagine that very soon we'll be reading reports about Apple Vision Pro is being ripped off of people's faces while they're type away at the invisible keyboard in the sky. These things cost $3,500, by the way. It's a $3,500 piece of equipment you are wearing on your face on the subway, and you're doing it in a way where you have reduced peripheral vision

and much less situational awareness. It's hard to imagine a dumber idea than wearing one of these things outside in an urban environment. But people are doing it anyway because they have no regard for their personal safety. That's how committed they are to the future of, spatial computing and augmented reality. But of course, there's something deeply strange about it, which is why everyone's filming these clips. Covering your face in public is not normal.

No matter how many times they told us to wear masks during COVID, it never became normal. Seeing people's faces is the main way you understand them and recognize them and interact with them. People will just never get used to this because it flies in the face of just our basic human psychology. And that certainly explains the reaction to one popular YouTube personality who shows

off the Vision Pro recently in New York City, and he put the video up and it's basically just walking around. People are looking at him like he's a freak because, well, he looked incredibly stupid, walking around with a giant clunky nerd goggles on his face. This is what you get for spending $3,500 to attach a big tech gadget directly to your face. You get the confused stares of strangers. That's assuming they don't just take the thing off your face and run away and pawn it somewhere, which is what's going to end up happening. Now, if it sounds like I'm mocking the idea that this technology will ever catch on, or that I'm saying that the whole project is doomed to fail and big tech will have to eventually give up. That's not what I'm saying. In fact, I think the opposite

outcome is more likely. Silicon Valley will continue to pump trillions of dollars into this technology. And they'll make it smaller and more affordable. They'll do everything they can to make augmented reality the next big thing that strips away whatever is left of our privacy and autonomy as human beings. Smart phones, smartwatches, other smart devices. They were the first major step. And now people don't leave their computers behind anywhere. Everywhere they go, they're tracked. Their purchases are tracked. Their location is tracked. Their social media use is tracked. And when the time comes that everybody's wearing VR and augmented reality headsets, then everything they see in real life will be tracked too. And that's that's one absolute inevitability here. Like you wear one of these things.

and you are giving big tech immediate access to everything you do, everywhere you go, and everything you see. Which means, and that's why, like, why do you, that's the story here. That they've spent, big tech spent a lot of money on this, billions and billions. It hasn't worked yet. They keep on trying. For a decade now they've been trying.

Why are they so desperate to make this work? Because of the absolute power and control it gives them over the people who buy this stuff. It means that, you are destroying not only your own privacy, but also the privacy of everybody that you look at and interact with, because they will automatically be on camera through your nerd goggles. But worse than all that, worse than the final death of whatever is left of our privacy, worse is the fact that the nerd goggles set up a filter between you and the real world. You are allowing Apple to provide the literal lens by which you see and access the world.

around you. We already have a major problem of big tech through its algorithms, determining in large part how we perceive the outside world and what we know about the outside world, so that already they are already able to shape that through their algorithms. But the nerd goggles will be the final step. They'll put the last nail on the coffin of our independent perception of the world. Should that happen, it'll be another giant, probably irreversible step towards a dehumanizing and basically unlivable dystopia. People become more distant, disconnected, more tech dependent than they already are, therefore more depressed and anxious and joyless than they already are. There will be nowhere anyone can hide from the all-seeing eye of Silicon Valley oligarchs. and that's why they're so obsessed

with getting this technology off the ground and that's why they've spent billions and billions and billions of dollars to make their dark dystopian dream a reality and they'll spend billions more until it happens and that's why the Applevision Pro and all of the devices that want to block out your surroundings and make you exist in some artificial big tech constructed world are today canceled

that'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching, thanks for listening, talk to tomorrow. Godspeed.