The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1413 - Trump Called Racist For Standing Up To Obnoxious, Hostile Black Journalists

Episode Date: August 1, 2024

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, activists in one crime-ridden city are rallying together to blame local businesses for the crime problem. This is just the latest example of leftists refusing to be honest about why the crime epidemic is happening, and who exactly is responsible for it. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is being accused of racism after his contentious back and forth with a group of hostile black journalists. Needless to say, the racism claims are totally bogus. Plus, Joe Rogan predicts a Kamala Harris victory. And the Army comes up with another brilliant scheme to deal with its recruitment crisis; instead, they just made it worse.   Ep.1413   - - -   DailyWire+:   Get my new candle for 30% off! Available now at https://thecandleclub.com/collections/matt-walsh   Get tickets to Backstage LIVE at the Ryman, August 14! https://bit.ly/46igytS   SWEET BABY GANG IS BACK. Buy the shirt: https://bit.ly/3zfUbZE   - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Responsible Man - Get 30% off, plus additional savings, at http://www.Responsibleman.com   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 the Matt Wall Show, activists in one crime-ridden city are rallying together to blame local businesses for the crime problem. This is just the latest example of leftists refusing to be honest about why the crime epidemic is happening and who exactly is responsible for it. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is being accused of racism after his contentious back and forth with a group of hostile black journalists. Needless to say, the racism claims are totally bogus. Plus, Joe Rogan predicts a Kamala Harris victory. And the Army comes up with another brilliant scheme to deal with its recruitment crisis. Instead, they just made it worse, as always. Talk about all that and more today on the Matt Walls show. The news surrounding the 2024 election is moving fast.

That's why we give our DailyWire Plus members unlimited access to our daily uncensored, ad-free shows, live breaking news, alerts, and investigative journalism the left wants buried. Join the fight now at dailywire.com slash subscribe. Now, in these challenging times, our nation needs strong, responsible men more than ever. That's why responsible man created the Emerson multivitamin for men of honor and take. their duties seriously. With 33 key ingredients, this American-made powerhouse supports your immune system, sharpens your mind, and keeps your heart and muscles strong. It's the daily discipline that separates the men from the boys. Right now, you can get your first order of Emerson

multivitamins for just $27.99. That's over 30% off. Visit responsibleman.com and fuel your commitment to God, family, and country. That's responsible man.com. Be the man America needs. One of the most important principles in life is the idea of cause and effect. Children start mastering the concept at around 18 months. A toddler might drop a block on his foot. Very quickly realized that the block caused him to feel pain. He won't assume that the TV across the room had somehow hurt him. He won't blame the neighborhood cat for it.

And then he'll know the block is what hurt him. And in the future, as a result of this deduction, the toddler might think twice about dropping a block on his foot. that's cause and effect. But in politics, for various reasons, cause and effect can be difficult for some people to figure out. Sometimes it's because life is complicated. Sometimes it's because of all the propaganda that people are subjected to. And sometimes it's because people just aren't that bright, frankly. That would explain the scene that took place the other day in Brooklyn where there was a massive protest against the shelters for illegal aliens that have popped up all over the city.

We might have seen that footage on social media. The protesters said that they were shocked by all the violence and mayhem that these migrants have brought to their community, apparently oblivious to the fact that they voted for exactly this outcome. Of course, there are similar scenes playing out all over the country. But even when you take into account all these factors, the propaganda, partisan politics, etc., it's still hard to come to terms with what's happening right now in Jackson, Mississippi. Politicians and black activists in Jackson have just made it clear that they have no understanding of causation whatsoever. This basic concept completely alludes them. It's not simply that they're blinded by politics. Instead, it appears that like infants, these activists do not comprehend that certain actions

naturally lead to certain results. It's worth exploring what's happening in Jackson in some detail because it has implications for the whole country, including the presidential race. So here's the background. There's a Texaco gas station in Jackson that's located on a street called Medgar-Evers Boulevard. And recently, there's been a lot of crime near the gas station, including several homicides and shootings this year. In response to this crisis, the solution that politicians and activists have come up with is not to blame the criminals. It's not to hire more

police officers, increased patrols. Instead, their response has been to blame the Texaco gas station. And now these politicians, including a councilman named Kenneth Stokes, are calling for the gas station to be shut down. In fact, Stokes has said he'll bring a vote of no confidence against the city's law department for refusing to have the gas station declared a public nuisance. Because the gas station is what's responsible for all the crime happening around the gas station. Watch. Jackson Councilman Kenneth Stokes continues to press the case for a crackdown on a West Jackson gas station. In the other city, in this state and country, where you have a nuisance will be in court,

filing legal paperwork to shut these kind of places down. If you're providing a business that you see is detrimental to the community that you're serving and that your business is causing people to lose their lives, then you should have the integrity of a human being for yourself to say, we need to shut this down. So just to reiterate there, what we just heard at the end of that clip, But if you're providing a business that you see as detrimental to the community and that your business is causing people to lose their lives, then you should have the integrity of a human being to say, you need to shut this down. In other words, the Texaco gas station is causing people to shoot each other.

The gas station, a collection of snacks and pumps distributing gasoline, is causing people to lose their lives. Therefore, the local councilman is holding rallies to get this place shut down. Now, when I first saw this story, I had to check if there was, you know, maybe something I'm missing. Because I figured that this can't be the full story. Is the Texco gas station executing its customers when they walk inside? I mean, is that why we're blaming the gas station for what's happening? Do they have guards posted at the door who shoot you in the head as soon as you enter the place? If so, I'll say, I totally agree that they need to shut the place down.

I mean, I am completely against that business practice. the practice of killing your customer. If I went to the gas station and it tried to murder me, I'd be frankly pretty upset. That's fodder for like a bad Yelp review, no doubt. I mean, no more than two stars on that one. But after looking into it, I can conclusively say that these are crimes being committed

by community members at and also against the gas station. So the real problem in Jackson, Mississippi, is that so many people in the community are violent criminals, which means that if you get rid of the gas station, by the way, those violent criminals are still going to be there. And they're still going to be violent and they're still going to be criminals. But the rush to avoid blame and accountability is so extreme that now they are robbing businesses and then turning around to the businesses and blaming the businesses for being robbed. And we've seen this kind of thing a few other times. And for example, the politicians in Minnesota and other major cities who have blamed car manufacturers for making their cars,

too easy to steal. And that's really bad, but this is a whole other level of delusion that we're seeing now in Jackson. Now, when I see a situation like this, I can't help but compare the situation in Jackson to what I've experienced in my own life. So before we moved to Nashville four years ago, we lived in a small blue-collar town in Pennsylvania. We had a local gas station that doubled as the town's supermarket. And people used to go to the gas station.

they would park their cars outside, leave the keys in the car with the car running and the doors unlocked and the windows down, and they would just go shop and they'd stroll back out 50 minutes later with a bag of groceries and a coffee, and their car would still be there. So how is it that a gas station in one town is so safe that you can leave your keys in an unlocked car while in another town you can't fill up your tank without getting shot? And it's not just about gas stations, obviously. The violent crime rate all across Jackson, not just at the gas station, is extremely high. Jackson is more dangerous than 97% of all cities in America.

It is among the least safe places you can live. I mean, there are cities in third world countries. Safer than Jackson, a lot safer. By comparison, and for the record in the town where I lived, The violent crime rate was less than half of the national average. Property crimes were about a third of the national average. So it was very safe. So again, the question, why is one so safe and the other isn't?

I mean, forget about where I lived. Jackson is in the 97 percentile for crime, so you could compare it to almost any town, and the comparison will be unfavorable for Jackson. Why is that? Can any politician in Jackson answer that question? Well, here's where we get to what for some people is the uncomfortable part of this conversation. Because we all know where the answer starts, except we aren't supposed to say it out loud. Every single person listening right now is thinking the same thing, but you're not supposed to say it.

But I will say it. The population of Jackson is 80% black. By the way, where I used to live, it was 2% black. Now, you might know nothing about Jackson at all, but just based on the crime stats, you already made assumptions about the racial demographics, and your assumptions were right. You heard that it's a place where violent crime is overwhelming. You make an assumption that it must be a heavily black community. And you're right.

Indeed, if you look at any town in America and see that it has a predominantly black population, you can assume that the crime rate is probably pretty high, and you will almost always be correct. And we all know that. We all know it. But we're not supposed to say it. This is one of the many things that we all, every single person watch,

including the people that are going to clip this and put it on Twitter and say, oh, Matt Walsh is racist. All of them know that it's true also, but you're not supposed to say it. So it's one of the many truths in America that we've all just like agreed to not say out loud. which is very unfortunate because it prevents us from asking the next question. Once we've admitted what we know is true,

predominantly black community, probably going to have high crime. The next question is, why is that the case? Why is crime so prevalent in black communities? Now, there isn't one single answer to that question, but there is one major overwhelmingly significant answer that we must begin with. the fatherless rate in the black population in Jackson, just as the cities all across the country, is over 80%. Now, you've heard stats like that before, especially on this show, but, you know, you hear it so often that it might not really sink in.

Is you hear 80% fatherless? Oh, yeah, we've heard that. But really think about that. I mean, really think about it. Over 80%. I mean, we are rapidly approaching a point where married parents and intact families simply just don't exist in Jackson or cities like it at all. In fact, the fatherless problem is so pervasive in Jackson and other cities in that state, but the out-of-wedlock birth rate in all of Mississippi is now over 50 percent. In the entire state, a child of Mississippi is more likely to be born to an unmarried mother than to a married one. Now, it is not possible to have a functioning society with statistics like that. There has never been in the history of the world a functioning society with statistics like that, ever. It's impossible. It is a guaranteed recipe for crime, violence, dysfunction, and chaos every time.

So there is no solution to the problems facing black people that doesn't begin with addressing this issue. It is not possible to have a productive and worthwhile conversation about the plight of the black community in this country if that conversation does not revolve around the fact that the black community, generally speaking, has given up on the nuclear family. Given up on it. To the extent that, again, in a lot of these communities, the nuclear family basically does not exist anymore. Now, politicians, like the one currently running for president on the Democratic ticket, will never talk about this, though. as much as they claim to be voices for that community, for Democrats, any criticism or uncomfortable observation of black communities, even if it's well-intentioned, even if it's completely reasonable,

even if it's something we all know, even if it's absolutely necessary in order to solve any of the problems, still talking about any of that is tantamount to donning a white hood and setting a cross on fire outside of somebody's lawn. The inevitable result is that black communities will, continue to stagnate and devolve into more needless violence. And that's obviously a very bad outcome that will ruin millions of lives. But really, the problem's even worse than that, because the attitude is so cancerous that it's now destroying our national political discourse,

too. And if you doubt that, take a look at what happened yesterday at the National Association of Black Journalists in Chicago, because yes, apparently we have segregated associations for Black journalists, just like Kamala's campaign has racially segregated Zoom calls. But Donald Trump showed up, knowing that it would be hostile territory, much to his credit. He did not duck the event like Kamala. Kamala, who still hasn't answered a single serious question from a single journalist since becoming her party's presumptive nominee. She could have gone to this event and she would have gotten nothing but the easiest softball

questions in the world. And she didn't even do that because she's afraid of even the softball questions. Meanwhile, Trump sits down for what he thought was going to be an hour, and knowing that they're just going to roast him, and he's sitting there live on TV in front of a crowd. And then as soon as the event began, the ABC journalist did not ask Trump a policy question. She didn't talk about inflation or interest rates or the price of housing or any issue that actually matters to a single American. She also didn't talk about how, oh, hey, by the way, you got shot two weeks ago. How are you doing? Instead, she started barking about how Donald Trump is racist because he said mean things about some people who happen to be black.

Watch. You have used words like animal and rabbit to describe black district attorneys. You've attacked black journalists, calling them a loser, saying the questions that they ask are, quote, stupid and racist. You've had dinner with a white supremacist at your Mar-a-Lago resort. So my question, sir, now that you are asking black supporters to vote for you, why should black voters trust you after you have used language like that? Well, first of all, I don't think I've ever been asked a question. So in such a horrible manner, the first question.

You don't even say, hello, how are you? Are you with ABC? Because I think they're a fake news network. terrible that one. And I think it's disgraceful that I came here in good spirit. I love the black population of this country. I've done so much for the black population of this country. Now, what's what's going on here is pretty clear. This woman knows that Donald Trump has called white people a lot of insulting names. Everyone's well aware of what Trump has said about Rosie O'Donnell and Jed Bush and Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

and Ron DeSantis and John Bolton, dozens and dozens of other people who happen to be white. There's not a single person on the planet who thinks that Donald Trump only uses nasty names to refer to black people. What's happening here pretty explicitly is that the moderator is saying that Trump is racist

because he treats black people the same way he treats white people. He insults them the same way he insults everyone else who crosses him. That's his approach. If you come after him, if you come after him, He's going to hit back hard and he's going to use whatever language he wants to use.

And he doesn't care. Man, woman, black, white, doesn't matter. Now, say what you want about that approach. But if equality is what you're looking for, then that's as equal as it gets. But, you know, they can't tolerate that. So these journalists are demanding special status for black people. That journalist there wants to completely show. shut down any criticism of black DAs, black politicians, black journalists.

This is the same mindset that gets gas stations blamed for shootings in black neighborhoods. Okay, because we're never, because you can never turn the mirror around to look at yourself. It is the pathological avoidance of criticism and accountability. And now, of course, it's being used to derail debate during a presidential election. This is not some fringe ABC reporter I'm talking about. This is a mainstream view now on the left. Last night, there was this post on Twitter, which is very viral, millions of views, tens of thousands of likes and supportive comments. A lot of commentary like this on social media and in corporate media sends Trump's interrogation by the black journalists there.

This is just one example, but a lot of stuff like this, quote, if you're black and watched how Trump talked to those black journalists and women and you still want to vote for him, please keep your black ass away from me. Thanks. In other words, he's saying very clearly that Trump should have treated that black journalist differently from any other journalists. Even though she was being as hostile and unprofessional and rude and disrespectful as she possibly could have been, even though she's approaching him in a tone of voice and with a line of questioning, she would never, ever in a million years, direct at Kamala Harris or any Democrat. We all know that. Trump should have pretended otherwise, apparently, because she's black. And it's not possible for black people to do anything wrong whatsoever, I guess.

That's what a critical mass of people on the left now believe. It's also apparently the view of Washington Post columnist Karen Ataya, in response to the event, she tweeted, quote, I'm so angry right now. This was a colossal mistake. That's how you know, by the way, that Donald Trump completely neutralized their attacks. Because if it had gone badly for Trump, they'd be glad that he was invited. but it went well for Trump because instead of falling for the trap, he called it out. In fact, what he did is he treated black people the same way he'd treat anyone else. He was honest.

He wasn't tiptoeing around or walking on eggshells. He's sitting there comfortably. The whole thing, you know, it's worth watching. If you haven't watched the whole 30-minute, I can't call it an interview against an interrogation. But it's worth watching the whole thing. And I think it makes Trump look great because starting with just how comfortable and normal he is. He's just sitting there like, okay, yeah, bring it on.

And I'm going to talk to you the same way I talk to anybody else. You know, you're not special. You're a person like anyone else. Yes, I'm talking. These are black, quote unquote, journalists that are interrogating me. It's mostly black people in the audience. Okay, who cares? I wouldn't care if they were white.

It doesn't matter. And this is what we need now. We've needed it for a long time. A radical, straightforward honesty. an honesty that is totally unconcerned with coloring inside the PC lines. When people aren't allowed to say the truth, they're very quickly start believing in absurdities, like the idea that gas stations cause crime. Only a party that wants more crime and more violence would push a lie as absurd as that.

And only a party that wants to push even more deception and propaganda, even when reality is staring all of us in the face, would ever dream of installing a candidate as obviously fraudulent as Kamala Harris. Now let's get to our five headlines. You know, summers here and seasonal businesses are hiring for everything from camp counselors to lifeguards. Whoever you're looking to hire this summer, ZipRecruiter can help. Right now, you get to a ZipRecruiter for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh. ZipRecruiter finds qualified candidates fast. It doesn't just, you know, cast a wide net and hope for the best.

ZipRecruiter's cutting-edge technology actively seeks candidates with the skills and experience that you need. And once you've reviewed your list of qualified candidates, you can invite your top choices to apply. This streamlined process encourages them to apply sooner, allowing you to fill that role faster, and allows you to take a proactive approach to going out and finding those candidates. Lots of seasonal businesses are hiring right now, so you can get into the action, gear up for the summer with ZipRecruiter's high-speed hiring tools. You can see why four to the five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day. To do that, you've got to go to this exclusive web address right now to try ZipRecruiter for free.

ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh. Again, that's zipRecruiter.com slash Walsh. ZipRecruiter, the smartest. Okay, staying for a moment on this Trump interview or rather waterboarding session with the black journalists. Of course, the main thing everyone's talking about today is the moment when Trump has a few words about Kamala's racial self-identification. Let's watch that. I've known her a long time indirectly, not directly, very much. And she was always of Indian heritage, and she was only promoting Indian heritage. I didn't know she was black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn black and now she wants to be known as black.

So I don't know, is she Indian or is she black? She has always identified as a black woman. I respect either one. I respect either one, but she obviously doesn't because she was Indian all the way and then all of a sudden she made a turn and she went, she became a black person. Just to be clear, sir. Do you believe that she is a... I think somebody should look into that too when you ask a continue in a very hostile, nasty town.

So this is, and of course they're making, trying to make a lot of hay out of this, I could put it mildly this moment. Everyone in the building there and everyone in general knows exactly what Trump was referring to. The ABC journalist knows what he's referring to, although she pretended not to. Early in her political career in San Francisco, Kamala Harris pushed her identity as an Asian American. That's how she presented herself. And she did that for self-serving reasons. San Francisco had more Asian voters than black voters. And that's why when she first ran for DA, the press mentioned in, you know, all the articles and stuff that she'd be the first Asian DA of the city.

But for the most part, they didn't mention that she'd be the first black DA anywhere in their reporting. So early in her career, this is, you know, she was Asian. Nobody anymore, like, when's the last time you heard anyone refer to Kamala Harris as Asian? When's the last time you heard her refer to herself that way? And many articles were written about, you know, at the time about this. And it's what Kamala was emphasizing at the time. And she continued to emphasize her identity as an Asian American for several more years. And that's why in 2016, when she was elected to the Senate, the AP ran this headline,

quote, California's Kamala Harris becomes the first Indian American U.S. senator. Indian American. Then a couple of years ago, CNN ended a whole biography segment on. on Kamal Harris, complete with an Indian narrator, that didn't talk about her being a black woman at all. Let's watch that. My mother, who raised me and my sister, was a proud woman.

She was a brown woman. She was a woman with a heavy accent. And her mother, Shamla Gopalan, was also the biggest influence in Kamla Harris's life. The answer is absolutely asked you. After the big announcement, Harris' sister wrote in a Twitter post, You can't know who Kamala Harris is

without knowing who our mother was. In 1958, a precocious 19-year-old Indian, Copeland traveled thousands of miles from her home and family to pursue a doctorate in nutrition and endocrinology in America. She soon became an active civil rights crusader while studying at UC Berkeley. But once she went there, she almost felt free.

And she took part in politics. She took in, she used to bring a whole series of literature, leftist literature from God's purpose. You know, he was a great philosopher. In her book, Harris says, there is no title or honor on earth, I'll treasure more than to say, I am Shamla Gopalan Harris's daughter.

Harris's visits to India with her mother kept her connected to her roots. Okay, so, so she was, She had Indian mother, Jamaican father. She was raised by her Indian mother. And that's how she identified. And then not too long ago, Kamala's identity, her self-identification, the parts of herself that she, let's say, emphasizes change very quickly.

By 2020, the AP was running headlines like this one, quote, Biden picks Kamala Harris as running mate, first black woman. Okay. And then that's when the emphasis changed. These are all factual pieces of information about how Kamala has presented herself over the years through the media. She's changed the way that she marketed herself in order to appeal to different segments of the electorate and to win political offices office in different contexts. And that's what Donald Trump was pointing out.

It just happens to be true. It doesn't mean that he's committing some kind of sloth. against black people or sending coded messages to white supremacists, you know, dog whistles. It means that he's observing something, which by the way, the dog whistle thing, nothing gets sidetracked, but anytime Trump is accused of sending a dog whistle, and we're hearing that now with this as a racist talk, like, he's the least dog whistling politician that probably has ever existed. He doesn't do dog whistles. He'll just say what he thinks. So, For better or worse, he's just got whatever's on his mind, he's just going to say it.

There's not any subliminal messaging, nothing like that. It's just, here's what I think. Here's what I'm thinking right now. And here it is. And that's what he did there. And it's just, it is just a fact about her. And that's it. That's the whole point.

Right. Now, do I think that this point about Kamala is something that Republicans need to run on? Do I think that it should be a central focus of Trump's campaign? No, of course not. Not because it's offensive, but just because it's not that important. People aren't going to vote one way or another based on it. And Trump didn't make it out to be super important. It just, they had a wide-ranging conversation that was all just them attacking him from different angles. But it was a long conversation, and this is one of the things that was said and of course, now it's portrayed as though this was, you know, Trump was like obsessing

over it and this is what he was focused on. No, it was about, it was less than 60 seconds of time was spent on that topic. It's the media that of everything that was said and talked about. They are plucking that out and saying, this is the thing, this is all that matters. So it wasn't like it was Trump's hyperfocus. And again, it shouldn't be. It wasn't. It shouldn't be. This is not. There are many things to point out about Kamala Harris. Nothing wrong with pointing this out. It's not the most important thing. There are a lot of things about her that are much more important. But this is the other game the media plays where, you know, and to a lesser extent and to a smaller degree, I have experienced this many times myself. where, you know, I talk about a lot, do a show, I'll talk about a lot of different things, and maybe I'll spend 30 seconds on a particular top, you know, even could be like a side comment, a sidebar, just, you know, 30 seconds out of an hour.

I'll say 30 seconds I'll spend on one thing. And then, you know, and then it gets picked by media matters, and then all the left blogs and everything pull it from there, the YouTubers. And then it's, well, why is Matt Walls obsessing over this? Why does that matter? Well, I'm not obsessing. I spend 30 seconds on it. You're obsessing over it.

I just mentioned it. So, again, that's a smaller, so I experienced that to a smaller degree. This is what they do to Trump all the time. And they have kind of an easy time with Trump because of his style of speaking. It's very extemporaneous. It's not scripted. He just says what's on his mind. and this is what people love about them.

But the media, they like it for different reasons because then they can kind of like comb through it. And if Trump is talking for an hour, he'll talk about, in that hour, he'll talk about like 80 different topics. And so they just comb through it. And let's find the one topic of the 80 that we want to pretend was the focus of everything he said. All right, let's move on to this. Here's a moment with Joe Rogan. that's getting a lot of media attention. He interviewed Michael Malice this week,

and during that conversation, he made a political prediction. Let's listen to that. She's going to win. No, she's not. She can win. She absolutely can win. I do not think she's going to win

because the more she talks, like in 2020, how bad do you have to be that you can't even make Iowa? She couldn't even compete with the mayor of South Bend. I feel like we are in this very bizarre time where people are giving in to the bull in a way that I'd never suspected people would before. And this is one, they just want no Trump, no matter what, and they're willing to gaslight themselves.

Like, if you're a person who's on the fence, you're like, maybe Donald Trump's not a bad guy. And then you Google them, and then you start reading some of these, like, pieces that they've written about them. It'll change your perspective. You really think she's going to win? I'm saying it because she could.

I'm not saying it because I think she's going to, and I'm not saying because I want her to. I'm just being honest. I could see you winning. So he's not wrong. I mean, I don't know that I'm not going to say, I don't know that Harris is going. I'm not going to predict that Kamala's going to win.

I'm not going to predict one way or another. I've already said I'm bowing out of the political prediction game. Part of me wants to predict that she'll win because then it all but guarantees that she won't because whatever electoral prediction I make, the opposite is destined to happen. But I'm not going to predict because I honestly don't know. I mean, nobody knows.

And it's so up in the air at this point that you could probably make a believable case that Trump will not only win, but win handily, win very convincingly, win the way that he needs to win, which is to win so overwhelmingly that they can't cheat their way out of it. And you could make that case.

But you could also probably make a credible case the other way, that there's more of a landslide in the other direction. Probably there won't be a landslide either way, but to me the thing is so wide open that no outcome will surprise me at this point. And Harris does have a few major advantages. There's the obvious and very, very significant one that she has all the institutions on her side,

starting with the media. So Trump is not just running against Kamala Harris. He's running against Kamala Harris and the entire media, big tech corporate apparatus. Together they have invented this new version of Kamala, Kamala, the political sensation, Kamala, the new Obama. And the advantage that she has on top of that is that she only has to maintain that facade for three months.

Because that's always the question. They've taken this person so unpopular for so long. Someone who's just not that charismatic, not that impressive, has never been seen that way. And overnight, they've turned her into this other thing that bears no resemblance to who she really is. the question has always been, well, how long can they keep that up? And there's just no, how do you, you can't keep this up forever. She does have to, like, at some point answer some questions. She's going to, you know, there's going to be a debate, at least one debate.

I'm going to assume. And she's, there's a, she's in the honeymoon period now. This is a major honeymoon period. Can't last forever. And it can't. but the advantage that she has is that it only has three months, is it? Now, three months is kind of an eternity in the internet age, but it is only three months. And then Trump, on the other hand, has been campaigning for a year.

He's been intensely scrutinized politically for a decade. Kamala only has three months, and there will be no scrutiny at all during that time. So those are big advantages. But Trump's appeal and brand and base is powerful enough to overcome it. And I think he needs to do more stuff like what he just did yesterday, sitting down with the black journalists. I think he needs to do more of that kind of thing. Because, first of all, I think it showcases him at his best.

It also brings the conversation back to him. Things have really been flipped on their head here in so many ways after this coup by the Democrats. And you've got to start thinking differently about strategy in a lot of ways. And this is one of those ways where back when Trump was running against Biden, I think the kind of conventional wisdom that I also subscribe to was, well, if you're running against Biden, the best thing Trump could do is make sure that the election is not about him. So just let it focus on Biden and what a failure he is and the fact that he sees. denial and all the rest of it, let that be the focus. And if you're Trump, you don't have to do much.

Just let them, let everyone, the more they focus on Biden and not you, the better it is. I think now that has changed, where the more they focus on Kamala, the worst it is for Trump. So a month and a half, two months ago, I would have said, no, no, you don't want to Trump, you don't want a news cycle. focused around you. Let it be around Biden. But now I think it's different. I think you grab the new cycle, you grab the attention,

you grab the excitement, you grab it all back to yourself, and this is how you do it. And you do it with things that the media, like they know this too. They're not as stupid as they come across. They know that at this point it works to Trump's advantage to focus on him.

They'd rather just focus on Kamala and keep building up this myth, this ridiculous myth around her, this rebuilding her into this person that doesn't really exist, they'd rather keep doing that. But when Trump is sitting there sparring with black female journalists, they just can't help themselves. They can't help them. So they're going to give Trump this news cycle because they can't help themselves, because it makes them so angry.

And that brings me to another point that I've been thinking about. because I've also noted a change in the way that the left is going after Trump up until, like yesterday with this most recent news cycle. But for the several weeks before that, there was a change. Because for years, the left's favorite move against Republican politicians was to turn them into punchlines. Right? They did it with Bush. He's still won twice.

but they did it with Bush. They did it to McCain. They did it to many other Republicans. Sarah Palin, you know, people like that. They just destroyed her career completely. Turned her into a total punchline, someone that you just can't take seriously. Now, Republicans did themselves no favors

and set themselves up for mockery, Sarah Palin principle among them. But this was the left's preferred mode of attack against Republicans, was just to make them into caricatures someone that mainly you laugh at. like even more than getting angry at them and shouting at them, you just laugh at them. And that's what they would do.

And they were successfully. They did that successfully. Well, Trump came along in 2016 and things changed because they hated the guy so much. They hated him so much. They just couldn't bring themselves to make jokes about him. Even the Trump, you remember the early days, the Trump SNL impersonators, they brought in Alec Baldwin. S&L doesn't matter that much, but it's just symptomatic of, the fact that they just can't.

Like, even the S&L impersonators were humorless and angry. The Alec Baldwin-Trump impersonation was, it wasn't even trying to be funny. It was just mad. And what Baldwin was doing, it didn't bear any resemblance to Trump. It was just very disrespectful. It was like an angry, we want to do this impersonation that we want to try to hurt his feelings more than actually be funny. Late-night comedians, of course, started giving homilies against Trump instead of making jokes about him. And they tried scolding instead of ridicule. And it just backfired. It didn't work.

Did not work at all. One of the changes in 2024, and it was a recent change just over the past several weeks, is that it seemed like they were kind of trying to go back to their pre-2016 playbook. And that's what a lot of the weird stuff is about, where now they're trying to go back and, you know, okay, we're going to. to make Trump into like a bumbling, unserious, dufous. Kamala has used that term about Trump several times recently. He's not serious. He's unserious. They're trying to make Vance into the new Sarah Palin. And they're using ridicule instead of lectures. That's what they're trying to do. And it is more effective. It's a more effective strategy. But the question is whether they can maintain it because Trump just angers them so much that so far they have not been able to keep up the kind of sarcastic, mocking, trolling tone that has worked pretty well for them against other

Republican politicians. And then they kind of slid into that mode for the last couple of weeks to some effect, I'll admit, just like as an objective observer, even though I'm not very objective. But then with this new cycle, they've slid back into they're just angry and they're crying. They're like practically in tears about how disrespectful Trump was to the black female journalists. And they're crying about it. They're angry. They're lecturing. They're scolding.

That's good. I guess this is my long way of saying. That's good. That's the mode we want them in. It's a lot less effective. You know, it just makes them look ridiculous. And so that's good. And it's an argument for Trump to continue to do things like this.

Just put himself in those kinds of environments where he's sparring with people on the left and with no concern for their feelings whatsoever. It's the kind of thing that they just hate it so much. It makes them so mad. And it's funny how mad it makes them. Remember, that was the dynamic in 2016. 2016, the dynamic was the left is really, really mad. And the right is just kind of like laughing at them. That was the dynamic and was effective.

It's also a lot more fun. Let's be honest about that, too. So that's why I think this moment with Trump, I think, was great for all of those reasons. All right, let's, I've had this. I wanted to play this for the last couple days. Joe Biden is still technically, supposedly, the president. And he gave a speech a couple days ago where he unveiled his, ideas for Supreme Court reforms, including term limits.

Let's watch that. We've had term limits for presidents in the United States for nearly 75 years after the Truman administration. And I believe we should have term limits for a Supreme Court justice in the United States as well. In fact, the United States is the only major constitutes of democracy that gives lifetime seats in their high court. Term limits would help ensure that the court membership

changes with some regularity. That would be make timing for the course nomination more predictable and less arbitrary. Reduced a chance than any single presence he imposes undue influence in generations

to come. I mean, you can't. I don't need to remark on the fact that he can't speak, but he can't. This is a, it's a terrible idea. It's not going to happen at this point. They're not going to be able to push this through at this point, but maybe eventually this is their, this is their dream, their goal. Now, we know that if the court had the makeup that they wanted, then they wouldn't be

asking for term limits. So if they ever do get the term limits, what's going to happen is that they'll do put the term limits in, wait until the court has the makeup that they want, and then they'll say, you know what, actually, it turns out we don't need the term limits. Let's get rid of them. That would be the plan. But term limits in general are a terrible idea. I think we talked about this recently, just I guess to reiterate, because on some real surface level, I can understand why it appeals to people, the idea of term limits, especially on the Supreme Court, because you hear a lifetime appointment, and you say, well, that's not fair. You can't be there for life. But the whole reason, or certainly the, I'd say the main reason,

why there are term limits on the Supreme Court, is to at least try to set up a scenario where the justices can be apolitical and make judgment calls based on what they think is actually correct and constitutional and not with anything else in mind. So that's what the lifetime appointment is really about. Now, is that a full proof plan? Obviously not. It's very clear that political considerations are often made on the court and all that kind of stuff. And even if they do have lifetime appointments, these justices still, it's not like they are quarantined from society for the whole time they're on the court. They're still out, you know, they're going to the cocktail parties.

They have friends in high places. And so they can be influenced by that. You know, they don't want to be ostracized and alienated by their rich and powerful friends. And so all that can still happen, but at least you can mitigate that to some extent. You can give the country some chance at least of having a court that makes decisions based on the Constitution rather than politics and the desire of the justices for personal advancement. There's some chance of that with lifetime appointments. If you put the term limits in, you get rid of lifetime appointments, then there's just no chance. chance now of having anything but a highly politicized court because now all of these justices

are thinking about life after the court. And even if you do an 18-year term limit, which I think is what they're talking about, still. I mean, we know that these people stay in politics until they're 170. So even 18 years, they're still going to have a life outside of that, most likely. And then you can have justices that want to run for office afterwards. They want to run for president. Now, maybe you could do an amendment saying that term limits and you are barred from running for office after you leave the Supreme Court. That's not part of this proposal. In theory, you could put that in there. And that at least would mitigate some of the concern. But still, it still means that they're leaving the court and they are,

going to do something. They're going to get a job somewhere, do something. And that just increases the likelihood that they're going to be taking politics into account. They're taking life after being a justice into account. And I say all this as if it's a, you know, as if I'm making some sort of observation that the people in favor of term limits will hear. here and think, oh, yeah, I hadn't thought of that. But that's, of course, very naive because they know that. They know that term limits will even, will politicize the court even more. And that is the point. That is what they want. For them, the problem with the Supreme Court is not that it's too political is that that it's not political enough. It's not that the,

that the justices are too influenced by outside forces, is that they are not influenceable enough. and that's what this is all really about, of course. Let's get to the daily cancellation. So today we must sadly cancel the Army. This, I admit, is a bit of a victim-blaming scenario. The Army got worked over, scammed, I guess. Allegedly, they got a bad deal, as Trump would say, and I'm blaming them for it. Here's the article from Military.com.

The Army is seemingly having buyers or mores after an $11 million marketing deal with the United Football League and Dwayne the Rock Johnson, and the high-profile high-dollar deal likely didn't lead to a single new army recruit and may possibly have had a negative impact on finding new enlistments. The service may even seek to get some of its money back. The Army inked the deal earlier this year with the UFL, the upstart minor league alternative to the NFL that had an inaugural season from March through June with a disappointing debut. More importantly, the deal included Johnson, a global superstar and owner of the league,

who was supposed to serve as a pseudo-brand ambassador for the Army, though the service said he did not fulfill his end of the bargain to publish a specific number of service-related posts on his social media accounts. Now, before the article describes what exactly his end of the bargain was supposed to be and how it failed, it gets into some detail about the historic recruiting crisis facing the Army, along with other branches of service, and the crisis is real. I mean, last year alone, the military across the Army, Navy, and Air Force came up over 40,000 recruits short of its goal. They also came up short the year before, and the year before that. So this is a compounding problem, and it's a major problem. We'll return to that point in a moment, but first, more details here. The UFL deal was so catastrophic, it led to a projected loss of 38 enlistments

and internal revenue review of the plan shows. The bulk of the deal included prominent Army branding during UFL games, including the service logos on players' uniforms. the center of gravity was Johnson, whom service planners were hoping could elevate the Army brand, as he's among the most revered celebrities in the world, with a strong cross-demographic appeal. Part of the allure of the deal was Johnson's social media reach and an agreement that he would tout the Army. A titan on social media, Johnson has 396 million followers on Instagram. The Army valued each social media post at $1 million service document show, and it was expecting five of them.

But Johnson did not fulfill his end of the deal, making only two of the five social media. posts. Okay, let me see if I understand this correctly. They paid $11 million for the UFL, an obscure off-season football league that nobody watches to market for them. Sizeable portion of that money was allocated to The Rock who was supposed to post on social media about the Army. They put a value of $1 million on each social media post. They were paying $1 million per post. So already we have a massive problem here, because there is no. way on God's good green earth that a single post to social media could ever be worth a million dollars, even if it's posted by Dwayne the Rock Johnson.

Now, one of the posts that the Rock did make was apparently just a picture of him posing with some army generals. So they thought a picture of the Rock standing next to some army dudes was worth a million dollars. Like, inflation truly is out of control right now. In fact, I'll say this, that if they're valuing social media posts that highly, then I'd like to talk to them about a promotional deal for me. Now, I don't have as many followers as The Rock or even close to as many, but I do have millions of social media followers. So, you know, if he can get a million dollars to post a picture of himself to his Instagram, I'd be willing to do it for like, let's call it 75 grand.

That's a steal. I'm basically doing charity work at these rates. The pictures don't even have to be of me. I'll post pictures of The Rock on my channels if they'll pay me like high five figures for each post. Now, of course, the most incredible thing here is that the Rock didn't even do all of the posts that he was supposed to. Like, imagine being so rich that someone will pay you a million dollars for five posts on Instagram, a million dollars each. But you only bother to do two. The other three aren't worth the effort for a measly three million bucks, I guess. That's the other reason why I'd be a much better investment than The Rock.

Like, if I scam you by charging you a million dollars for social media posts, I will have the decency to actually post it. Or at least I'll make sure my social media team does, because logging in and doing it myself is kind of a hassle. Anyway, it appears that this strategy of blowing millions of dollars on selfies with the Rock did not translate into a single new recruit, as the article says. Not one single person saw the Rock's picture on Instagram and said, you know what, I think I'll join the Army. In fact, they tell us 38 people who, I guess, were going to enlist, decided not to. And they're blaming the social media posts for that. I guess they really hate professional wrestling. I don't know.

So this is another failed recruitment scheme. And it can be added to the list of all the other failed recruitment schemes in recent years. And, of course, we cannot talk about failed Army recruitment schemes without again making note of the 2021 ad campaign that included the. this ad. This is the story of a soldier who operates your nation's Patriot Missile Defense Systems. It begins in California with a little girl raised by two moms.

Although I had a fairly typical childhood, took ballet, played violin, I also marched for equality. I like to think I've been defending freedom from an early age. When I was six years old, one of my moms had an accident that left paralyzed. Doctor said she might never walk again. But she tapped into my family's pride to get back on her feet, eventually standing at the altar to marry my other mom. So the story drones on and on, as stories told by women so often do. But remember, this was an entire ad blitz, not just one random commercial. They had a bunch of ads like this. But I guess by the way they spend money,

they probably spent, they probably spent $50 million just on that one ad we just saw. We also had the other one that had the look and sound of a Disney princess film and featured this scene. When I was 17, I had such real big dreams. I said, Dad, I want to be a soldier so I can be like you. Okay, so that's a, that's an army ad there. What do you notice about these ads? I mean, what do you know, notice about whatever you can see of the ads while you're cringing into a ball, they are, of course, targeted at women, which is what the Army has been doing for a long time. Instagram selfies with celebrities are also mostly targeted at women, even if the celebrity is the rock. And if you don't want to go as far as to say that social media posts from The Rock are a

feminine recruitment strategy, we can at least say that it's not a strategy likely to mobilize young men to do anything, least of all join the Army. And the proof's in the pudding on that one. So this is a problem because the recruitment crisis in the military is entirely due to a drop in male enlistment. Another article from Military.com, this one from June of this year spells this out, quote, a decade of declining recruitment numbers for the Army is almost entirely attributable to a significant drop in male recruiting as female enlistments have remained relatively flat. Internal service data reviewed by military.com shows. Since 2013, male enlistments have dropped 35% going from 58,000 men enlisting. 2013 to 37,700 in 2020.

Meanwhile, female recruitment has hovered around 10,000 recruits each year. Okay, so the military has aggressively feminized its recruitment strategy, and yet still, the number of female recruits remains the same, but the number of male recruits has fallen off a cliff. Women are not all that interested in joining the military, no matter how desperately the military wants them to join, men used to be very interested in joining the military, but no longer are. So that's the crisis. That is the entire crisis. It's not that the military is failing to attract recruits generally, it's that it's failing to attract men. Young men specifically, between the ages of

18 and 24, which is the age range of about 90% of new recruits. So how do you fix that? Well, you have to understand what appeals to young men and speak to them on that level. like you have to be willing to try to appeal to men specifically, which no institution in American life is willing to do anymore, including the military. And it's not all about having good ads or even mostly about ads, but the tone of the ads can tell you something. So think about what recruitment commercials back in the 90s used to be like.

I can remember growing up in the 90s watching TV, you see these recruitment ads all the time, and they were all very similar, but they had a certain tone to them. So, for example, here's a very 90s army commercial that aired about 30 years ago. Watch. I can't tell you how it feels when you're way out there on your own tracking the bad guys.

How it feels leading a skilled team that's the eyes and ears of the whole outfit when all your training is coming alive. But finding those tanks and telling the air cavalry right where to hit them? I can tell you exactly how that feels. Okay, so, a question. According to the YouTube description, that aired in 1992 during a WWF, as it was known at the time,

a Saturday night main event. Now, the music may be a bit on the dated side, though also very much on the awesome side, in my opinion. The focus instead on the pitch that they're making. They're saying, come join the army. It's exciting. It's an adventure. You can hunt down and kill the bad guys.

That is a pitch tailor-made for young men between the ages of 18 and 24. This used to be how the military sold itself. It spoke to that distinctly male desire for adventure, excitement, and combat. Now, the Marines had maybe the best entry into this genre. Here's an ad from 1987. There's still on. The few, the prouds, the Marines. Okay, I mean, I want to join the Marines after watching that.

I want to join the Marines in 1987. seven. I mean, my, my, even again, retro vibe, a little dated with the music and all that, but, and the special effects. But, um, uh, if my 11 year old son saw that ad, he would want to, he'd want to join the Marines. This would be, if he saw that ad. So you get to have a sword. Yeah, that's, that's, uh, that's what he would be thinking. So adventure, pride, courage, honor. These are words that don't come up very often in military recruitment these days or anywhere. Like they don't, they, these are just not words that are used anymore.

Here's another word that you hear in that commercial that you will not hear in any military ad in the current year. Men. The Marines were calling very specifically for men of adventure, men of honor, men of courage. Why? Well, because that's what a military needs if it's going to be a strong and lethal fighting force. Also, that's what young men want to be. Other ads from the time period focused on duty, patriotism, sacrifice, high ideals that stir a young man's soul to action. Now, compare that to today. Compare that ad we just watched with a crusader in shining armor wielding a sword while, the manly voiceover calls on men to go on an adventure for the sake of their honor, compare that to a woman talking about her two lesbian moms or a girl staring out at the ocean

while singing about her dreams. Now, of course, you know, of course you're losing men. You're doing everything you can to lose them and none of what you could do to win them back. Partnering with a football league, at least potentially gives you access to a male audience. It is arguably a step in the right direction, even if it's a league that nobody watches. But once you have access to that audience, you have to make a pitch that will appeal especially to that audience. That's what the military, terminally infected by wokenness at the highest levels, cannot bring itself to do. And that's why army recruitment is falling off a cliff, and it will continue to until the army no longer exists unless something changes drastically. And that is why the army, by its own choice, is today

canceled. That's due for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to you tomorrow. Have a great day. Godspeed. Republicans or Nazis, you cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people. Growing up, I never thought much about race. Never really seemed to matter that much. At least not to me. Am I racist? I would really appreciate it if you love. I'm trying to learn. I'm on this journey. If I'm going to sort this out, I need to go deeper undergris. Cover. Joining us now is Matt, certified DEI expert.

Here's my certification. And what you're doing is you're stretching out of your whiteness. This is more for you and less for you. Is America inherently racist? The word inherent is challenging there. I want to rename the George Washington Monument to the George Floyd Monument. America is racist to its bones. So inherently.

Yes. This country is a piece of shit. White folks. White. White supremacy. White woman. White boy. Is there a black person around?

What happened? Black person right here. Hi, Robin. Hi. What's your name? I'm Matt. I just had to ask who you are because you have to be careful. Never be too careful.

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. You're great at protecting your data, but lots of places could still expose you to identity theft. I thought it was safe. If that happens, LifeLock gives you a U.S.-based restoration agent who will stick by your side from start to finish.

Phone calls, filing documentation, preparing insurance claims, your agent handles it all. In fact, we're so confident restoration is guaranteed. Pour your money back. Isn't it nice to have someone like that on your side? Save up to 40% your first year at lifelock.com slash Spotify. Terms apply.