The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1823 - Cambridge’s DEI Superstar Was A Serial Liar, Plagiarist & Hate Hoaxer

Episode Date: August 17, 2026

Jason Arday was the perfect embodiment of DEI. We go through a trove of ridiculous claims he's made that the left has believed. Ep. 1823 - - - Today's Sponsors: Hillsdale College - Go to https://hillsdale.edu/Walsh to enroll. It's totally free. Start reading. Learn the classics. Rediscover the West. PreBorn! - For $28, you can provide an ultrasound and help parents see their child, hear the heartbeat, and choose life. Dial #250 and say "BABY" or visit https://Preborn.com/WALSH - - - DailyWire+ Become a Daily Wire Member and watch all of our content ad-free: https://dwplus.watch/RealHistorySubscribe 📚📝 Back-to-School Sale - Get 3 months for $19 📲 Download the free Daily Wire app today on iPhone, Android, Roku, Apple TV, Samsung, and more. 🍿 Run Hide Fight: Infidels will premiere on The Daily Wire, Wednesday September 16th. 📜 Real History with Matt Walsh is available ad-free, exclusively on DailyWire+ https://dwplus.watch/RealHistory 👕 Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://dwplus.shop/MattWalshMerch - - - Socials:  YouTube — https://youtube.com/@mattwalsh Facebook — https://www.facebook.com/mattwalshblog Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/mattwalshblog TikTok — https://www.tiktok.com/@mattwalsh_ X — https://twitter.com/mattwalshblog - - - Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The midterm elections are heating up, congressional control, and President Trump's agenda hangs in the balance. Every headline has the potential to shift the odds. And in a key Senate race, James Telerico is currently trading at 52% to beat Ken Paxton. That means $100 trade pays out over $180 with a win. Use code Daily, D-A-I-L-Y, to get up to $20 when you trade $20. Cali, K-A-L-S-H-I-C-C-T-E-T-T-E-L-S-H-I-C-T-T-E-T-E-L-SH-I-C-T-E-L-C-T-E-L-C-T-E-L-C-T-E-R-SH-E-R-C-E-R-T-E-R-T-E-R-D-E-R-D-R-D-E-R-D-R-D-R-A-R-R-R-D-R-E-R-R-E-R-E-R-R-E-R-R-S-R-T, who quickly rose to the ranks of full professor at Cambridge, one of the most prestigious and sought after jobs in all of academia. Ardei was awarded his job as a professor of sociology of education, not because

of his talent or scholarship, but because he was a black activist. He told liberal white women what they wanted to hear. Ardea fabricated elaborate, obviously fraudulent narratives about how racist had oppressed him throughout his life. He also concocted bizarre stories about how masked men with knives were chasing him around campus, how he supposedly discovered a pig's head on the porch of his family home. Despite clear evidence that Ardei was delusional, the leaders of Cambridge, mostly white liberal women, of course, fell in love with him on the spot. They passed over thousands of other qualified, much more qualified applicants, many of them white, in order to sell a story to the public about the virtues of DEI. Cambridge promoted Arde as a shiny example of a strong

black man who had overcome tremendous adversity, claimed he couldn't even read or write until he was 18 years old, and became the youngest black professor in the university's history. And then, when it all came crashing down, when Ardei was exposed as the complete fraud he was, he apparently took his own life. Faced with some actual adversity for once in his life, Ardae immediately opted for the coward's way out. He left his two children behind rather than face the consequences of his own lifelong deception. And through it all, Cambridge and many other race hustlers, including the UK's new prime minister,

have stood by Ardei. Many mainstream media outlets in this country have run sympathetic stories on him as well, where they suggest that his critics are responsible for his death. Jason Ardeh chose to lie and plagiarize, and then chose to end his life, apparently, and the only person not responsible for any of Jason Ardae's disastrous decision,

we are told, is Jason Ardeh himself. Watch. The death of high profile academic Jason Ardei has intensified scrutiny of the media coverage of him beforehand. Jason Ardei, a sociologist who was once celebrated as the youngest ever black professor at Cambridge University, was found dead on Friday. That's just nine days after he resigned over allegations of plagiarism in his academic work. His family said in a statement released by his publisher, The campaign of misinformation was too much for Jason, as he had been subjected to a campaign of sustained abuse to sticking the job. The British Prime Minister called his death a tragedy on so many levels.

A really sad, sad and sorry state of affairs, and I think we just all today think of Jason, his contribution and his family and friends. Some British media stories called the 41-year-old, Professor Plagiarism, and a poster boy for diversity. He acknowledged some mistakes in his work he said were partly due to a lack of support. provision, but denied plagiarism. Questions surrounding his athletic and fundraising achievements also dominated media coverage. As the story about him continued to gain traction, Ardey said in a letter posted online that he resigned because he, quote, reached the limits of what any person should reasonably be expected to endure. Ardei was found unresponsive in South London on Friday and was later pronounced dead at the scene, a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police told CNN. Following his death,

Cambridge University said in a statement, we are desperately sudden to hear. get this tragic news. Our heartfelt sympathies go to Jason Ardei's family and friends at this incredibly difficult time. So he didn't plagiarize. They were just mistakes in his work that were due to lack of supervision. He didn't lift whole passages from other authors on purpose. It was an accident. He tripped fell and copy and paste in other people's work with that attribution. It happens. It happens to the best of us. CNN also told us that questions were raised about Ardae's other alleged achievements, but they didn't go any further into that. This is drive-by news coverage that's designed to convince people that Ardei was smeared by white supremacists when in reality he deserved everything

that happened to it. But the true story of Ardae's fall is much bigger than the sorted collapse of one phony academic at a failing school in the UK. This is also a story about why whenever they seek to find the most qualified black candidates for high-level jobs, whether they're looking for a justice on the Supreme Court or a president of Harvard University or a White House press secretary or a vice president of the United States or a full professor at Cambridge, white liberals inevitably select imbeciles who are as morally stunted as they are intellectually stunted and obviously unqualified for the job. Now, you would think with unlimited resources to find the most qualified black candidates available, they'd come up with someone worthwhile. You'd think that might happen at least occasionally, but it's not happening. And we need to talk about why.

We also need to discuss the backlash against Nathan Kauffness, a former fellow at Cambridge, who lost his job because he told the truth about anti-white discrimination in universities all over the world. Coffness, with the help of other academics and outlets, most notably retraction watch, exposed Arde's fraud over the summer, and for that, he has been subject. to a smear campaign by Cambridge University, as well as various left-wing academics and activists. So the very thing they accuse Koffness of provoking against Ardei, an unfair, vengeful, politically motivated smear campaign is precisely, of course, what they're doing to him. In fact, it's not just Koffness that they're going after.

The left is demonizing anyone who reports the truth about Ardae, including mainstream outlets, like the Telegraph, the Guardian, even the New York Times. the reaction has been nothing short of psychotic. There is an all-out effort to intimidate and harass critics of the serial fabulous, in part, because they realize that if people keep digging, they're going to find out that he was not an aberration. The vast majority of liberal arts scholarships at every university, including Cambridge, as well as the entire DEI industry, are all just as fraudulent as RDA himself was. And right now, all of these scammers are terrified that they're going to be

exposed as well. That would include a woman named Hillary Kremlin, who serves as the head of faculty and professor of education at Cambridge. She's one of the faculty members who hired RDA in 2023. The BBC was on the scene to cover this momentous development in a puff piece that has not aged especially well. And Kremlin is the white woman at the end of the segment, just to be clear, Watch. I always felt it was a privilege to have a period of 11 years where maybe I couldn't speak and I couldn't converse in a way that everyone else could

because it allowed me to see things in a different way. Professor Jason Ardei was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder at the age of three. He couldn't speak until he was 11 and read or write until he was 18. Throughout his early years, his parents continued to believe in him. At 18, my mum had got told. a point where there was only so much she could do and she was brilliant even though she had

this belief that you know he'll do something okay but she just decided i need someone else to believe in him as much as i believe in him. Therapists predicted he would need full-time assistance throughout his life how wrong they were and now jason is days away from achieving another ambition. Hey, so good to see you. Here's his new boss at Cambridge. We do have a lot of work to do but I feel really optimistic. Part of his research will look at new ways to make higher education more accessible for everyone. What can we do to ensure that this isn't a marked appointment in five years' time?

How can this become the norm? We've listened to the voices of our black scholars and our black students, and some of it has not been easy to hear, to be honest, but we're able to face up to some of the structural issues that people face. There will be those I think this is a tokenistic appointment. What are your thoughts on this? The Board of Electors on your interview day were absolutely unanimous. We are so lucky to have you. You are the best in the world in terms of the research that you do. Well, there's nothing quite like being forced to watch the sexual tension in the Cambridge Sociology Department between a man who looks like a long-lost member of Millie Vanilli and a woman who looks and acts like she should be starring in a

PSA about the dangers of brain parasites from cats. Hillary Kremlin is living the fantasy of every white liberal female on the planet right now. This is the equivalent of like a BTS concert for millions of adult women. She gets the opportunity to fawn over a black guy to apologize to him on behalf of white people. They love nothing more than that. They love to do that. And to present herself as this exceedingly wise, introspective academic who's willing to do the work. And to really sell the message, there's even the dramatic close-up of the

interracial handshake, like it's a modern-day Renaissance painting. So who is this person? Who is Hilary Kremlin exactly? Well, I looked up her CV, and as you expect, she hasn't done anything worthwhile in her entire career. Her publications have titles like violence and institutional racism in schools, interdisciplinary perspectives on restorative justice, and is it possible to access the voice of preschool children? Now, she throws in every woke buzzword you'd expect. admittedly, I didn't read any of it, of course. But from what I can tell, no one else is reading this stuff either. A professor named Alex Edmonds took a look at Cremond's work on Google Scholar and found that she's been cited only about 2,000 times in her entire career, which has lasted

for more than 26 years. And for comparison, he says that a senior professor in finance might have 2,000 citations in a single year. In other words, Hillary Cremden, like virtually every other academic in the liberal arts, is a net negative on society. She consumes a significant amount of taxpayer funding. She hires faculty members on the basis of their skin color and her research, if we can call it that, which nobody cares about in the first place and does not contribute to the reserves of human knowledge in any way. It's all about finding new methods to discriminate against white people. The world would be a better place if professors like Hillary Kremlin were purged from society.

It's as simple as that. This help explains, helps explain why Kremlin might say that Jason Ardey is, the best in the world. It also explains why she refused to fire Ardei or even criticize him when evidence of his plagiarism surfaced. Frauds tend to look out for one another. They understand that when one of them falls. The others are also in jeopardy. Arde himself understood that concept very well. In April, he spoke at the British Sociological Association's 75th Anniversary Conference, where he lamented the fact that right-wing activists were exposing black frauds in academia, including Claudine Gay, who's the former president of Harvard, Ardey stated that, quote, the instruments that are designed to protect academic integrity, designed to protect our well-being and our intellectual property are weaponized. There isn't any room to sit there and watch your fellows suffer for no reason.

It's abhorrent. It's a disgrace and, quite frankly, evil. That's the cancer that we need to eradicate from academia. Now, of course, Ardae was not worried about eradicating a cancer from academia. He knew that he was the cancer, along with every other unqualified activist who's elevated solely on the basis of skin color. So let's get specific about what exactly Ardae was guilty of and how obvious it was. On July 21st, Nathan Kauffness published an article on his substact called DEI fraud and cover-up at Cambridge. And in the article, he describes running Ardae's 2015 PhD PhD dissertation through plagiarism detection software. And he found that on several occasions, Ardae stole the wording with minimal changes from a 2009 dissertation written by a student in London. And we'll put some of the side by sides up on the screen right now.

You can, you know, you see the yellow highlights indicate verbatim copying. Green indicates a paraphrase. So there's a lot of verbatim copying, as you can see. The plagiarism is obvious. It's extensive. There are many more examples as well, including plagiarism from other sources. But it's important to understand that Ardei's plagiarism extended well beyond his dissertation. I mean, that's bad enough on its own. Several of his published papers were plagiarized as well. Unfortunately for our day, a retired professor named Dave Harris came across one of these published papers entitled, attempting to break the chain, reimagining and including, including, including, pedagogy and decolonizing the curriculum within the academy. And Harris noticed some apparent plagiarism. Now, why you would even need to plagiarize nonsense about decolonizing the curriculum when it's all made up drivel anyway is beyond me. I mean, you could just make up whatever you want.

It doesn't mean anything. Decolonizing the curriculum. I could write a paper on that subject in 45 minutes. You're just making it up. I mean, that's the fun of it, isn't it? Isn't that the one thing that should make this fun? Being in this totally nonsensical academic field, you can just make up whatever you want. Be creative, have fun with it.

That's maybe the worst thing about the R-Day scandal. Not only was he a plagiarist, but he was plagiarizing gibberish. I mean, that's like copying a preschooler's chalk drawing of a tree and trying to pass it off as your own. You couldn't just made your own tree, really? You had to copy that one? Anyway, Harris wrote an email to Ardae seeking an explanation. It was a polite email that simply asked Ardae to explain the, quote, puzzling similarities between his work and previously published materials. In response, a week later, Ardei wrote that it was, quote, disappointing that you have imposed yourself on me in the manner you have, i.e. without any reflexivity or humility whatsoever.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black there. Arde added, quote, you'll likely know from your literature reviews, not from experience, that the academy is a hostile place for black scholars. There are very few of us that become professors, but even fewer in the fortunate or precarious position I am in, which is having the platform to represent and uplift other people of color, even beyond academia. As a black autistic man with global developmental delay and severe dyslexia, the odds are even less likely. My hope has always been that people like me feel inspired to pursue academia and that people like you can make space for this. Instead of spending your time trying to dismantle racism and abelism,

you've spent what I assume is hours coming through my work looking for mistakes. Arta concluded, quote, please do not email me again. Should you have the time to spare, I invite you to direct your resources elsewhere. Anything further from you will be considered bullying and harassment. Then, I mean, all of that reads like a parody of what a, you know, what a black academic activist would write in response to being accused rightly of plagiarism. Why are you imposing yourself on me? You're imposing yourself. I've stolen from you, but by you pointing that out, you are imposing yourself on me. Why would you impose yourself? Don't you know I have dyslexia? Don't you know I'm autistic? And if that, if the self-parity wasn't

enough, Ardei then contacted the police who referred the matter to the Devon and Cornwell Police for investigation. So to be clear, Ardei reported a professor to the police and claimed that he was a victim of a fake crime, a hate crime, presumably, also harassment, in order to shut down a legitimate inquiry into his fraudulent work. Rather than denying the accusation and providing context to clear his name, he started rambling about how he's black and autistic, which is about as close to an admission of guilt as you'll get. The police declined to pursue the case after investigating it, but they should have been, they should have just put Ardei in handcuffs at that point,

and he should have been fired immediately. There's no place in a university for a professor who tries to have his critics arrested, obviously. And filing a phony complaint with the police is a crime. Ardei should have gone to jail for it. He is a criminal in addition to everything else. Ardei resorted to intimidation because it usually worked for him. Most notably in September of 25, Ardae received an email from the Times Higher Education, which was about to report on his extensive plagiarism.

Arde responded by bringing in the top defamation law firm in the UK, Carter Ruck, to send a cease and desist to the newspaper. It's unclear if Ardei was paying the firm's bills or Cambridge was. but somebody was. And the cease and desist, the law firm said that the paper was relying on a source who did not understand the academic process. The law firm also accused the newspaper of harassment and mocked the idea that there was actually a story here. In the end, it worked. The Times' higher education shamefully caved. They never ran the story. But Kauffin's didn't give up. He went through all of our day's prominent published papers, including the one flagged by Harris, and found even more

plagiarism, a lot more. Again, we'll throw some of the examples up on screen. These are all flagrant examples of plagiarism. It didn't require any kind of careful line-by-line comparison. Plagiarism detection software picked up on all of these problems immediately. You know, there may be cases of plagiarists who are clever enough to cover up their theft or obscure it to a large degree. Jason Ardeh was not clever. And we can assume that there are even more examples that the program hasn't found yet. Again, other than Koffness and a few professors, nobody with any resources has been looking into this guy. But when you zoom out, things get even worse for RDA. Here's the most important image from Kofna's substack article. It's a summary of his findings after looking through

all 10 of our day's most prominent publications. And as you can see, at least four of the 10 articles involve some amount of plagiarism with extensive plagiarism and at least two of the articles, but that's not even the most important takeaway here. The really important takeaway is that if you eliminate the plagiarized papers, then Ardae has not produced any actual scholarship. You're left only with interviews he supposedly conducted about racist white people, so there's nothing to indicate that Ardae has any academic qualifications whatsoever. Now, when these concerns were raised with Cambridge, the university, of course, said it didn't care because the plagiarism took place before he was hired at Cambridge. They said that, quote,

In this instance, the research that your concerns relate to was carried out before Professor Ardeh joined the university that would normally be for the institution at which the work was done to consider any research integrity concerns with a particular paper published in their name. As such, we do not consider it within our remit to investigate the paper to which you refer. In other words, they hired him because of his research, but they don't care if the research is fake. I mean, it's like if a hospital hired a doctor, and then you pointed out to the hospital that, oh, that doctor's whole resume is fake, he doesn't even have a real medical degree. And then the hospital said, yeah, but that happened before. That was then, this is now. I mean, yeah, the guy's currently operating on your heart, but, but, you know, that happened. It was way in the past.

That's not up to us to look into. Meanwhile, the journals that published Ardae's articles took them offline and allowed him to make edits before they went back online. journals all stated that the edits were relatively minor and merely involved, quote, making it clear where ideas were adapted from past research. But in truth, as Retraction Watch found, the edits were actually extensive. So to give just one example, Arde's articles in the article in the journal Social Sciences, originally stated that he had analyzed interview transcripts with, quote, an intuitive coding scheme using en vivo qualitative data analysis software,

before having a researcher code data to enhance the data to enhance the the validity of emerging themes and claims. So that sounds all very technical, sounds like he did some actual work in the original version. But in the revised version of the article, Ardei merely says that he recorded the interviews, transcribed them, and analyzed them by using, quote, review and reflection. The initially Retraction Watch also found that Ardei had plagiarized some of these interviews from other sources, so he wasn't even conducting them himself. This guy was not simply a plagiarist, in other words. He was actively found. fabricating data in order to push a certain narrative. He was engaging in deliberate deception

in multiple different ways. So this is institutional corruption at every level. Cambridge refused to punish the black guy. They hired as a token. And the peer-reviewed scientific journals allowed Ardae to cover his tracks with stealth edits even after his plagiarism was brought to their attention. And on top of that, even before all the plagiarism was uncovered, Ardae was lying about every aspect of his life. in a very pathological and blatant fashion. First of all, he claimed that he ran 30 marathons in 35 days, even after suffering a leg fracture around the 21st marathon. Nobody who's looked into this rather extraordinary claim has been able to verify it.

There's a news article where he tells a reporter that he ran 30 marathons, but it's based solely on his own claims. And there's nothing in the article about a leg fracture. Arte also claimed at various points that he ran 300 miles in three days or 600 miles in six days, depending on where you look. If true, that would mean that Jason Ardeh is nearly on par with the greatest runners who have ever lived. As Kaufness writes, for comparison, Janus Quoros, who has been described as the greatest ultra runner of all time, set a world record in 1984 when he ran 359 miles in three days.

As a side note, I have to say, it's very funny that a grown man was making this kind of thing up. It sounds like a lie, a third grader might tell. his friends when he gets back to school after summer vacation. You know what I did? You know what I did? I ran so far. Like so, I, like 300 miles. And then I got attacked by a bear.

That's my Jason Ardei impression. Then there's the claim that Ardei couldn't read or write until he was 18, even though on its face it's absurd to think that somebody who's illiterate at 18 could start publishing academic papers so quickly. But then again, since he copied all the papers and his whole field of study is made up gibberish anyway, and maybe that claim isn't actually so implausible. I mean, there was a lot of people saying, oh, he clearly was not illiterate. He made that up.

That's like the one thing he claimed that I'm willing to believe. He might still be illiterate. Or, I mean, he might have still been illiterate before, you know. And yet Ardei graduated high school with a certificate that requires literacy, which seems incompatible with the idea that he couldn't read. And additionally, the New York Times just spoke to several of Arde's classmates as well as a speech professional who worked with him when he was. as a child, they all said he could speak English and did so often.

So the idea that he couldn't speak at all until age 11, as he claimed, is absurd. There's no way that a child goes from being unable to speak English to being fluent overnight, but he kept making that claim again and again. Camber sent already out on a press tour to illustrate how inclusive they are. Watch. I was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder when I was three, so a hybrid of autism, as Berger's Syndrome. and global development delay. And I guess it's been well kind of publicised now,

but I didn't learn speak until I was 11, and I didn't learn to read and write until I was 18. So tell me about you being a little boy, though, and what was going on in your mind at that time? Well, I mean, one of the things that I think people tend to think with neurodivergent children is that it's a disadvantage. And while I wouldn't want to trivialise the difficulties that come with that, for me it was there was a beauty in the paralysis of speech,

you know, not being able to be vocal and, I guess, converse with people in what is contained in a more conventional way. I was able to absorb the world and construct my reality in a different way, really through the efforts of my mother and my friends and family around me. Now, as a few people have pointed out, when our day was three years old, neither Asperger's nor global development delay were formally diagnosed by the UK's National Health Service. a global development delay was first used around 2003, while Asperger's became a diagnosis in 1992, four years after Ardei was that age. So there's a lot of reasons to doubt what he's saying, and none of it received any mainstream pushback whatsoever.

There are also some more questionable claims in Ardei's memoir, as Sarah Didham points out on her substack. Arde claims that he had several tumors, including one in his brain and one in his testicle. he claimed he developed epilepsy after being beaten by four people. He says he was comatose after being hit by a car. Some of these claims are from his memoir itself. Others are from the book proposal.

They're all risable and absurd to the point of being laughably implausible taken together. And by the way, while we're at it, Simon and Schuster published Ardei's memoir, which they clearly did not fact check in any way. That's yet another institution that totally folded in the name of DEI and racial equity. You know, it used to be that when you bought a nonfiction book, an editor and fact checker had looked at it. But that wasn't the case here. He lied about everything, from his autism to his athletic accomplishments, and nobody at any point in the editing process flagged any of it. Apparently because there was no editing process.

When Westcham first took flight in 1996, the vibes were a bit different. People thought denim on denim was peak fashion, inline skates were everywhere, and two out of three women rocked the Rachel. While those things stayed in the 90s, one thing that hasn't is that fuzzy feeling you get when WestJet welcomes you on board. Here's to Westjetting since 96. Travel back in time with us and actually travel with us at westjet.com slash 30 years. But for my money, the most extraordinary fairy tale from Ardei are the ones exposed by the guardian of all places. This is where it becomes evident that this guy is a fabricator on the level of Jussie Smollett. So this is where he throws away all of his credibility, what infinitesimal amount of it he had,

without even realizing it, though, it's from an open letter that Ardei wrote last summer to a minister in the government, outlining the alleged racism he experienced. So listen to this. Quote, Arde claimed to have been confronted at his faculty building on two separate occasions by a masked man threatening to harm him if he did not resign and evading detection both times. On the second occasion, Arday said the intruder produced a knife and threatened him with it. The intruder was not picked up by CCTV on either occasion, and no one in the faculty reported seeing anything suspicious. Ardig did not report either intrusion at the time, tell the Guardian that after the second incident, he continued his working day and even conducted a PhD oral exam for a student less than two hours later. They did not inform colleagues that a masked man with a knife was in the faculty building. This is one of those lies that's so bad and so poorly thought out that it actually stops being beneficial to the liar. You know, it's a fake story that if it were true would make you worse, makes you look worse, not better?

Because if it's true, that that means that your colleagues and the PhD students are going to wonder why you didn't find the time to mention the masked homicidal maniac with a knife who's roaming around campus and making threats to murder people. It's one of those things that in most circumstances you might want to mention to somebody, like a certain amount of urgency. but according to our day's own version of events he kept the information to himself he was confronted by the masked man with a gun with a knife he was he managed to escape somehow maybe he did maybe uh you know repelled up a down a wall or did ninja karate moves or something we don't know but he managed to escape and then he thought like well I'm not worried about anybody else that that's their problem I got away from that guy

that's everyone else's problem I'm not even going to tell anybody and he just went about his day as if nothing happened. Now, of course, the story is not remotely true. I mean, it's a variation of what Jesse Smilett was doing at Fox when he wrote those letters to himself, pretending to be white supremacist who wanted Fox to fire him. But Camer's pretended to take the lie seriously, and so the lies kept coming. And in his open letter, Arde also claimed that mutilated animals had been sent to his parents' home and that bananas and bullets had been mailed to him.

Quote, Arde confirmed it in his. an interview with the Guardian that the mutilated animal sent to his family home mentioned in the open letter was a severed pig's head delivered in a large cardboard box to his parents' home address in South London. He claimed to have intercepted the package and immediately thrown it away, only telling the police several months later. In a subsequent interview, he claimed the police investigated checking with butchers in South London if they had sold a pig, eventually finding one that had sold a whole hog on the morning the head was left outside the family home. When the Guardian checked those details with the local butchers, are they named?

they said no police officer had come in to ask them about a pig. When asked if they were sure, the butcher said, that's the kind of thing we'd remember. When the details Artee gave about the pig's head investigation were checked by London's Metropolitan Police, the Guardian was told they were categorically incorrect, and no investigation had taken place. So Arte had fantasized a scenario where he was being tormented, like someone who had gotten on the wrong side of Don Corleone.

Of course, I will say some of the most tender and flavorful cuts of pork are the cheeks and jowls. So it seems possible that this white supremacist was just trying to send him a delicious meal. That could have been it. Wait, maybe it wasn't white supremacists. Maybe it was just someone trying to do him a favor. At least that would be a plausible theory if the white supremacist existed, which he doesn't. As you'd expect, there's also no evidence of the bananas or bullets that were supposedly sent to him. Arde never took any photographs.

of these items when they were mailed to his house, nor did he mention them to anyone at the time. Like, that's the strange thing about these race hustlers, you'll notice. You know, they're desperate to claim racism, wherever they can find it. And then one day, a white supremacist sends them a box full of bananas and bullets, and they don't even think to snap a picture of it.

Strange. When the Guardian asked them about all these issues, he replied and, quote, and said, I quote, to be honest with you, I thought you just believe me. Why would I lie? That's an extraordinary reply. That's really what he said. What he's confessing here is that he never even developed a plan for defending his lies. Like typically a liar, you know, if he's vaguely intelligent, will be aware that his lie might be exposed. And so it'll come up with some kind of plan B, some sort of defense, some sort of deflection, like the guy cheating with his sex.

He hopes that his wife won't notice the motel room charge on the credit card. But if she does, well, he's ready to claim that he generously rented a room for a hypothermic homeless man that he found huddled on the sidewalk or something. What he won't say if the room charge is raised is, oh, I didn't think you'd ask me about that. Oh, you want to know what I was doing in that motel? I didn't, honestly, I didn't think you'd ask me. That's it. Anyway, what do you want for dinner?

So in this case, we're dealing with someone so narcissistic and so profoundly stupid that he simply thought he could make up whatever he wanted and nobody would question him or his motivations. And the really shameful and pathetic thing is that actually he was right, at least for a while. But here's the amazing thing. I mean, even if Ardey hadn't plagiarized anything and even if he'd never lied about his life story, there would still be no reason to hire him at Cambridge or anywhere else. It would still be a scandal that he got hired in the first place. Everything we've talked about up to this point relates to unethical or criminal conduct that should have disqualified him from employment at any university, regardless of how talented he was, and regardless of how much research he was doing. But even if you forget about everything I've said, his credentials are still non-existent. So this is from the New York Times.

When Cambridge University interviewed Jason Arde for one of the most prestigious sociology positions in the world, he was an early career scholar underqualified by the school's own standards. Cambridge's requirements, reviewed by the New York Times, called for an outstanding research record of international stature and a proven successful track record supervising PhD students. Dr. Ardena had a modest publication record and had bounds from one university to the next, not staying long enough to oversee a full three-year or more doctorate. Cambridge hired him anyway in 2023. So this is one of the key points that needs to be made here. The plagiarism is not the biggest issue. It's extremely unethical, and everybody involved should be terminated, sure, but the bigger problem is that all of academia is fraudulent. They have no standards for anything. It's all a ruse. The average Cambridge faculty member is no more worthwhile than Jason Ardei.

They give themselves awards and titles, but there are no standards, particularly when it comes to non-white candidates. As the evidence of Ardei's plagiarism and fabricated stories began to circulate, his former students came forward to describe him as a terrible teacher on top of everything else. So this is from one of Ardei's former students at another school, the University of Roe Hampton. Quote, in the end, Arde gave me 70% from my essay, particularly as Arde had given my work no feedback, I asked for a meeting. At Roampton, marking is blind, so he wouldn't have known who had written which essay. In our meeting, I had. explained that 70% was a low mark for me and asked him to provide feedback. Suddenly, his friendly, confident demeanor changed. I now saw a side of him I'd never seen before, angry but also scared. Ardae implied that I was racist and said that the only reason I wasn't happy with 70% was due to my

white privilege. He was clearly upset at being questioned, and I ended the meeting as quickly as possible. Now, we should say this student who's making his claims is anonymous. The Times in London said they verified the student's identity, but it's pretty remarkable. that he can't simply come out in public with his own name on the op-ed. Even now, after Ardae has been clearly exposed as a fraud, it's still a career suicide to speak out against him. Cambridge has put out multiple statements denouncing the vile campaign against Ardae. And indeed, now that Ardei has taken his own life,

as predicted black activists are claiming that white racists are responsible. So here's one such analysis from somebody calling herself Dr. Shola Moss Shogbamimu. Shagbamimu. That's her name. Beautiful name. Watch. This is exactly what you wanted to achieve.

I told you. I knew you wanted to kill him or get him killed. I hope you are all satisfied now. Every single one of you bloody evil, racist, you white supremacist waste of freaking human space. Those of you who jumped on this bandwagon to publicly execute. him for what? Who held him to a different standard that you hold white people and may you all get

exactly what you deserve every single thing you did in this last two weeks, every single one of you that took pleasure and gleaned. This is exactly what you wanted. You wanted to kill him and getting killed. I hope to God you get everything that you have coming to you. Are you happy now? Are you happy now? Are you satisfied? You should all be ashamed of yourselves, every single one of you. You are murderers. You are killers.

Are you happy now? Shogbamimu asks, are you happy? Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I'll say that I'm, no, I'm not happy. No part of this story makes me happy, but I also feel no pity for this guy at all, at all, especially now that he's dead. because of all the selfish, evil, pathetic things this man did, and his was a life filled with selfish, evil, pathetic things, the manner of his death surpasses all of it. Now, if you're looking for an explanation as to the psychology behind why Jason Ardei took the coward's way out, here's your answer. He was a committed pathological narcissist to the very end.

And he decided that rather than live with the consequences of his actions, he wanted to go out as a victim. as a kind of perverse hero for the swarms of black activists. We're always looking for a reason to attack whites, and that's exactly what he's become. Predictably. There's even going to be a march today in Trafalgar Square entitled Vigil for Jason Ardey, stand against racist witch hunts.

Because, of course, you see, when you report on black fraudsters, the only conceivable reason for doing so is that you hate black people. The implication is that this would never happen to a white guy in academia, But actually, white men in academia have had their lives destroyed for far less. Strangely enough, to give just one example,

there were no marches against racist witch hunts for a white school principal in Toronto named Richard Bilksso, who killed himself in 2023. And what was his crime? Well, he dared to suggest during a DEI struggle session that Canada is not a racist country. And for that crime, he was publicly reprimanded by the superintendent and relentlessly accused of white supremacy by his colleagues, He was branded a racist all over social media, and eventually he killed himself. Now, Richard Biltzkob was not a career fraudster or a criminal or a plagiarist. He was a white principal who dared to question the wisdom of anti-white propaganda,

which he questioned very mildly, by the way. So they destroyed his reputation and his career. But he doesn't get any marches or any remembrance. The communists are glad he's dead. they celebrated his suicide on social media. The reason Jason Ardei is different is that he's black. And if people dwell on his fraud too much, they might realize that the underlying rationale of DEI is a complete lie.

Not to be outdone, the grandmaster of racial grifting himself, Ibermex-Kendi, whose real name is Henry Rogers, has decided to weigh in. And that's not surprising because, as you can see here, Ardei and Henry Rogers went to the same DEI stylist, to really nail the whole, like, serious but exotic vibe that drives white women crazy. And they have something else in common, too.

They're both fraudsters. Henry Rogers' anti-racism center at Boston University was shut down after burning through tens and millions of dollars, which no one can trace. And beyond telling black people that they should be racist against whites, Rogers struggled to articulate any coherent thoughts whatsoever. And now this same Henry Rogers, aka Ibramax-Kendi, is declaring that despite what it looks like,

Jason Ardeh was in fact murdered. Henry just wrote a piece entitled, The media lynched Jason Ardee. And here's how he introduced it. Quote, The death of Jason Ardee hit so close to home that I had no words yesterday, but I woke up with words.

To be a prominent anti-racist black scholar is to know you are a target, almost totally surrounded by resentments. You know that at any point, the attacks can come like a lynch mob. And if you die from all the attacks, the media still calls the attacks on you accusations to wash their hands of the blood. Your lynchers announce your death as if they had no

role in your lynching. Well, Henry, the reason this hits so close to home is that you are a despicable fraud also. You have every incentive to accuse Ardae's critics of murder right now because you're desperate to avoid scrutiny yourself. You are an anti-racist expert who can't even define the word racism. It's like a veterinarian who doesn't know what an animal is. If you never saw this, it's from the so-called Aspen Ideas Festival a few years ago. And other than watching Am I Racist, it's the best possible way to sum up the fraud that is Henry Rogers, as well as the entire DEI Gryft in general. Watch.

You talked about the importance of defining racism. How do you define racism? Sure. So racism, I would define it as a collection of racist policies that lead to racial inequity, that are substantiated by racist ideas. Sure, a collection of racist policies that lead to racial inequity that are substantiated by racist ideas.

And anti-racism is pretty simple using the same terms. Anti-racism is a collection of anti-racist policies leading to racial, anyone who want to take guess? Equity that are substantiated by animals. anti-racist ideas. So, you know, racism is when you're racist. Anti-racism is when you're not racist. Racist policies are, what is a racist policy?

Well, you know, racist policy is a racist policy. Any questions? I guess the one thing you can say in defense of Henry Rogers, at least, is that he probably didn't plagiarize any of that. If he was going to copy somebody else's work, it would have probably made sense. or maybe not, as we saw with Arde. Maybe even that was plagiarized. We should look into that.

Henry Rogers' alleged scholarship is so idiotic that it could only come from the mind of the single dumbest person in the DEI industry, which is Henry Rogers himself. In the article defending Ardae, Rogers states that, quote, The attacks are wielded by racist propagandists resenting you for shining a light on anti-black racism.

They hope everyone finally picks up their baseless claims. They know that to dim your light is to dim the light on their anti-blackness. In 2023, only the Financial Times covered extensively that William O'Reilly, a white Cambridge professor, was found guilty of plagiarism, all told a black Cambridge professor endure 249 times more media coverage for an accusation of plagiarism by a known racist. Well, I went and looked up this story. First of all, William O'Reilly was not presented by Cambridge as the leader in his field. They didn't send him out to every mainstream media outlet to do a point.

puff piece on his appointment, nor did he lie about every single aspect of his biography to an absurd degree. And Cambridge didn't suspend all of their alleged standards in order to hire him in the first place, nor did they give him any kind of preferential treatment because of his skin color. So it shouldn't be surprising that there's more media attention on our day. Someone Cambridge deliberately chose to turn into a star solely on the basis of his skin color. When an institution like Cambridge decides to discriminate against more qualified applicants and such a flagrant manner on the basis of race that is a much bigger story than one random professor plagiarizing a couple of paragraphs. And most importantly, from what I can tell, there was a single paper that

O'Reilly plagiarized from his student's work, a tribunal determined that his plagiarism was negligent rather than deliberate. And while that's still bad, and he should be fired for it, there's been no finding that he plagiarized every important academic paper he ever wrote. If you've never read The Odyssey, the basic premise is pretty simple. A guy goes off to fight a war. The war ends after 10 years. Then it takes him about 10 more years to get home. And during those 10 years, pretty much everything that can go wrong, does go wrong. He gets shipwrecked, encounters monsters, gets trapped on an island, deals with various gods and temptations. It generally has a much harder time getting home than you would think shouldn't be necessary. But what makes the Odyssey interesting isn't just the adventure. It's what Odysseus actually wants at the end of it. At one point, he's offered immortality. He and live forever in comfort without any of the responsibilities or difficulties of ordinary life. And he turns it down. He would rather go home to his wife and resume his ordinary life than live forever in paradise. Apparently Homer was writing this before avoiding responsibility became a virtue.

That's really the point. Odysseus understands something that we seem to have forgotten. An easy life isn't necessarily a good life. Home, family, duty, and loyalty are worth more than comfort or glory. That's why the Odyssey has remained relevant for nearly 3,000 years. also why Hillsdale College is offering a free online course dedicated to Homer's Great Epic taught by Professor Benedict Whalen. The course explores the Odyssey and its timeless lessons about courage, leadership, temptation, perseverance, and the search for home. This course includes

engaging lectures and can be completed entirely at your own pace. Go to Hillsdale.edu slash walsh to enroll. Totally free. Start reading, learn the classics, rediscover the West. Start right now at Hillsdale.edu.edu slash Walsh. Over the years, I've spent a lot of time talking about the evilsdale of abortion, and obviously it's important to fight this battle politically and culturally, but there's also something you can do right now that's very concrete. You can help save an actual child. Today, a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can order an abortion pill online. Sometimes before anyone has had the opportunity to tell her that there is another option. Preborn is trying to reach these women first. At preborn network clinics, mothers receive

compassion, practical support, and a free ultrasound. And more than 80% of abortion vulnerable women who see their baby on an ultrasound at a pre-born network clinic, choose life. Just think about that. For just $28, you can provide one of those ultrasounds. $140 helps rescue five babies. It's not an abstract political argument. This is a mother seeing her child for the first time and choosing life. And through pre-born, it's also an opportunity to share the hope of Jesus Christ with this woman. You were made for this moment. Dial pound 250 and say baby. That's pound 250. Baby. Go to preborn.com slash walsh again preborn.com slash walsh. So the scale of plagiarism is nowhere close to Jason Arden. And also, by the way, white people were not rallying around this guy to defend him and to accuse

his critics of racism. That happened in this case, which makes it an even bigger story. And it's a bigger story because it's a controversy. This is something the left never understands. when somebody is accused of doing something bad and everyone says, oh yeah, they did that bad thing. Like, yeah, sure, that was bad. Yeah, he plagiarized. He shouldn't have done that. He shouldn't be fired. Okay. When that happens, there's really no, there's nothing else to say.

Like, the story's over. But when you have someone who's accused of doing something bad and they did do the bad thing, and you've got mobs of people flanking them, surrounding them to protect them, and claiming that actually this bad thing isn't bad or it's okay in his case or whatever, that makes it a controversy. And so then the controversy itself turns into the story. Now, one of the main tactics that Ardae's defenders are using is to minimize all these details. They don't want to talk about what Ardae actually did. Instead, they want to speak in very general terms to convince people that he was lynched somehow. So here's PBS anchor and NBC contributor Jeff Bennett, for instance, taking an issue with the New York Times reporting on Ardae's fraud.

I'd quote, a man dies at 41 after weeks of relentless public scrutiny. The New York Times the next day says he was underqualified for his job. Whatever the merits of the underlying questions, publishing this now is ghoulish. First of all, spare me the whining about public scrutiny. Okay, I've faced public scrutiny plenty of times. It comes with the territory in any prominent position these days. You can't run around doing media interviews, trying to get your face on camera as much as possible, doing and saying things and making claims,

clearly designed to attract attention, and then cry like a baby when the public scrutiny comes. You literally asked for it. Now it's here. Stand up like a man and take it. But Jason Ardeh was no man at all. And just based on this tweet alone,

this Jeff guy should be fired from PBS and whatever other news organization he works for, you can't have anybody working for a news organization who's willing to misrepresent basic facts like this. No, the Times did not say he was underqualified. They also said he was a, they didn't just say that. He also said he was a serial liar and plagiarist. And no, Ardei was not just a random man.

He was a professor at a major university that collects taxpayer money, a university that has an international reputation. He's emblematic of a much larger DEI regime that operates in the vast majority of universities and workplaces all over the world. So if a journalist is going to ignore all of this, then he should quit and go work in communications for the NAACP or something. It's disgraceful.

Here's another take along these lines from the podcast of one Cahinde Andrews. Watch. It was a metaphor with cheap and lynching. So I didn't use it last week. It was like last week, it's public storm. It was a metaphorically a lynching. Now it's just a lynching. Man's dead because of the press.

because of the media, because of this campaign, and because people, including Cambridge, but not just Cambridge, didn't support him. That's the reality that we have to bear here. And so I've been getting a lot of phone calls from obviously from press, press. You're still handing him, by the way. Press outside his parents' house.

Man's dead outside his parents. What are they trying to get a picture of, like a picture of the mum? Like they leave him alone. Stop. Enough is enough. Honestly. Right, they just can't stop. It's like a feeding frenzy.

You have to talk accountability. like this didn't just happen in a vacuum this happened for many many many reasons and there is a whole lot of shame shame pie if you like to go around this was a mob this was a smear this was vile tactics and instead of seeing that many of us looked away

and said no no I'm not sure in fact instead of seeing that many of us man's being lynched and were there checking his credentials say hold on a second should we support him it's a bizarre respectability politics because you couldn't just see what was happening and back case.

Now you've got a lot of coming out as a point. That's enough of that. I really understand them. The effect of clips like this should be to make you go back and take another look at the reports of lynchings that you learn about in high school. Now, these black activists are describing legitimate, lawful criticism as a lynching.

They're saying that if you challenge a fraudulent black academic by pointing out that he's a liar and a fraud, which he is, then you are lynching him. And if that's the case, we should revisit like every single alleged lynching that we're told took place during this country's history. I mean, how many of those were just light criticisms? How many of those were justified responses to heinous crimes? If this is a lynching, then we have no choice. We have to go back and look at, okay, if that's what you mean when you say lynching, then what was going on back here?

And you're not crazy for asking that question based on how these people lied to your face? the time, particularly about lynchings. Every single time they try to claim somebody was lynched. It turns out to be a completely fake story. So they don't get to talk about lynching anymore. And if they don't like it, tough, this is what happens when you devalue the meaning of word, which is what the left does incensibly, incessantly. Here's another post with thousands of likes from somebody using the name Nells Abbey, quote, white supremacy killed Jason Ardei, murdered him. exposed, criticized, murdered, what's the difference, right? There's even a petition with tens of thousands of signatures, including faculty members at Cambridge and members of the British government, demanding a government investigation into the media because, quote, self-regulation of the press has comprehensively failed.

So they're begging for media censorship because the media reported the truth about a black fraudster. We respectfully ask you to commission an immediate public inquiry into how to ensure a responsible press given its contribution to Dr. Ardae's tragic death. Consider how far the West has fallen in order for tens of thousands of people in a Western country to demand government action to silence people for telling the truth about anything, much less DEI, which is another word for anti-white discrimination. You know, it's easy to criticize the United States, but we're the only Western country that still respects the freedom of speech by and large. And it's extraordinary, just how far everybody else has fallen. Now, to be clear, these unhaged tirades are not simply being directed at vague targets like the media or white supremacy. Some of the most vicious attacks have been leveled personally at Nathan Kauffman's, the former Cambridge academic who's exposed Arde's fraud. You can see a few of the threats he's received on the screen.

There's been a lot of it. He's getting hundreds of explicit death threats solely for reporting accurate information that led to the downfall of a scam artist. By the way, there's a great rundown of Nathan Kaufness's academic achievements that was published in Quillette the other day. He was kind of a rock star at Cambridge, and he was on the fast track to much bigger things. And then he made the argument that, quote, genes play a non-trivial role in average race differences in traits such as intelligence. Now, this is a belief that, according to anonymous surveys, more than 80% of experts in the field agree with.

It's also obviously true. But even at a university, a place supposedly dedicated to exploring and debating controversial ideas, this was an intolerable thing to say. So they showed him the door. And then as if to prove his point, Cambridge turned around and promoted incompetent, unqualified, unintelligent black fraudsters like Jason Arde. I need to emphasize that last point because it doesn't get stated nearly enough. If you were interested in disproving the idea that genetics and race and intelligence could possibly be linked,

then the worst thing you can do is silence any debate on the subject while simultaneously practicing DEI. I mean, it's as if Cambridge is secretly run by white supremacists. I mean, on the one hand, you have Nathan Koffness, an early career academic who's making an argument based on decades of peer-reviewed research. He's echoing the position of James Watson, who co-discovered the DNA double helix structure. He's taking an enormous personal risk to say something he believes it's true. On the other side, instead of debating with Nathan Kovness in any way, you have these absolute claspers. who silence him while promoting degenerate losers like Jason Arde, all while claiming he's the single best black scholar you could have possibly found. That's not how you win the argument.

It's not how you maintain any kind of legitimacy. Instead, it's how you concede Nathan Koffice's point. You're making his argument for him. And by the way, just since we're on the subject, it is a simple fact that there are average IQ differences between races. That is a fact. It doesn't matter how you feel about it. It's true. No credible person denies that. Lots of people who aren't credible do, but no credible person does. And the idea that genetics have absolutely nothing to do with those differences is just absurd on its face. Of course, there's some genetic. There's no reason to deny the genetic component except if you're worried about the societal implications of that. But societal implications, whatever they may be or not may not be, have nothing to do with the question

of whether or not it's factually true. And it is factually true. Keep in mind, according to Harvard's own internal 2013 analysis, which was disclosed in litigation, black enrollment in Harvard would drop to less than 1% if the admissions office stopped practicing anti-white discrimination, otherwise known as affirmative action, and if they judge candidates based on academic merit alone. With the discrimination, black enrollment was around 14%. So, COVID-ness is obviously correct that universities to this day are giving an enormous benefit to black applicants, although they can't articulate why exactly they're doing that.

This is very much a live issue. This kind of discrimination has continued even after Supreme Court ruled that Harvard's affirmative action is unconstitutional. So we should be able to debate issues like this without fear of being silenced or terminated. Instead, leftist academics are shutting down any kind of dialogue, even as they're openly selecting students and faculty solely on the basis of race. And in the process, they're destroying what is left of the education system. This is an extraordinary op-ed that was just published in the San Francisco Standard. It's written by a calculus teacher at Berkeley, one of the top universities in the nation, allegedly. Quote, I teach mathematics at UC Berkeley.

Three days a week, I stand in front of lecture halls with 500 to 400 students. By the second week of the semester, I already know who's in trouble. Some students are five to eight years behind in mathematics. Office hours that should be spent discussing integrals instead become lessons on fractions and basic algebra you would expect students to learn in middle school. Now, the professor notes that from 2018 to 2020, more than 70% of students at Berkeley tested as ready or nearly ready for calculus prior to enrolling in calculus class. after Berkeley changed its admissions policies so that standardized tests were no longer relevant, that number dropped all the way down to 44%. So in other words, in the quest to achieve equity, major universities, students and faculty,

have become dramatically less capable and intelligent all over the world. We all knew this was happening, of course, but it's notable that a San Francisco newspaper and a Berkeley professor of all people are coming out and admitting it. It's a big change from just a few years ago. DEI has become an embarrassment to every institution that practices it. So despite what Cambridge and Henry Rogers and other black activists are trying to say about Jason Ardei, the truth is most people are not falling for it. DEI was always bound to lead to increasingly bizarre and humiliating outcomes because by its very nature, it only selects for candidates who are both unqualified and shameless. and after all, you have to be totally shameless to accept accolades that you clearly don't deserve.

And as DEI's reputation circles the drain, an even greater degree of shamelessness is required to participate in the sham. So we'll continue to get more and more stories like Jason Arde's, except somehow they'll be even more absurd and unbelievable. The insanity will have to ratchet up even further. This is what the death throws of DEI looks like. Just a few years ago when we produced Am I Racist, this moment seemed many years off, maybe even decades. But with the comically preposterous rise and fall of Jason Ardei

and the subsequent freakout by deranged black activists, it's fair to say that the fall of DEI is already upon us. Or as Jason Ardee might have said, if he were still with us, observing the public humiliation of a once great university because of his own rampant dishonesty. Now I am become death, the destroyer of DEI. And people would say, wait, Jason, are you quoting Oppenheimer? Hindu scripture?

And he'd respond that no, he was being totally original. Completely thought of that line himself this morning when he was brushing his teeth. And somewhere in a faculty lounge deep in the bowels of Cambridge University, a white liberal woman would break down to tears at the sheer originality of Jason Ardei, the premier Cambridge academic, the exemplar of everything academia stands for, taken from us far too soon. Now before we go, we just finished a real history episode on the Watergate scandal. There's a lot of information in it. Like when the FBI went into the Watergate complex to check for bugs after the break-in, they didn't find any. One of the burglars apparently had access to the DNC offices. Another had a key to the desk inside.

All of them were connected to the CIA. All of that and a lot more is in this episode, which you have to see. It comes out for all Daily Wire subscribers on Wednesday. Here's the trailer. But in all of my years of public life, I have never profited from public service. I welcome this kind of examination because people have got to know whether or not their presidents are crook. Well, I'm not a crook. For more than five decades, from Iran-Contra to Monica Lewinsky to Russia Gate,

every political scandal has been measured against one, the Watergate affair. But what if Richard Nixon was telling the truth? What if Watergate isn't what it seems? What if hundreds of thousands of pages of sworn testimony, memoirs, and newly released government documents tell a different story than the one you learned in school? I know America. In 1972, Nixon won the biggest electoral landslide in modern American history with grand plans to remake the federal government.

Two years later, he was out of office. You were taught that Nixon's men broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters to spy on his political opponents. You were taught that when he found out, Nixon covered it up. And the cover-up was worse than the crime. You were taught that two heroic Washington Post reporters, guided by a righteous FBI whistleblower, brought the most powerful man in the world to justice.

But you were never told what really happened. I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. The real history of the Watergate scandal is available now on Daily Wireplace. You got to watch the episode. You don't want to miss it. You know, learn a lot. Lifetime and all access members get early access and can watch right now, though. So go do that. And in the meantime, have a great day. We'll talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed. Your country is beneath contempt. We who love and serve Allah fought back against the Americans and the Zionists from the scourge of secularism and the lands of unbelief. in Saunders tomorrow. They retired Delta Force soldier with a new book out.

He's the polar opposite of those brain dead protesters. Given the current climate, should place Saunders to even be allowed on campus. Mr. Saunders is a close personal friend of Chancellor Friedman. This is a decision I cannot fly. There are three ways Islam will conquer the West. Through immigration, through the wombs of our women, and by using our nation's freedoms against us.

Are you paying? attention. Aniloktu. Listen carefully. The great Satan America will fall. You are infidels. The bodies of women are not pure and the men's souls are unclean. What makes them so dangerous?

Their goals are not in this life, but the next. Friends here, I can't just leave. They listen to me! In the law! We cannot run or hide from what is coming. is coming. We have to fight. I will be rewarded 10,000 times in the next life. When you die, you're nothing. Only one way to find out. That's the American way.