The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 507 - Rayshard Brooks Was A Violent Criminal, Not A Victim

Episode Date: June 18, 2020

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, in one of the worst injustices we’ve seen in recent memory, the officer who shot Rayshard Brooks in self-defense is being charged with murder. We’ll talk about this case and why the charges are insane. Also, the media is attempting to make a saint out of Brooks, so we’re going to discuss the actual truth about this man. Also Five Headlines. And in our Daily Cancellation, in honor of my birthday, I will be canceling cake. Just hear me out on this. If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/walsh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today on the Matt Wall Show, in one of the worst injustices we've seen in recent memory, the officer who shot Richard Brooks in self-defense is being charged with murder. We'll talk about this case and why the charges are just completely insane. Also, related to this, the media is attempting to make a saint, a hero posthumously, out of Richard Brooks. And we know that this is what they do. This is a tactic. So I want to discuss the actual truth about this man. What sort of man was he?

I think that's important. We'll talk about that. Also, five headlines. And in our daily cancellation, in honor of my birthday, which is today, no big deal, don't make a big deal out of it. I will be canceling cake. Just hear me out on this. I have a, I have, I have, I will make my case.

And you need to hear it because this is important. And these are the kinds of things we talk about on the show, the important things. All of that coming up. But first, a word from LifeLock, you know, having your identity stolen is, I think a has So we'll be putting it mildly. It's a very, very troubling thing to go through, very difficult thing to resolve. While many people continue to work from home on computers and devices, we have an alert about large-scale fishing campaigns that are undergoing.

Microsoft is warning that phishing emails, which appear to be coming from the Johns Hopkins Center, are trying to trick people to open an attachment disguised as a COVID-19 report, and then that downloads a file that gives hackers access to their PCs. So these attacks come in many different ways. you never know exactly what to expect. Fortunately, LifeLock is always one step ahead of the game. LifeLock detects a wide range of identity thefts, like your Social Security number being for sale on the dark web.

That's something you'd like to know about. If they detect your information has potentially been compromised, they will send you an alert, and you will know right away. And you also have access to a dedicated restoration specialist who will handle your case. And if you become a victim, then you're going to have that tool at your disposal as well. nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses. LifeLock can see threats that you might miss on your own. Join now and save up to 25% off off off off lifelock.com slash walsh. That's lifelock.com slash walsh for 25% off.

Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard in Atlanta, who is, by the way, under investigation for funneling funds from a nonprofit to supplement his salary and who has been repeatedly accused of sexual harassment by his subordinate. and who was now facing a primary challenge, decided to charge the cop who shot Richard Brooks in self-defense with felony murder. The other officer on the scene has also been charged. Now, to review, to review the Rayshard Brooks case, Brooks is the convicted violent felon who passed out drunk behind the wheel of his car in a Wendy's drive-thru.

him. They called the police because he was blocking traffic because he was passed out drunk in his car. Police came, they talked to him, talked to him for a while, gave a sobriety test. He failed. So they tried to make an arrest. Brooks assaults the officers, steals their taser, fires it at them multiple times. And then on the second attempt, to fire it at them, they shot and killed him. All of this, as any rational person can see, is entirely the fault of Rayshard Brooks. every step of the way, everything that happened, Rayshar Brooks's fault. In fact, let's take a look at that video again

of the shooting and the lead up to it. If you haven't seen it yet, this is important context, so take a look at this. Hold on, Mr. Brooks. Will you take a preliminary breath test for me? It's yes or no. I don't want to refuse anything. It's yes or no. It's completely up to you.

Yes, I will. Okay. Just wait here while I go. What kind of drinks did you have? I'm not sure. It's something she ordered. She said top shelf or whatever. Top shelf what? I'm not sure. It was, like I said, it was her birthday and... You had about one and a half drinks. You don't remember what kind of drinks they were? No, sir. All right. I really don't, Mr. R. All right. I think you've had too much to drink to be dry. I just put your hands on your back for me. Put your hands by your butt.

Hey, hey, stop fighting. Stop fighting. You're going to get tea. You're going to get taste. Stop, stop, stop. Stop. You're going to get tight. It's a right. Hey, guys on the fucking David. Stop, stop my. Stop by! That's sticky, three. Put your hands on your back.

Put your hands on your back. All right, that officer that you saw there trying to be very reasonable is facing felony murder for shooting a violent criminal who was attacking him. Remember, you could see in the video, we're told that he was shot in the back. Maybe he was irrelevant because he was turning around and pointing a weapon at the officers after he'd already assaulted them. after he'd already made it clear that he would do anything. He was going to do anything. He would resort to anything to escape. So he'd made it very, very clear.

He'd made it extremely clear that he was a lethal threat to them. And now he's pointing a weapon at them. In fact, a weapon that is categorized as a deadly weapon by the state of Georgia. And we'll get to that in a second. And so they shoot him. Now, many reports surfaced last night saying that hundreds of Atlantic Atlanta cops were walking off the job in protest of this unjust prosecution, refusing to answer calls, you know, basically going on strike.

Good for them. This is exactly what needs to happen. This should be happening across Atlanta. This should be happening across the country. This is what cops need to do. Widespread strikes. If the people want mayhem, if they want anarchy, if they don't want cops there to protect them, then they can have it.

Now, before we go any further, I want to talk about, and we'll talk about all this in more detail, but let's take a look at a few of the clips from the press conference that the DA Howard gave yesterday, where he was explaining his reasoning for filing these charges

because you have to see this for yourself. If you haven't seen it, it's a really incredible press conference in a lot of ways and all bad ways. You have to see and hear as this guy tries to justify his decision to throw an innocent man to the wolves. And he's very desperate to justify it, but his reasoning is

tortured, to say the least. So watch. So in reaching our decision, there were some considerations that we considered important. And one of the things that we noted from our evaluation was that Mr. Brooks on the night of this incident was calm, he was cordial, and really displayed a cooperative nature. Secondly, even though Mr. Brooks was of slightly impaired, his demeanor during this incident was almost jovial. Also, we noted that he received many instructions from the Atlanta

officers and he was asked many questions. Some of the questions he was asked repeatedly. But for 41 minutes and 17 seconds, he followed every instruction. He answered the questions. Yeah, did you catch that? Brooks was, Brooks, the violent criminal who was assaulting officer, stole a weapon, was shooting it at them, was calm, cordial, cooperative, and jovial. This is what passes for calm, cooperative, cordial, and jovial. apparently. Apparently, you can cordially assault a police officer. Now, I'll be honest, I haven't specifically looked up any of these words in the dictionary, but I'm pretty sure that assaulting a police officer is not going to fall under the definition

for any of these words, although that might change. I mean, we know that Webster's Dictionary changed the definition of racism because BLM activists told them to. So maybe they'll, maybe we're going to get a change to the definition of cordial. because BLM demands it. And it gets worse, if you can believe it. Listen. We concluded and considered it as one of our important considerations that Mr. Brooks never presented himself as a threat.

At the very beginning, he was peacefully sleeping in his car. After he was awakened by the officer, he was cooperative. and he was directed to move his car to another location. He calmly moved his car. Mr. Brooks was asked whether or not he had a weapon. He indicated that he did not. Without any resistance, he passed his driver's license to the officers. And the officers then asked Mr. Brooks whether or not he would consent to a pat-down or a body search.

and Mr. Brooks allowed them to search him, and the search yielded no weapon. We found that it was of interest that when the officers patted Mr. Brooks down, they noticed there was a bulge in his pants. They did not pull that item out of his pocket. They took Mr. Brooks' word that that bulge represented a number of dollar bills. But Mr. Brooks never displayed any aggressive business. behavior during the 70, 41 minutes and 17 seconds. Never presented himself as a threat.

Peacefully sleeping in his car. Peacefully sleeping? That's one hell of a way for a DA to describe a guy passed out drunk behind the wheel. He blew over a point one. The limit is 0.08. Over point one for a man of his size, you know, you'd have to drink five or six drinks in an hour to get to that point, which many people are capable of drinking that much. But the point is, if you drink that much and then you drive and you're

peacefully sleeping in the car, that's not sleeping. That's passed out. That's what we call passed out. Drunk. I wonder, could I go pass out drunk on the DA's porch? Could I go to his house on his porch, sprawl out, maybe bring a blanket? Can I peacefully sleep on his porch after a night of drinking? And, you know, he's not going to call the cops, right? Will he refrain from calling the cops because he doesn't want to disturb my hallowed slumber? Now, and he keeps going, in both of those clips, you hear that he goes back time and again, he's hammering on this 41 minutes and 17 seconds thing. He keeps saying that for 41 minutes and 17 seconds, Brooks was just a swell guy. He was a great guy, peaceful, for 41 minutes and 17 seconds.

41 minutes and 17 seconds. Yeah, for 41 minutes and 17 seconds. Unfortunately, at 41 minutes and 18 seconds, he became a violent sociopath attacking and assaulting cops and stealing their weapon and using it against them. That's what happened at 41 minutes and 18 seconds. But from zero seconds to 41 minutes and 18 seconds, you know, he was nice.

So what? What are you saying exactly? Are you saying that he had been, you know, once you get to 41 minutes and 18 seconds, you're allowed to do whatever you want? As long as you're nice to the cops and cooperative for 41 minutes and 17 seconds, then you're fine. Once you get to 41 minutes and 18 seconds, then the purge is on and you can do whatever you want. Is that what you're saying?

If that's not what you're saying, then who gives a damn that he was, he was a nice guy for 41 minutes? Oh, 41 minutes of being a nice guy. You mean he didn't attack or try to kill anybody for 41 minutes? Wow, that's impressive. Let's give him a medal. Let's give him a medal of honor posthumously, Medal of Freedom, all the medals.

Nobel Peace Prize. Let's give Ray Sharbrooks the Nobel Peace Prize because for 41 minutes, he refrained from trying to kill police officers. Yeah, I mean, after that he started to try to kill him, but for 41 minutes! My goodness! What?

This man is a hero. Now, it's interesting that this guy Howard says the officer's lives were not in danger. You know, Brooks only had a taser. That's interesting because here's what Howard himself only a couple of weeks ago said about tasers when he was charging police officers with assault for using a taser on protesters.

Here's what he said about tasers then. Listen. Charge with aggravated assault of Ms. Pilgrim, and this is for pointing a taser at Mrs. Pilgrim. And as many of you all know under Georgia law, a taser is considered as a deadly weapon under Georgia law. A deadly weapon under Georgia law, according to Howard's own words, Brooks was using a deadly weapon against the officers. And yet they're being charged with murder for responding with deadly force when he is using deadly force against them. the standard here seems to be, according to this crooked prosecutor, that tasers are only deadly

weapons when cops use them. If you use them against the cop, it's not a deadly weapon anymore. This, again, is total leozy. It is madness. It is one of the worst injustices I've ever seen. And I don't say that as hyperbole. It really is. I'm glad the officers are walking off the job. I hope they do it, like I said, in cities across America. If people want anarchy, let them have it. If they want their cities run by violent criminals and sociopaths like Rayshard Brooks, good, have at it. Enjoy. But let's be honest about this for once. Let's be clear about what's happening, okay?

Officer Rolf is being charged because of his race. His crime is being a white cop. That's his crime. That's the great crime that he committed is being a white cop. If this was a black cop and a white suspect, no charges are going to be filed. We all know that. There's no question. This is racial retribution.

The DA is a bigot and a racist targeting a man for his race. He should be disbarred and he should go to jail. Now, I ask again, how are cops supposed to do their jobs like this? Really, how are they supposed to do it? They're out here every night dealing with the worst people. humanity has to offer. That's most of what a cop does is going to be that. I think I mentioned before, you know, I remember I got a speeding ticket.

This is years ago. I've gotten several speeding tickets, afraid to say. But this particular one was years ago. And, you know, I was going well over the speed limit, so I deserved it. But I was at the court, and I was talking to the cop before we went in to, you know, talk to the judge. And he was saying to me that, you know, he really doesn't like that the only time that he, that he, one of the only times on his job that he, that he deals with just sort of nice, law-abiding normal people is when he's giving them speeding tickets. Because the rest of the time, you know, he's answering domestic violence calls. He's just in, he's in areas where there are a lot of crime and he's dealing with criminals.

And one of the only times that he's actually just dealing with, you know, decent people is because he's given him in. speeding ticket. And he doesn't, you know, it's, it's kind of, that kind of wears on you after a while. I remember the cops saying that and, and, you know, that has always stood out to me because that, that's kind of true. Most of the time, cops, they're dealing with dangerous, that they're cops. They're going to be dealing with dangerous people, criminals. They are doing a lot of domestic violence stuff. You know, that's, that's going to be a lot of the calls they're responding to. And or, or, you know, things like this, someone passed out drunk, dealing with that, drug addicts and so and so forth.

So they're out trying to enforce the law on people who, like Brooks, think nothing of lashing out violently, sometimes fatally. They're dealing with sociopaths a lot of the time. This is what they're up against. And now, if they have to defend themselves in a situation like that, they know they'll go to jail. So they're in a position where they're dealing with a violent, dangerous person and a bad person, as Brooks was. And he has decided to turn it violent. And immediately now the cops know, they're in a position where this can go a few ways. They can be killed,

or they can protect themselves and kill, potentially, and then face the very real possibility that they're going to go to prison for the rest of their lives. and be reviled across the world as racist, and there's going to be riots, and their family's going to have to go into government protection for the rest of their lives. I mean, they know that. How do you do your job? Under those circumstances, how do you do it? Why do you do it? Now, there's one other point I want to make here, and this is important, because we've seen this process play out many times already.

The game, the tactic from the left, whenever there's a shooting like this, is to turn the criminal into a martyr, into a saint, into a man of unimpeachable character, a pillar of his community, a loving father and husband, etc, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. This is not just about not speaking ill of the dead. It's not just that they don't want to speak ill of the dead. This is way beyond that.

Because they aren't just not speaking ill. They're canonizing, sanctifying, making heroes out of them. The point is obviously emotional manipulation. Make it so that rational discussion is impossible, disallowed. make it so that the only thing you're allowed to say about the death of the man is that it's an unspeakable tragedy and the world is so much worse now that he's gone and it's the worst thing in the world and you've been crying yourself to sleep five nights in a row over it. Make it so that that's the only thing you're allowed to say. That's the only acceptable take on this matter. Because then it's impossible to argue that he was the aggressor, that it was his fault. It's impossible to, and even if it wasn't his fault, even if he wasn't the aggressor. it's still going to be impossible to inject any kind of nuance into the conversation at all.

And we've seen this happen many times. It started with Michael Brown. Michael Brown was a violent sociopath who assaulted a store clerk for no reason, stole something just for the sake of stealing it. The store clerk tried to stop him, grabbed him by the neck and shoved him, walks down the street and tries to kill a cop. It's just a bad, violent person. It's a terrible person. and they made them into a gentle giant. You know, that was the phrase we kept hearing. A gentle, gentle man, young man, and we get his graduation picture.

Over and over again, we see it. Now Rayshard Brooks, ABC News has this headline. Rayshard Brooks remembered for hard work and dedication to family. Hard work and dedication to family. We'll get back to that in a second. What, what, yeah, in what way was he dedicated to his family? I'm wondering. We'll get back to that.

Here's the mayor of Atlanta on CNN describing Brooks as a guy you're rooting for. This has been hard. And it is really been difficult for me to put aside my own anger and sadness during this time and really be able to articulate what our communities need to hear because the reality is what can you say? I watched the body cam video. I watched it for 30 minutes. I watched the interaction with Mr. Brooks, and it broke my heart when he talked about his daughter's birthday party that he was planning for. This is not confrontational. This was a guy that you were rooting for. And even knowing the end, watching it, you're going to

just let him go. Just let him go. Let them call somebody to pick them up. By the way, Mayor, no, you don't let a convicted violent felon who's passed out drunk behind the wheel go. You don't just let him go. And that's not what normal people are thinking when they see that. Oh, just let him go. You don't let them walk away. You don't call them an Uber. The cops are not a concierge service for drunk felons. That's not what they do. You idiot. And you know, there's, there's, you don't let the, the drunk felon just go. You enforce the law. Why is he special?

If I passed out drunk behind the wheel, I would expect to get arrested. Many people have been arrested for that kind of thing. Thousands of people across the country have been arrested for driving drunk. And most of them were still awake, at least, when they got pulled over. Why the hell is, is there any particular reason? reason why Rayshar Brooks should have been special and let go when nobody else would be in that circumstance. And then we also hear that once all this happened and he's running away, they just let him go. They didn't have to shoot him. Never mind the fact that he's pointing something.

He's pointing a weapon at them. But even if he wasn't, you know something, even if he wasn't pointing, which he was, but even if he wasn't, you have again a drunk, violent, dangerous felon, who has already demonstrated that he will do anything to get away. He doesn't care. He'll resort to violence. It doesn't matter to him. You're going to just let him run off into the night and what, hope that he goes home and sleeps it off

and waits for the cops to come pick him up the next day? Is that what you're going to do? Is that the safest thing for the community? And no, Brooks is not. not a guy that you're rooting for. I'm not rooting for him. I wouldn't root for him. Here's CNN again. This is Anderson Cooper saying that Brooks is trying hard to do right by his family, and he's reaching heroically for redemption. Given the news tonight that one fired Atlanta police officer has been charged with the capital crime, another also faces serious

charges in the killing of Rayshard Brooks. The next item is haunting. You'll see what might have been a story of struggle and perhaps redemption. In video obtained exclusively by CNN's Van Jones, Mr. Brooks talks about life after incarceration and the impact it's had on his family, the family that he's trying hard to do right by, trying for redemption, which he can see within reach and which he can not know will never come. And on and on and on. You get the idea. Okay, so let's talk about the reality, and the reality is this, because the truth matters. The reality matters, truth matters. Here it is. Rayshard Brooks was a bad man, a violent man, an abuser of women and children. Brooks in 2014 pleaded guilty to false imprisonment, family violence, battery, and felony

cruelty against children. Now, if you're wondering how you get a felony cruelty to children charge in Georgia, let me just read from a lawyer website. This is Conway and Strickler. I just Googled it. This is what popped up describing the parameters of the cruelty to children crimes. This is not specifically related to Rayshaw Brooks, but this is the charge that he was, he pled guilty to. Willfully depriving a child of his or her basic needs for survival to the point that health and well-being are jeopardized or causing a child cruel or excessive mental or physical pain are considered first-degree cruelty to children offenses.

Criminal negligence that causes cruel or excessive mental or physical pain falls under the heading of second-degree cruelty to children, while the offense of cruelty to children in the third degree can result when an individual intentionally allows a child to witness forcible felonies, battery, or family violence. So that's Rayshar Brooks falls in somewhere. That's just one of his crimes. Dedicated to his family. Felony cruelty to children. Dedicated to his family, a family man.

And we're told he he wanted to get home for his daughter's birthday. So he's out, passed out drunk in the middle of the night? That's what you do when you want to get home and see your child for her birthday? I mean, I relate to, you know, wanting to be there for your child's birthday. I got four kids. I want to be there for the birthdays. I want to be there, you know, for as long as I can through their lives. That's why I'm not going to drive pass out drunk, you know, in the middle of the night or at any other time of day.

And that's why if I did do that and I was getting arrested, I wouldn't start assaulting the cops and throw my life away. That's not what you do. That is not what you do if you want to see. your kids. Drunk driving, resisting arrest, assault of a police officer, assault with a deadly weapon. Those are the crimes we can add to the crimes he already committed. So we got everything I listed. Plus, drunk driving, resisting arrest, assault of a police officer, assault with a deadly weapon, on top of cruelty to children, false imprisonment, family violence, domestic abuse. No, this is not a man dedicated to his family. This is not a man that you root for.

I don't root for child abusers. I don't know about you, mayor. I don't root for child abusers. They're not the people that I root for. I don't root for violent sociopaths who use deadly weapons against police. Those aren't the people that I root for. I don't root for men like that. No. He was not a good man. He was not trying to turn his life around.

Don't give me that. You don't drive drunk pass out a drive-thru lane and then assault cops if you want to turn your life around. Trying hard. He's trying hard to get back on the... I mean, I've never done... any of those things and it required no effort at all not to do it. I've been pulled over, as I've said,

I've been pulled over many times. I've never assaulted a police officer. It required no effort at all for me to refrain from assaulting the police officer. So you're telling me that he's trying hard and can't manage to stop himself from assaulting an officer with a deadly weapon. In that case, he's worse than I thought.

Because if that was the absolute best he could do, if that was him at his best, that's him trying hard. Well, I'd hate to see him at his worst. And it sounds like his children did see him at his worst and paid the price for it. So don't give me this BS. I don't want to hear it. We can't allow this to happen this time. We can't let them turn Rayshard Brooks into a hero, a saint, anything like that. There's a bad man, a violent felon.

That needs to be the message because it's the damn truth. And it's what we need to say. It matters. You can't get squeamish about it and say, I don't want to, you know, it's a man passed away. I don't want to. Okay, well, you could be squeamish and you could be nice about it. And they're going to build this narrative and they're going to use that narrative to send an innocent man to jail forever, if not the death penalty.

That's the narrative they're going to use. So you could be a very nice person. and not want to contradict that narrative, then you could very nicely sit there while a man is sent effectively or literally to his death. Let's go to news. All right. Number one, a couple of weeks ago,

it was claimed that a truck driver made a white power sign at a Black Lives Matter protest as he was driving by. The mob went into action. Of course, the man was fired. Well, now he's speaking out, this guy that supposedly did a white power sign at a Black Lives Matter protest, explaining that he never made a white power sign. He was cracking his knuckles as he drove by.

And there are other details as well about this guy that I think are relevant. So watch this local news report on it. It's scary that you can be charged, tried, and convicted on social media. Without your permission with no corroborating evidence of any type. A local SDG&E worker has been fired after allegations of racism were made against him. Now he's speaking exclusively to NBC7 about what he calls a major misunderstanding. He says his employer jumped to conclusions and he should not have lost his job. Priya Shrethar has the story.

It all started about two weeks ago near a Black Lives Matter rally in Poway. Emmanuel Kaferty says he had an interaction with a member of the public that later got posted on Twitter. He says shortly after he was fired by his employer, SDG&E. This was the tweet that Emmanuel Cafferty says started it all. It shows an SDG&E worker making a hand gesture that some say is a white supremacist sign. When my supervisor said that I was being accused of doing a white supremacist gesture, that was baffling. Cafferty is the man in the picture and says he had no idea what the symbol meant. he was just cracking his knuckles.

But shortly after, he was informed that he was suspended by SDG&E pending an investigation, and a few days later, he was fired. I do that a lot when I'm driving. It has no racist intent behind it. And I was confident that I would be able to, you know, with my character, show SDG&E that I'm not a racist. According to the Anti-Defamation League, this hand sign has been used in. in recent years by white supremacists as a white power gesture. But a post on the organization's website says that it is also widely used as a sign signifying approval and therefore shouldn't be assumed to be a white supremacy symbol unless there's

other evidence to support those claims. I don't know how long it's going to take me to get over this, but to lose your dream job for playing with your fingers, that's a hard pill to swallow. Okay, so this is, and we have to appreciate the Anti-Defamation League explaining to us what the OK sign means. And this, how many times we have to go through this? The OK sign is not a white power sign and never was. That was an internet hoax. I think that was 4chan made that up.

And they're still going with it. Oh, but they, at least they'll admit that sometimes people can do that and not mean anything by it. Sometimes. But, you know, it could be that they're white supremacist. So this was a completely innocent man. Speaking of an innocent man, being accused of things. That's sort of the theme here. Just a normal guy, just a guy doing his job.

Now he's unemployed. He's reviled as a racist because someone caught him making an offensive shape with his fingers. Meanwhile, he's not even white. You saw the guy, right? He's Mexican. This is a Mexican-American. Okay, a man of Mexican descent. he's fired from his job for being a white supremacist and he's Mexican.

How did that conversation go? When his cowardly employers pulled him in and said, yes, sorry, we have to let you go for being a white supremacist. Yeah, but I'm not white, though. I'm not, yes, but you're a suspected white supremacist. I'm not, you see, not white this here, I literally cannot be a white supremacist. It's impossible. It is actually impossible. I am not white. You see everything going on here. Non-whiteness. I imagine the conversation. I hope the conversation went something like that anyway. This is, it's collective insanity. We've fallen into collective hysteria. You know, it's, you can't reason your way out of it anymore. If we're firing a guy because he was cracking his knuckles in an offensive way and saying that it makes him a suspected white supremacist,

even though he's Mexican. Yeah, okay. Where do you go from there? You can't argue against that. It's not like someone who would defend that. You can't present an argument to them that's going to change their mind. This is someone, in order to argue against someone,

in order to present an argument to someone, they have to have a functioning brain that they're willing to use. And unfortunately, there are a lot of people in our country that don't have functioning brains, or at least they're not willing to use them if they do. And so there's nothing you could say to them. Number two, here's an attack that happened outside of a gas station in Texas.

Take a look. The victim says the assailants screamed Black Lives Matter. So this is basically Jussie Smollett except races reversed and it actually happened. So I guess it's nothing like Jussie Smolett come to think of it. But it's in terms of how, think about how gratuitous that attack was, the attack that Jesse Smollett claimed happened. Completely gratuitous and ridiculous. That's one of the ways you knew it was fake. Except here, that sort of thing actually happened.

We know it happened because we can see it. Only the races are reversed. And of course, we know that you reverse the races back, and this is a, you know, these are white guys doing this, who are the culprits. Then that's national news, it's headlines. There's probably going to be protests and riots, so on and so forth.

Number three, a report from the Daily Wire says, Infectious Disease Expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, a key member of the President Donald Trump's, President Donald Trump's Coronavirus Task Force, admitted Tuesday that health experts, including himself, downplayed the efficacy of face masks in preventing the spread of COVID-19 out of concern that Americans would snap up the available stock

and there would be none left for health care workers. So he's just the latest person to admit this. And I guess most people are okay with it. It seems like from the reaction, they're admitting that they lied to the public and by their own logic put the public in danger from those lies

because they thought that we couldn't handle the truth. How is that not an enormous scandal? Number four, John Bolton has a book out where he talks about some of the stuff, some of the stuff, I don't care.

I don't care about this. This is what, I just don't care. I really don't. I'm done with all this. all the drama with Trump and the personal feuds on both sides. I just don't care. Yeah, I mean, I get it. Okay?

We know who Trump is. I'm not surprised. I get, we get it now. I personally, for one, I get it. I don't need another book. And John Bolton, some of the stuff he's accusing Trump of, I really don't care at all, to be honest with you. But some of the stuff he's accusing Trump of, sound, you know, if they're, you know, if they're they actually happened, sound like they'd be potentially criminal, huge scandals. Why didn't you say

something when they happened if they actually did? Why didn't you testify? Why didn't you say something? You wait until you're fired and they wait another, what, year to put it in a book so you can sell a book off of it? So if it did actually happen, then that just makes you a horrible scumbag as well. One of the things he claims is that Trump endorsed concentration camps in China. I don't know if that happened or not. That wouldn't be a crime on Trump's part, but it would be a big scandal. That's the kind of if that actually happened and you're a man of integrity, you would come out right away and say something about that while you're still in the administration, right? Because then you have some credibility. Then it's not like you're a spurned or employee or, you know, a jilted. It's,

It's not like that. You're not a disgruntled ex-employee. But no, instead he writes in his little notebook, supposedly, and then brings it up a year later so he can sell books of it. And it's just... And then Trump is on Hannity last night, and he's tweeting and he's talking about John Bolton. No one cares about this.

This is not what's important. We don't care about your personal feuds, Mr. President. We care about the fact that the country is falling apart at the scenes. That's what matters. That should be your focus. 100% of your focus. Entirely. Nothing else.

Number five. Finally, Variety has an article making the rounds. The headline, 10 problematic films that could use warning labels. So this is, we know about Gone with the Wind,

problematic film that now has a warning label on HBO Max. Variety, helpfully, has suggested other films that should use that should have warning labels. They have,

what do they say? They say, dirty hairy should have a warning. Forrest Gump. It says Forrest Gump was made by intelligent people, won six Oscars and as beloved by many, while the film is condescending to anyone with a disability, Vietnam vets, and people with AIDS, among others. It's actually hostile to protesters, activists, and counterculture. As a bonus, lovable title character, Nathan Bedford Forrest, was named after his grandfather, the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. So that's very problematic.

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is problematic, needs a warning label. Stephen Spielberg and George Lucas are generally compassionate filmmakers, but this film went a little too far in trying to replicate the mood of 1930s action serials. Like those old movies, the exotic villains are portrayed as primitive and bloodthirsty foreigners, resulting in negative and stereotypical depictions of India and of Hindu customs. And then, okay, all right. Speaking of things nobody cares about. How about this? If you're the sort of person who would get offended by Indiana, Jones in the Temple of Doom or Forrest Gump. If you're the sort of person who would need a warning label on a film, rather than us putting warning labels in all the films, why don't you just deport yourself to Jupiter and leave the planet and never come back?

I think that would be the best for all parties concerned. Now we're going to go to our daily cancellation. It's a very important one. Before we do, if you're not out. already a DailyWire member, you should consider getting a readers pass at DailyWire.com. It's great value, only $3 a month. And when you sign up, you get the first month for only $99. You also get access to our mobile app articles, ad free and access to exclusive editorials, all for, again, just $0.99 for the first month.

So if you haven't checked out the Reader's Pass already, go to dailywire.com and sign up for just a buck. And it really is that easy. And I would highly recommend it. Now, for our daily cancellation, today on my birthday, I thought, it was a perfect occasion to cancel cake. I want to explain why. And this is by far the most important issue I'm going to talk about today on the show. So you need to pay attention. You know, the other day, I was talking to my wife,

and she said that she wanted to get me a cake for my birthday. And this is exactly the kind of microaggression that people around the world have been suffering for too long. Every birthday is made to revolve around cake. It's just assumed that if you have a celebratory, occasion, birthday, wedding, retirement, whatever it is. There's going to be a cake. There should be a cake. What kind of cake do you want? It's not even like, do you want a cake? It's what kind of cake is it going to be? There's the assumption of the cake. The pro-cake assumption is itself deeply problematic. Meanwhile, cake sits there confidently, arrogantly on its, on its lofty perch

as humanity's celebratory pastry of choice when in fact it is subpar, sometimes outright bad. Most of the time acceptable, but not special. It's kind of like the, I don't know, the Alex Smith of pastries. So let's be honest. And this is what,

you can't deny this. You have never had a great piece of cake in your life. You never have. Don't tell me that you have. I know, I know better than you do about what, about what's happened in your life and what you've eaten. Okay. So let me tell you, you have never had a great piece of cake.

Maybe you've had pieces of cake that were great for cake. By the standards of cake, they were great. You've never had cake that was truly great. That truly deserved to be in the pantheon of your all-time great dessert experiences. If you were to make a list of the 10 best desserts you've ever had, nobody's birthday cake is going to be on the list, unless you're mentally disordered. Now, so here's the thing. You've had slices of pie that warranted those accolades. You've had brownies that did. You've even had cookies that did. You maybe have had ice cream that did.

And yet those don't get the recognition that cake gets. And if somebody on his birthday, say me, for example, wants to have brownies instead of cake, he sneered at, mocked, discriminated against, belittled, assaulted, killed. I've seen it happen. I've seen someone be murdered on their birthday for not having cake. Happens all the time. Okay. And I'm done with this.

So it's time to be honest. It's time to confront the truth. Cake is okay, not special, not sufficient for birthday celebrations. What does it tell you? Here's all the proof you need. Here's all the evidence you need. What does it tell you that the actual cake part of the cake has to be slathered in sugary, disgusting icing? Nobody has a cake without icing. Why is that? I mean, the cake, the actual cake is the cake. The icing is just an added, supposed to be an added bonus. Iceing on the cake, they say, right? That's where the... But nobody's just going to have the cake. Why is it? Because the cake is not that great.

cake has been skating by for far too long like this and I've had enough. I don't want to hear excuses like, well, cake can be decorated. You can put candles on cake. Those are aesthetic factors. I'm talking about taste. I'm talking about what the food actually tastes like. I mean, I can put a candle. I could put a candle on my desk.

Does that mean I'm going to eat my desk? In fact, you know, there's so many, so many of the cakes I've had are so stale that I might as well be eating a desk. And that's the other problem, that in order for cake to be even just passively good, the person making it needs to be an expert chef. Most people don't know how to make. And even then, expert chef, the best you could hope for is a B minus C plus type of cake. Most people, their cakes are, you know, D's, E's and Fs. Because you have to be an expert to really make a good cake. Most attempts of making homemade cakes end up disastrously.

Most store-bought cakes are terrible. So I don't know how many times I've been at someone's birthday party. They serve me a cake. I take one bite. I throw it directly at their head and say, what the hell is this? Get this out of my face. What are you doing giving me this? Go to hell, you scumbag.

It's a whole scene. Cops are called, everything. This could be avoided if we did birthday pie. Birthday chocolate chip cookies. Birthday brownies. even a birthday donut would be better, as long as that's not from Dunkin' Donuts, which is also canceled for being revolting.

And there we go. That's why cake is canceled. I'm glad we could finally have this much-needed discussion. And, of course, in conclusion, happy birthday to myself. I'll talk to you guys tomorrow. Godspeed. If you enjoyed this episode,

don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review. Tell your friends to subscribe as well. We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts. We're there. Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcast,

including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Null's show, and the Andrew Claven show. Thanks for listening. The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.

Our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny DeMico, and our audio is mixed by Robin The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020. If you prefer facts over feelings aren't offended by the brutal truth and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune in to the Ben Shapiro show. We'll get a whole lot of that and much more. See you there.