The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 841 - How The Media Rigged The Rittenhouse Trial

Episode Date: November 17, 2021

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, as we await a verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse case, we ask this question: is it possible for anyone to get a fair trial in modern America, or has the media effectively put an end to fair trials in America? Also, an FBI whistleblower reveals that Merick Garland lied when he was testifying to lawmakers about the FBI’s pursuit of parents at school board meetings. Plus, a waffle house customer claims that a waitress committed a noose-related hate crime. When has a story like this not been a hoax? And in our daily cancellation, we will finally once and for all cancel sesame street.  Andrew Klavan's latest novel When Christmas Comes is now available on Amazon. Order in time for Christmas: https://utm.io/udW6u Read the Daily Wire’s bombshell Loudoun County exposé here: https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says | Support the Daily Wire’s investigative journalism for only $4/month — use discount code REALNEWS for 25% off your membership: https://utm.io/udQ0u You petitioned, and we heard you. Made for Sweet Babies everywhere: get the official Sweet Baby Gang t-shirt here: https://utm.io/udIX3 Subscribe to Morning Wire, Daily Wire’s new morning news podcast, and get the facts first on the news you need to know: https://utm.io/udyIF 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, as we await a verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse case, we ask this question, is it possible for anyone to get a fair trial in a modern America or has the media effectively put an end to fair trials in America? We'll talk about that. Also, an FBI whistleblower reveals that Merrick Garland lied when he was testifying to lawmakers about the FBI's pursuit of parents at school board meetings. Plus, a Waffle House customer claims that a waitress committed a noose-related hate crime. When has a story like this not been a hoax? Maybe this will be the one exception, probably not. And our daily cancellation, we will finally, once for all cancel Sesame Street. It's been a long time coming. We'll get to that much more today in the Matt Wallstead. As an increasing number of companies fall all over themselves trying to appeal to the left, wouldn't it be nice to find one company that actually supports your values and where you don't have to hold your nose while you're supporting them? Well, here's one company, Charity Mobile. Charity Mobile is the ProLife phone company. They partner with you to automatically support the pro-life pro-family charity of your choice with 5% of your monthly plan price going to the charity of your choice, and they've sent millions of dollars to charities so far, and we'll send millions more in

the future. New activations and eligible accounts get a free cell phone with free activation, so that means that on top of supporting a great company and the most important cause, the pro-life cause, you're also getting a great service. Plus, you can get a free Christmas gift with every phone from Charity Mobile while supplies last. So it's a win-win, it's already a win-win, now it's a win-win-win. Charity Mobile makes it easy to switch as well. If you keep, you know, you could keep your existing phone if you want, and you could keep your existing phone number as well. If you need a new phone, though, as many people do, no problem in Charity Mobile has a variety of options from basic flip phones and low-cost smartphones to the latest 5G phones. And you know, this is important to me because I'm always preaching about it.

You can ask them about their new flip phone with parental controls that allow you to disable mobile data usage, text and picture messaging, and more. And if you're going to give a phone to your kid, then please, I beg you to take advantage of that, um, of, um, of, that service as well. So switch to Charity Mobile now and support the causes you care about. Call them at 187744-3662 or chat with them online at CharityMobil.com and mention offer code Walsh. As the jury in the Eccal-Rittenhouse trial continues its deliberations, deliberations that should have lasted about five minutes before landing on a full acquittal in every single charge, it's been revealed that the prosecutors who already committed, quote-unquote, grave constitutional violations, according to the judge who said that during the trial,

went back to that same bag of tricks by withholding evidence from the defense, reportedly. The Daily Mail reports, quote, prosecutors in the Kenosha shooter trial withheld evidence from the defense that was, quote, at the center of their case, only sharing the high-definition drone video footage on which they have hung their prosecution after the trial had concluded, DailyMail.com can reveal. Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger played the enhanced drone footage to the jury during his closing statements and claimed that it showed Rittenhouse pointing his gun at people, an assertion that opened the door to state the state claiming that Rittenhouse provoked the violence on the night of August 21. 20th, 2020. Now in the motion obtained by Dailymail.com, Rittenhouse's defense insisted that the state only shared it with the defense after evidence had closed on Saturday, November 13th. There's just one of the grounds on which they have made a motion for a mistrial with prejudice filed by Kyle Rittenhouse's defense Monday afternoon. And a mistrial with prejudice, by the way, means that they can't refile it, mistrial, and then

that's it. Double jeopardy would apply. So if you're wondering why the deliberations are taking so long. This is part of the reasons. The jurors have been bombarded by lies from the district attorney, and every underhanded, dirty tactic has been utilized. For Rittenhouse to have any shot at a fair trial, he would need 12 jurors who are, first of all, smart enough, right, and savvy enough to wade through all of the half-truths and untruths and falsehoods and fabrications, spotting, you know, the sleight of hand tricks and the red herring distractions along the way, and somehow, the truth out of all of that. But, and that would be tough enough to find 12 people who can do that.

But that alone is not enough. It's not simply a matter of being intelligent and observant, something that, I mean, the average person, let's face it, is not. That's why we would call the average person average. But also, they have to have the courage and the wherewithal to do the right thing at potential cost to themselves. You know, that's not the kind of calculation that a member of a jury in the United States should have to make. The whole system breaks down when members of juries start balancing, you know,

the right verdict on one hand against their physical safety on the other because they can't have both. When that becomes a mutually exclusive proposition where you could do the right thing or the safe thing when you're in, when you're deliberating, that's when the whole system breaks down, but that's where we are. The system is breaking down. And that's the case, no matter the ultimate conclusion of this trial. It's already taken longer than it should precisely because of the way the game was rigged. And who rigged it, we should ask? Well, the prosecutors, of course, we know that, and also the media. I mean, the media has intentionally made it so that men like Kyle Rittenhouse cannot get a fair trial in the United States of America, period. We live in the

information age, which is not to say the truth age. This is not an age of truth. This is not an age of It's an age of information. Because information is not always true. We walk around every day inside this tornado, this never-ending tornado, this storm of information, most of it false and misleading. And nobody can really escape it. And what this means is that the media has the absolute power to pollute any jury pool that they want to pollute. They can do this absolutely. If they decide that they want you to be convicted of a crime.

if you, for whatever reason, fall into their crosshairs. And you might be sitting there thinking, well, I don't have to worry about it. I'm not, you know, I'm not a prominent person. They're not going to come after me. Well, you never know. Kyle Rittenhouse was not a prominent person before all this happened. You never know when the spotlight will fall on you in a way you don't want it to fall. And if they decide that they can craft a narrative about you, craft it quickly, almost at lightning speed, really.

and with the same speed, send it around the entire world and inject that narrative straight into the minds of the masses. Once it's there, once everyone has been exposed to it, and most have come to believe it, because most people do. Most people just accept whatever they're told. Once that happens, you cannot possibly get a fair trial. Your only hope at that point is that you manage to extract a fair outcome

from this incredibly unfair situation, and that's possible. It's not likely. I mean, it is possible. But whether you get the right outcome or not, the fact remains that you did not have a fair trial. So when I say that fair trials are over in America, that's true.

They are over. They don't exist anymore. But that's not the same thing as saying that every innocent person will be found guilty and every guilty person will be found innocent. Sometimes, even in an unfair situation, just by happenstance, against the will of the people

trying to rig it, the right thing can happen, but that's going to be the minority of cases. And so we're left with this kind of farce. The legal system itself has become a farce thanks to the media. We talk about an impartial jury, but we all know that every single person on that jury had heard about Kyle Rittenhouse, every single one. They're not going to find anybody, especially in Kenosha, who's never heard of that. And every single one of them, again, every single one, without exception, had been exposed to 18 months of propaganda, painting Kyle as a murderous white supremacist. Every single one of them has been living in that environment. Not only that, but we also know that all of them, again, every single one, no exception, is aware of the

potentially devastating personal consequences of passing down an acquittal. So we all know this, which means that the trial from the very start is a charade, it's a pageant. And all we can hope is that Kyle manages to free himself from its clutches, like he freed himself from the clutches of the mob and Kenosia, even with the odds stacked against him. The media has subverted our justice system and ripped our country to shreds. They deserve not just to be sued into oblivion, though they do, of course, deserve that, but to be put in prison. I mean, the media members responsible for this should be in prison. This is the way elected Republicans need to start talking. Yeah, I don't want to hear vague general complaints about the media anymore.

What they need to start saying is that this is criminal, and we're going to put you in jail for it. The people who lied about the Jacob Blake case in the first place in order to provoke the riots, provoke them, by the way, as part of a larger effort to influence the presidential election, and then lied about written house, they shouldn't just face monetary repercussions. They should be in jail. They should be locked in cages like the rats they are. they have no right to do what they're doing. This is not free speech. This is a terrorism is what it is.

Of course, the left has never met a truth that it won't deny. So they'll still claim that really when it comes to the justices. In fact, they'll agree that the justice system is rigged and that it's unfair and everything and that it's all a farce. But they would say it's because of white privilege and white people are so privileged and they have the advantage. And they still claim that somehow, you know, that something. somehow Kyle Rittenhouse is getting better treatment than he would if he were black. And they say this even though we all just witnessed only a few weeks ago a black school shooter waltz out of jail less than a day after opening fire in his classroom and then go home to a welcome home party

that was broadcast live on Facebook. Not only that, but we also saw gang members in Chicago shoot each other in the street in full view of security cameras, by the way, leading to at least one person's death and none of them were charged with crimes. to reiterate straightforward homicide on camera, and there were no charges. None. Not even for illegal firearm possession or, you know, I don't know, disturbing the peace, not even so much as a misdemeanor charge for first-degree murder. Privilege? I mean, what white privilege? In the court system? No, that's not the kind of privilege you'll find in the court system. And it's not black privilege either, necessarily.

If Kyle Rittenhouse were black, but still, but, you know, associated with being right wing, and I don't even know if that's true or not, I don't know what his politics are, but that's how he's associated. So if he were black and associated with being right wing and he had been in Kenosha under the same circumstances and everything had played out the exact same way, he'd probably still be facing the same fate. In fact, just as the media is calling Rittenhouse a white supremacist right now, even though he shot three white people who were attacking him, I have no doubt that they would still call him a white supremacists for shooting white people, even if he was black, provided that he was associated

with being right wing. So the privilege in the court system, just as in society at large, is not strictly racial. It's ideological. It's determined by the media, most of all. The media dispenses the privilege, right? The media decides who will get favored treatment and who will not. The media is rigged the entire system. Destroy the entire system. So Trump was, right. It was the most right thing he ever said, the most correct he ever was, was when he said the media are the enemy of the people, because they truly are. Now, let's get to our five headlines. A couple weeks ago, we introduced to you this incredible new app, and I get people asking me about it all the time. Is it really as good as it sounds? Is it really that there's, you know,

what's the catch? Well, there is no catch. Get upside app is what it's called, and it's all upside. There's no downside to it. And when you get the Get Upside app, you are getting cash back every time you buy gas. And we could all use a little cashback now, especially with how expensive gas is. My listeners are making up to 25 cents for every gallon of gas every time they fill up. Just download the free Get Upside app in the app store or Google Play right now. Use promo code Walsh. You get a bonus 25 cents per gallon on your first fill up. That's up to 50 cents cashback. And you don't have to pay full price of the tank anymore. There's no reason to do it. You can get cash back using Get Upside. Just download the app for free. Use promo.

promo code Walsh to get up to 50 cents a gallon cashback on your first tank. Some people who drive a lot are making as much as $2 or $300 a month in cashback. And there's no catch again. The cashback is added right to your account. You can cash out anytime you want. PayPal, e-gift card for Amazon and other brands you can use as well or it can just go right to your bank account and you get that money in your pocket as quickly and easily as that. So download the free Get Upside app and use promo code Walsh. You get up to 50 cents a gallon cashback on your first tank. That's Code Walsh. The Daily Wire is on the scene in Kenosha outside of the courthouse, and they've had, there's been a few interesting interactions. I want to, we'll start with this. I want to play this for you.

Here's the Daily Wire's Georgia Howe talking to, this is Jacob Blake's uncle who is who's there. And now let's just remember again, we have to review this all over again because this all started with Jacob Blake, who, and really it began, not even at the police shooting. It actually, it actually actually began when he allegedly broke into a woman's home early one morning, I think on a Sunday morning, and raped her, and then stole her credit card and her vehicle and drove away. Now, the thing about that is he was never convicted in that case. In fact, they dropped the charges for that. This happened a few months ago, and of course, there was no outrage from the Me Too set or anything. I mean, this was a guy accused of breaking into a woman's house and raping her, and they dropped the

charges. And yet, what we know, and part of the reason, by the way, that they said they dropped the charges is that they weren't getting a lot of cooperation from the victim. But of course, you're not going to get a lot of cooperation from the victim because the entire media and society and culture and everything, they're all on Jacob Blake's side. They have made him a hero. He's a folk hero. And so that's what she's up against. And so she's afraid for her own well-being, not without reason. and I would imagine that's why she was not very cooperative. And they decided to just take that as an excuse to drop the case entirely. But we still know, you know, this was not one of those cases where Jacob Blake was accused of rape 10 years later or 30 years later, you know, like a Brett Kavanaugh situation.

No. The morning of this alleged incident, the victim called the cops trembling and crying and telling them what happened, you know, in her pajamas. and they showed up in the morning that it happened. So I guess you could decide. I mean, did she just wake up one morning and decide to, you know, this was, she was going to go for an Oscar and put on this whole show? Now, it seems pretty clear to me that, you know, that we could drop the alleged from the rapist part,

but I'll keep it on there just for litigation reasons. So that's where this begins. And it has to begin there because he's got a warrant for his arrest, stemming from that. and then he shows up again to his alleged victim's house and he is accosting her and she calls the police to come and save her from this violent scumbag of a man.

The police show up. He fights the police, pulls a knife on the cops and they're still doing everything they can to apprehend this guy without, without, he gave them an excuse almost right away to just shoot him there on the spot and shoot him dead. They gave him a reason.

As soon as he pulls the knife, out. That's their reason, but they still didn't. And he walks around the car, not his car. It's his victim's car where there's children inside and the cops are trying to stop him and telling him to stop, telling him to stop. And he starts to climb into the car where there are children into a car that is not his while he's wielding a knife. And so we've got this knife wielding, accused rapist trying to steal a car with children inside. And that's when they opened fire. And they were absolutely justified in doing so. So that's what he had. happen with Jacob Blake, and that's where all of this begins. In fact, if we were to start,

if we were to make a list of who to blame for the written house shootings, who's really to blame for it? Well, first we have the rioters who attacked written house. And then we have the media for ginning up this mob and this riot in the first place, again, in an effort to influence the election. And then we have the government officials who abandon their communities to the mob. But then also Jacob Blake. He's actually the first to blame. He's the one who started all this. And yet, in spite of all this, Jacob Blake's family, they're still out there. I mean, they got a visit from the president and the vice president.

You know, president and vice president made their state visit to the folk hero Jacob Blake, accused rapist, knife-wielding madman who tried to kidnap kids and steal a car. They made their visits. And the family is still, you know, they have no shame whatsoever. They're still out there painting them. even, they're a victim too, by extension. So that's the context. And here is Georgia Howe.

We'll watch a little bit of this talking to Jacob Blake's uncle. Now, a lot of people have been making this about race, and I notice we have some Black Lives Matter protesters here. Do you think this case is about race? Of course. I'm going to be just cold-blooded, honest with you. Of course it is. A young black man was shot seven times in the back,

who was never charged with any crime, who was not being aggressive, and who had his back turned on a police officer. Now, when it comes to the Kyle Rittenhouse case, all of the men that he shot were white. So how is the Kyle Rittenhouse case about race? So to be blunt with you, back in the 50s, 40s, and 60s, they would refer to him as n-de-lovers.

So they were sacrificed. They were sacrificing this young man was used. So if they can, what was the tone that we're setting the day is that I don't believe our caucuses, The occasion counterparts are willing to give up the lives of their young people on the street. This is no different than the shooting in Colorado, the shooting in Florida. It was a young person because he would have been in high school or just out of high school and he shouldn't have had a gun.

And he murdered people with the gun that he had illegally. Some people would say, you know, Jacob Blake was visited in the hospital by the vice president of the United States. They would say that is a form of privilege, sort of like what you're discussing. Let me tell you, I wish you would mention the president of my presence. He has failed us. He has betrayed the Floyd family. He's betrayed the Taylor family.

That's great. I love that they still hate. Okay. We can cut out of this. We've heard this guy babbling enough. Just lying. I mean, you know, this is someone with no soul whatsoever. He knows the truth.

This was a non-vite. Jacob Blake was a good young man. He didn't do anything, right? He wasn't charged with any crime. They went there to warn out for his arrest. What do you mean he wasn't charged with any crimes? Many of those charges have been dropped. for political reasons, but a fair number of the crimes he committed are on camera.

We can all see him do it. And they continue right along with the narrative. It doesn't matter. But he still, they still don't, and he goes on for a while there. It's actually an interesting conversation. I was going to continue playing it, but I just, I can't stomach listening to this guy anymore. I really don't want to hear from anybody in the Blake family. But it's great that he doesn't like Joe Biden.

You know, Joe Biden showed up. Joe Biden showed up and like bowed before this absolute scumbag, Jacob Blake, this nothing of a worse than a nothing. This absolute total dirtbag, Jacob Blake. Nothing positive can be said about this man. He's contributed nothing positive to society, only negative. He has been an absolute net negative for humanity in every single way, Jacob Blake. he gets shot by the police

totally deserves it every bullet he took he deserves and the president still shows up and bows before him at his hospital bed and what are the BLM protesters say still not good enough not enough it's not just not enough we hate you

they don't even know why they hate him like what else what more do they want Joe Biden They don't know. But their whole gig is to be perpetually aggrieved no matter what. So if you're in a position of authority, they're going to hate you because they are all, they are the victims. And if you're running the system, then you are responsible for victimizing them, no matter what you do. Meanwhile, we had some other protesters who were on the scene.

And protesters on both sides of it, let's watch a little bit of some of the pro, some of the anti-written house protesters. And see, maybe a few of them will make some interesting points. Maybe they can explain why they're there and they can be eloquent and articulate about it. My hopes are not very high, but we'll see. I wanted them to think of the word hero when they see Anthony Huber. I want them to think hero because you guys, they were running after Kyle not to like kill him. They were just trying to stop him because he just shot somebody. They're treating him like a child in making it as comfortable and as non-threatening as possible.

And what did you make of the footage of the actual incident? Did it look like self-defense or not self-defense to you? It looked like a crazy situation. It looked like murder to me. And it was an illegal horrendous act. Has it been your opinion that Kyle has been treated as if he was innocent? I don't have an opinion on that. It's really up to the jury to decide what's going to happen.

You don't have an opinion on that. What are you doing there with a poster board sign, you idiot? I'm here to call Knoisseur to come together to denounce the hateful ideology of white supremacy, as depicted here. He's shouting into a lampshade, by the way. A little context here. at Pudgy's Clavern in Mount Pleasant Wisconsin. Here's a man shouting Kyle is a killer into a lampshade.

All right. So there you go. I love the one guy. He's got a sign calling for a conviction of Carl Rite House. I really have no opinion about the case. I think the jury should decide. What are you doing protesting, though, if you want the jury to decide? Well, they have no idea.

These people have no clue whatsoever. useful patsies for the left that they're out there. But it is interesting, you know, that it's not a huge crowd outside the courthouse. There's a great amount of interest in the case, obviously. And if you go online, you see, I mean, every leftist is calling for Kyle Rittenhouse's head, but it's not a big crowd out there. It's really a very sad assortment. It reminds me of the people who protested at Netflix because of Dave Chappelle. It might actually, be the same people. Or, you know, maybe they all kind of end up looking the same, slightly overweight, oftentimes. Not the stereotype. But this sad, pathetic assortment,

like a handful of people out there. And that's why I might end up eating these words, but, you know, most people on the right, most conservatives are kind of predicting and expecting that if written house is acquitted, that there's going to be massive, massive riots. And it's going to be even worse than it was in 2020 after the Jacob Blake shooting. And there's certainly a possibility of that, but I wouldn't put my money on it. If I were to, if I were to put money down on something like this, I would not put my money on massive riots. There will be some protests. But it's probably not going to be anything like it was in 2020. And why is that? Well, because as we said, why did the media, there was a reason why the media made the decision to foment these riots

at that point. It's not a coincidence that this happened to be, right? leading up to a presidential election. That's why they did it. They were trying to get people fired up in a very literal sense with this idea that it's a racist system and that we, you know, and it also gives everyone the impression when there's rioting and there's violence in the street and everything. It makes people more inclined to want change.

And so they got to get rid of whoever's on the top. They don't want this now because Democrats are running the system. So they don't want that, you know, this feeling of unease and chaos and violence. They don't want that, even though there is a lot of chaos and violence in the streets of our cities, whether there's riots or not. But the other problem is they realize that Democrats are running the system right now. So a riot, because everybody is upset about systemic oppression and systemic racism and everything, well, that's going to put the blame on the Democrats who are running the system right now. Therefore, the media has no real interest in fomenting riots. the riots in 2020 across the country.

These were not organic things. These were not spur of the moment. Spontaneous. There's a reason why we saw, you know, Vans showing up with signs and all the rioters were carrying the same signs and the same kind of slogans. These were funded.

These were coordinated. These were promoted. They had the whole PR mechanism of the media behind it. That's not going to be the case this time. So I would expect, no matter what happens to the trial, it's not going to be the same kind of reaction.

Though I could be. incredibly wrong about that. All right. Let's, and then, and then obviously he had a lot of protesters also saying that Kyle Rittenhouse shouldn't have been there. So this is cross state lines, even though he lives 30 minutes away and he worked there and his dad lived there, but he crossed state lines and he shouldn't have been there. You hear this a lot. This is something you hear on the right also. David French wrote an article recently saying, Kyle Rittenhouse is no hero. He shouldn't have been there. And quickly to address that notion one more time, if you are saying that Kyle Rittenhouse shouldn't have been there.

And really, that's irrelevant to the case, whether or not it was self-defense, whether he should have been there or not, it's irrelevant. But if that's what you're saying, if that's a position you're taking, then what you're saying is that when the government surrenders your community to the mob and surrenders it to anarchy and violence and says that they will not uphold the law anymore for a period of time, what he shouldn't have been there folks are saying is that your moral obligation is to sit there and take it and I guess hunker down batten down the hatches go into a storm cellar and wait for it all to be over and hope that your house isn't burned down in the process that's what you're saying now that that is the actual reaction of most people but is that like the morally right reaction

when the government decides there's going to be this huge hole, this void, where they're not going to enforce the law? Is it our moral responsibility to say, well, the government doesn't want to enforce these laws anymore? So, well, that's it. Or are we morally justified in stepping into that void and saying, if you're not going to do it, then we have to do it? I would say that you are morally justified. Okay. Huge development here. A report from Yahoo.

It says, citing an internal email provided by an FBI whistle. blower. Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee revealed Tuesday that the Bureau has created a system to track threats against school board officials and administrators and accused Attorney General Merrick Garland of misleading lawmakers when he asked about the subject during his previous testimony, when he was asked about the subject during his previous testimony before the committee, the FBI's counterterrorism and criminal divisions created a threat tag, EGEO officials, to track instances of related threats, according to the email. The purpose of the threat tag is to help scope this,

threat on a national level and provide an opportunity for comprehensive analysis of the threat picture for effective engagement with law enforcement. The email was signed by Counterterrorism Division Assistant Director Timothy Langan and former Criminal Division Assistant Director Calvin Shivers, who retired earlier this month. In the letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, Representative Jim Jordan, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote that the whistleblower email provides specific evidence that federal law enforcement officials employed counterterrorism tools against concerned parents. The FBI has denied this.

If you care at all what the FBI has to say, here's what the FBI says to the Wall Street Journal, a statement. The FBI has never been in the business of investigating parents who spoke out or policing speech at school board meetings, and we are not going to start now. The creation of a threat tag in no way changes the longstanding requirements for opening an investigation, nor does it represent a shift in how the FBI prioritizes threats. Well, of course, Merrick Garland, so he lied, he perjured himself. He should be disbarred from that, for that. He should be, he should resign in disgrace. But neither of those things will happen. And the problem is, there's no denial from the FBI that matters to anyone at this point. I mean, nobody has any faith in the FBI. How is this going to work when we get into, you know, federal criminal trials and that sort of thing? That's all based on work by the, you know, the FBI and FBI testimony. You've got people from the FBI up there on the stand testifying.

Nobody trusts them. No one believes anything they have to say. And that's something that they brought on themselves. And when you weaponize the FBI against average Americans, well, average ordinary Americans like parents, that's going to change how they see the FBI. So this is the great crisis that we're facing. It's a total collapse in trust in our institutions. And you can't have a functioning society when no one has any faith in the institutions underpinning it. One of our most fundamental institutions is the court system, the justice system, law enforcement. And when no one has any faith in any of this stuff, then it, as I said, it breaks down. Although I keep using the phrase breaks down. I probably shouldn't because that makes it sound sort of accidental.

It's not being broken down. It's more being demolished, deconstructed, as the left likes to say. I want to get to this. This is from the Gainesville Times. It says a Gainesville woman says she was threatened at a Waffle House on November 7th by employees who said they needed nooses after her biracial family walked in to eat. While at the Waffle House in Gainesville, a woman, Angelica Tabor-Fells, recorded a video describing the allegations which has since gone viral on TikTok with 2.5 million views, of course. and so this has already gone viral. The police department is investigating it. The Waffle House has released a statement.

It's a whole thing. Let's watch. We have the TikTok video. Here is, what's your name is, Angelica Tabor-Fells with a story of a noose-related hate crime. These things are always, okay, up until this moment, and we'll watch you together and we'll see what we think about it. But up until this moment, these stories have always been false. I mean, like 100% of the time for the last. last 30 years at least. Anytime there's a claim of a noose-related hate crime or a racist

incident involving a noose, it is always false every time. It's incredible that we have, I mean, to bat a thousand on something like this is pretty incredible. But maybe this will be different. Maybe this is the one real one, the one real incident. Let's watch and find out. So we're at Woffa House in Gainesville. I've 1.29. Look at my family. It's very diverse. See my family? So I'm about to show you a waitress that decided to ask for a noose in front of me and my daughter. And then when I asked to speak to the manager, the manager who said that he has two nooses in his car. So I'm pretty daggone sure.

This is probably the racist place I've ever been. Now they're trying to hide. Ma'am, can I get my ticket to go? Because Ms. Thang over there needs a noose. And we're the only black people in here. And your manager said he got two nooses in his car. So we're getting the hell up out of here. And I need a number for corporate.

Okay. I don't mean to laugh at your pain, Miss Angelica, Angelou, Angela, whatever your name is. I just, Angelico's name. Yeah, I find this extremely hard to believe. I really do. So some customers walk in and the waitress looks at them and says, I've got to grab my nooses. and the manager says, I got a fuel my car, go grab them. What?

It doesn't even make any sense. Okay, did she say, oh, I need to get some juice? Can we go through words that rhyme with noose here? Of course, as we said, batting a thousand. These stories are always fake. And I got to say this one, this one I would put on the tier of the claim a couple of years ago that there were racist nooses hanging from a at a cracker barrel at someone had put there.

And then it turns out that they were just cords, like extension cords. So I would say, I'm going to give this a 99.999.9999% chance of being false. Let's round up and call it 100%. These stories are always fake, and I'm thinking this one's going to be no exception. You know, there are, if we wanted to break this down and analyze it, there are a number of questions we could ask, probably no reason to do it.

But here's one question. Why would they be the first black people at this Waffle House to have this experience? I mean, if this Waffle House is that racist that you simply walk in and they start talking about going to grab a news, wouldn't there be other customers who would have similar stories? Or are we supposed to believe that these are the first black customers that have ever gone into this Waffle House? Are we really supposed to believe that? Waffle House in Gainesville has never seen a black customer before? That's, you know, I'm a, look, I'm a big fan of Waffle House, by the way, assuming that they're not committing hate crimes like this. If they are, then I will not go

any more Waffle House. But on the assumption that they're not, I'm a big fan of Waffle House is myself. I consider myself to be sort of an officiantado of Waffle Houses. And what I will tell you is one of the great things about it is Waffle Houses are very, very diverse. I've never been to a Waffle House that was anything less than racially diverse. That's another thing that makes this story not make a lot of sense. Okay. What else do we got here? I tried the few days ago to talk about this Britney Spears thing. Brittany Spears, this is the story from L Magazine. I'm a big the reader of Elle magazine. It's a couple days old now, but a Los Angeles judge ruled that the conservatorship that has controlled Britney Spears' life for over 13 years should end today, according to

New York Times. The pop icon now 39 years old has been under the court-ordered legal arrangement since 2008 following struggles with her mental health. And now the conservatorship has ended. Yeah, I've been threatening to talk about this, and they're more important things to talk about, so I've kind of skimmed over it. I have the same. I have the same. I have the same. same, I have followed this story, as I said, not very closely. So maybe I've missed something along the way. But as happy as I am for Britney Spears that she's free now and she can do whatever she wants. That's wonderful because I had something I'd been deeply been, I personally had been deeply worried about it for the last 13 years. I have not been able to sleep well at

night, knowing that Britney Spears is under a conservatorship. So I feel that relief like everyone else does. But the reason she was under the conservatorship is because she was judged mentally unwell and so mentally unwell that she was a danger to herself and others. That's also why she lost custody of her children, which is a very hard thing to do as a woman. It's very hard to lose custody of your children, especially in, I believe this was in California. So to be in California and to lose custody of your kids, that is not, that's not something they do lightly anywhere, but especially in California. So, That was the judgment that she was psychologically unwell to the extent of being a danger to herself and others.

That's why she was under the conservatorship. I assume that the people who want the conservatorship to end, I assume those people aren't claiming that it's impossible for someone to be judged mentally unwell and unable to care for them, you know, a threat to themselves and others. Obviously, there are people who fall into that category. And so there should be arrangements like conservatorships for those sorts of people. We should also have institutions to put them in. And we used to, you know, we don't do that nearly as much as we used to. But assuming we can agree on that, the question is, is that the case for Bernie Spears? And I guess my point is, I don't really know, but all the people calling to the conservatorship to end, do they have evidence?

Do they have some information about her psychological health? Could they somehow prove that she was not as crazy as that? they said, I never saw anyone produce that evidence. It's just sort of an assumption. This is what the court had decided, and there's an assumption that it's false. It could be wrong. We just talked about not trusting the court system, but do you have any reason to think that? And if the original judgment was correct that she's a danger to herself and others, and now she's been released of this conservatorship, and then she goes on to hurt herself or hurt someone else, you know, all the protesters who have been calling for this for the last several years, how are they going to feel then?

One of the thing, we got to mention this also, some closure here from the New York Post. Brass against rocker Sophia Eurista has apologized for going too far by peeing on a fan on stage while insisting that she's not a shock artist. This is not something she normally does. In fact, she's never peeing on someone's face on stage before, if anything is something she does in the privacy of her own home. And she always makes sure to take sanitary precautions, puts down some newspaper and all that sort of thing. So not something she normally does.

She got carried away. This is her statement. She says, I've always pushed the limits in music and on stage. That night, I pushed the limits too far. I love my family, the band, and the fans more than anything. And I know that some were hurt or offended by what I said. And so she apologizes. We all make mistakes sometimes.

You accidentally pee on someone's face on stage. It happens. I would like to get an explanation. It'd be interested in what the explanation is. Like, what was the thought process that led to this? I'm curious. But we don't need to talk about it anymore. This whole thing is great.

It's just really not my cup of pee, to be honest. Sorry, I used up all the good urination puns yesterday, so I'm all out. The bladder is empty, you might say. I just wish this video had never leaked. I mean, talk about a live stream. Okay, I'm sorry, I'm done. You know, this singer, she's not a big star in the music industry. She's like a little star, really.

So she went tinkle, tinkle, little star. Okay, that was a bad one. I even wrote that one down. Can you believe I wrote down Tinkle Tinkle Tinkle Little Star so I could tell that joke? and I hate myself for it now. I really do. Let's go to the comment section. You're Kinsulations on the long.

You're killing me small says, hey, Ben Shapiro. Hey, Ben Shapiro referred to you as my friend Matt Walsh during the Q&A with the trans activist who couldn't answer what is a woman. That was heartwarming. I did see that exchange. Ben Shapiro speaking in Florida, University of Florida, I believe.

And he had an interaction with the trans activist and he dropped the, what is a woman question and gave me some credit for that. And of course, the response from the trans activist was there was no response, as always. I think the trans activist accused Ben of a red herring fallacy. And this is something, you know, people who grow up on the internet at a certain age, they're very impressed with themselves because they know about certain fallacies. And so their response to any argument you present is always to label it with a certain

fallacy and then to define it for you. Well, that was a red herring fallacy. That was a red herring fallacy and a straw man fallacy. So, you know, it's not a red herring fallacy. It's the opposite of red herring. This is the whole point. Can you, within the context of gender theory, even define what these genders are?

If you can't, then that shows that the whole thing's incoherent. And the other interesting thing is that, ironically, while accusing Ben of a fallacy, the trans activist is a, their entire argument is structured around an appeal to authority, listing all of these supposed public health authorities who have said that actually, you know, it's great to give kids hormones and everything. So that's the whole argument is an appeal to authority while accusing Ben of being a trans activist. As far as calling me his friend, I do appreciate that because if I was in his position and the roles were reversed, I would refer to him as my

subordinate and employee. I certainly would. So I appreciate that on his part. Jimmy says Matt giving away the banjo in order to get out of playing it for his dooring a fan such a Chad move yeah I feel like that needed more explanation than we gave it that was sort of out of nowhere wasn't it we are giving away the banjo and if you if you this is something we're going to this is a gift we're going to give to a someone who signed up for our newsletter the the Matt Walsh newsletter and so if you want to win the banjo you have to sign up for the newsletter but I do want to clarify one other thing. Obviously, I'm a legendary banjo player, and that's why you would want a banjo.

And this is a banjo that's near and dear to my heart, because I've played many, many tunes and many melodies on it, many beautiful tunes. I'm always walking around the office. Anyone at Daily Wire, I'll tell you. I'm always walking around the office, playing music, singing, bringing joy to everybody. That's just what I'm all about. And they call me the Music Man, actually. That's the nickname to give me. But the banjo that it's in my studio right now that the alien is holding, that's not the original banjo. Okay, that's my Daily Wire Nashville banjo, which we will be giving away. But don't worry, there will still be a banjo on set. The original banjo from my studio in my house, that will replace it. So everything will be fine. You'll get a banjo. I'll still have a

banjo and everything will be great. But you've got to go to dailywire.com slash banjo to sign up and possibly win it. Cyril says, oh, I saw a fairy in the garden. What? Am I the only person who never believed that fairies and unicorns were real? Matt makes it seem like it's normal for kids to do this. As a child, I always had a very good idea of what was real and what wasn't. And I think it was because my parents said the exact thing Matt is mocking. And before you say that I'm a special case, I have three siblings who shared in this upbringing. It has similar early understanding of these things. So either all four of us are special cases or there may be something to that approach. No, I was not there. for your childhood, far be it for me to say, but I will tell you, far be it for me to tell you what happened in your childhood, but I will tell you what happened in your childhood. And I can tell you 100% certainty, you definitely at some point in your childhood, believed that things like fairies and unicorns and dragons and everything were real. You absolutely did. And the reason that you did is because you were not born with the brain you have right now, which is a really good thing,

because if you were, you would have killed your mother on the way out. Okay? So you were, you're, your brain was not fully developed as it is right now, hopefully as it is right now. And early on in childhood, once again, you do not have the neurological equipment in place to differentiate between real and not real. Okay? So when you go to a two-year-old and you say such and such is not real, it's a fantasy, that doesn't mean anything to them. They don't understand the difference, okay?

which is why little kids, they're afraid that there's a monster under the bed. You could explain to them, no, monsters aren't real. That doesn't even make any sense. What would a monster be doing under your bed in the first place? I mean, if there were monsters, it wouldn't be under your bed in any way. Here, I'll turn the light on. You can look under there. There's nothing there.

And that's not enough to convince them. Because they see it in their head. They feel it. And so it's real to them. And the idea that you could feel something, see it, think it, and that it's not real, that's something, that's a realization that develops later in life. If you're a leftist, it never develops, right? So that's the case for everybody.

And you're no exception. You might not remember those times because it was a long time ago. Let's see. B.H says, if you have to wear a band on your wrist to relieve you from your helpless feeling of nausea, you are a female. How dare you, sir? How dare you? More bigotry against the motion sick community, the MSC, as we call ourselves.

We are not, actually, we are not motion-sick people, by the way. We are people of motion sickness inclination. And how dare you? Once again, I say, you're banned. Nate says, conservatives, there's no such thing as your truth. Your personal experiences don't determine reality. Walsh. If you don't have kids, your opinions on anything parent-related is completely irrelevant and silly. Okay, well, this isn't about people having their own truth. Okay? I'm not saying that if you're a parent, you have, one truth and if you're not a parent, you have another. What I'm saying is that if you aren't a parent, you can't really know the truth about parenting. There are certain truths, certain realities of parenting that you can't really know until you are one. And this is something that I know if you're not a parent and, you know, if you're younger, you don't believe me on this. You don't think I'm right. I was in your shoes too. Okay. There was a time in my life when I was younger and I was childless, and I sat there judging parents and making all of these declarations, sometimes in my head,

sometimes out loud about what I would do as a parent and how everything would be as a parent and what I, you know, and I was, before I had kids, this is what I could tell you, before I had kids, I was an absolutely perfect parent, perfect. I was a model for everybody else. And then I had kids, and I start to understand certain realities that I simply didn't have access to when I wasn't a parent. And when you have kids, this same thing will happen with you. I guarantee it. You will look back at the things that you said and things you thought before you had kids and you'll and you think, what a moron was I. So that's just, I can tell you take it from me. I know you won't, but it is the truth. Regardless. Now a word from LifeLock. You've probably heard of fishing attacks,

fishing emails. Well, what about spear fishing attacks? That's the latest thing. These targeted attacks focus on an individual and try to trick them into revealing personal information by posing as a trusted friend, a boss, a company, family member. So the bad guys out there online are getting, you know, as we get wise to their tricks, well, then they pull another trick out of the bag. And that's the way it goes. And that's why you need to protect yourself with life lock. It's important to understand how cybercrime and identity theft are affecting our lives every day because they are. I mean, every day we put our information at risk on the internet. In an instant, A cyber criminal could harm what's yours.

Your finances, your credit, your reputation. They could really destroy your life in a lot of ways. And that's why it's so good that there's LifeLock. LifeLock helps detect a wide range of threats, of identity threats like your Social Security number being for sale on the dark web. If they detect your information that's potentially been compromised, they'll send you an alert. So, look, nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses,

but you can keep what's yours with LifeLock by Norton. Join now and save up to 25% off your first year by going to LifeLock.com. slash walsh. That's lifelock.com slash walsh for 25% off. We just talked about it, but I'm going to reiterate again, if you have not signed up for my newsletter yet, then frankly, that offends me and it hurts my feelings. And it should be enough that I simply demand that you do it. But if I have to coax you, if I have to bribe you, then I will. Because right now, starting right now, if you sign up for the newsletter and you're on the email list, you will have a chance to win my very special

banjo. Not the most, it's like the second, second most special banjo. that I own. The one that right now, the alien in the back of the studio has been taken care of for so many months, but now you can own it yourself. Own the legendary banjo that has been played and enjoyed by legendary banjo player Matt Walsh. Go to daily, daily wire.com slash banjo to subscribe my newsletter and get your chance at the banjo today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. All right, so today we cancel Sesame Street. We could have canceled Sesame Street a week ago when Big Bird tweeted. Big Bird has a Twitter account now, by the way. He tweeted that he'd just gotten the vaccine despite having natural immunity from respiratory viruses due to the fact

that puppets don't have respiratory systems. But I suppose if we're giving the vaccine to kids who are almost completely immune to severe COVID illness, then we might as well give it to fictional birds also. To make matters creepier, Big Bird then appeared on a CNN town hall to further push pharmaceuticals onto kids. Big Bird seems to have really settled into his new role as drug dealer. Here's what that look like. You know, my granny bird says that since I'm six years old, I can get the vaccine. Oh, yeah, that's right, Big Bird. But, well, I have a lot of questions.

Like, what is a vaccine? And does it have to be a shot? And will I still need to wear my mask? Those are such great questions, Big Bird. And it turns out lots of kids and families have questions too. So over the next half hour, we're going to be answering your questions, talking with experts and giving information you need about vaccinations for kids. You know what?

They're going to change. Oh, come on. It's time for the time. Yay! Okay, this raises a number of questions. Questions like, what the hell happened to Big Bird's voice? Why does he sound like a child molester now? He sounds distinctly creepy all this.

And also, what kind of six-year-old is watching a CNN? special about vaccinations in the first place? Who is this? Who is the audience for this? When I was a kid, the only thing I knew about CNN was that it's the channel my dad watches sometimes when he wants to yell at the TV, which, come to think of it, explains a lot. In any case, this is all very weird and inappropriate and dystopian and horrible.

As a show for preschoolers, hawks a drug that nobody in the preschool demographic actually needs. But that's not why I'm canceling Sesame Street. It would have been the reason until they gave us a whole new reason. As ABC reports, quote, Quote, Sesame Street debuts,

G. Young, the first Asian-American Muppet. That's the headline. The article says, At only seven years old, G. Young is making history as the first Asian-American Muppet in the Sesame Street Canon. She's Korean-American and has two passions,

rocking out on her electric guitar and skateboarding. The children's TV program, which first aired 52 years ago this month, gave the AP a first look at its adorable new occupant. G. Young will formally be introduced in, See Us Coming Together,

a Sesame Street special. Simuloo, Padma, Lakshmi, Naomi Asaka are among the celebrities appearing in the special, which will drop on Thanksgiving. Now, if you want to see Xi Young in action, which I know you do, here she is. Actually, there's something really cool about my name. So in Korean, traditionally, the two syllables, they each mean something different. And Chi means, like, smart or wise. And Young means, like, brave or courageous or strong.

Yeah. And I think it was honestly inspired, unfortunately, by the past year and the rise in, you know, attacks and racist incidents against Asian people, especially during COVID. My one hope, obviously, is to help have Chiang help teach, you know, what racism is, help teach kids to be able to recognize it and then speak out against it. But then my other hope for Chiang is that she just normalizes seeing different kinds of looking kids on TV. And I'm excited to share kimpap and toadokie and kogi and jiggas and panchans and kimchi and chaps and chaps and all sorts of stuff. Oh, yes, okay. Well, we need the Asian Muppet to tell kids about racism in case they didn't pick up on the racism lessons from literally every other show or movie they've ever watched. It's very important, you see, that we don't allow young children to go more than 17 minutes without being reminded of racism.

Even 17 minutes is probably too long. I'm concerned that, you know, like SpaghettiOs hasn't released a new product where the letters in the soup are R-A-C-I-S-M, so that even when they're eating, they can still be reminded of racism. Plus, as the puppeteer behind the Asian Muppet explains, we also need to normalize Asian people for kids. This is important in case there are any children in America who've never seen an Asian person before. We need to think about all those kids maybe who were raised inside a crater on the moon and haven't encountered any members of another race or ethnicity. We need to make sure we normalize other ethnicities for all of those moon children who might be watching. But this all leads to a confusing question.

G. Young is the first Asian puppet on Sesame Street. Okay. Well, then what race are the other Muppets? What race is Ernie? What is Elmo's nationality? Where is Grover's ancestral home? We know that the Count is from Transylvania, so we know that. We know Oscar the Grouch is from New Jersey, which is why he prefers living in a trash can.

But the rest of the characters seem to be very intentionally non-racial. I mean, what the hell is Snuffelup against supposed to be? Does Cookie Monster have an ethnic background? I guess he's from New Jersey also. In fact, he was the governor of the state from 2010 to 2018. But you see the point. Most of these characters have no ethnicity. no race, no nationality.

They're fictional characters that all children can relate to equally. And I think that was sort of the point, right? They exist in a fantasy world where there are no races. And there was a time when this was the liberal utopia, a world of sameness, where nobody is different,

everyone is the same. And when it comes to things like gender, that kind of homogenous, ambiguous paradise is still what they strive for. But the realm of race, in the realm of race as equity replaces equality, the pendulum has swung back in the other direction dramatically. And now, rather than emphasizing similarities and downplaying differences,

the left wants to make sure that everyone is categorized and labeled and put into a box. And it makes things even more confusing because our gender is all fluid and there's no differences and it doesn't matter. But as far as race goes, we are strictly in our box and we can never leave it. They want kids to see themselves in those terms. Sesame Street actually has been pushing this message for a little while now. debuted their first Black Muppets a few months ago. And here's how those characters explained race. Well, it's because the more melanin you have, the darker your skin looks. The color of our skin is an important part of who we are. But we should all know that it's

okay that we all look different and so very many ways. Well, well, Emma's fur is red and soft. Oh, and my hair is black and curly. Things on the Outside, like our skin color, our hair texture, our noses, our mouths and eyes make us who we are. Many people call this race. Our skin color is what makes us who we are, says the Black Muppet, as woke Sesame Street tries its hardest to ensure that kids see race first and foremost. But our skin color is what makes, when I was a kid watching Sesame Street, the message was precisely the, opposite of that. Of course, the funny thing is, you'll notice, the Asian puppet doesn't actually look or sound all that Asian. And so this is always the conundrum for the identity box checkers

when it comes to cartoons and puppets. They want to make sure that there's proper representation, but they also can't allow themselves to be accused of stereotyping, which is a problem because when you're making a puppet or a cartoon that's supposed to represent a certain race, then inevitably, by definition, there is a caricature, a stereotype going on. But they can't do that yet. They want to have the representation, which just means that the diverse characters meant to represent a specific ethnicity or race end up representing really nothing and nobody in particular. They want to racialize the fictional world as much as they've racialized the real world, but they can't really do that because then they'd be engaging in stereotypes. So they're left then with this weird kind of

half measure, which is what wokeness always boils down. It boils down to incoherence and weirdness in the end. Though on a different note, I'm wondering if we'll see the episode where the Asian puppet G. Young applies for college and is turned down in favor of the Black Muppet. That would be, you know, that's another important real world lesson about equity. Maybe we'll get that as well. And I look forward to that. But in the meantime, Sesame Street, we must say, is canceled.

And we'll leave it there for today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Have a great day. Godspeed. Well, 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. Also, 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 podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Null's show, the Andrew Claven Show. Thanks for listening. The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover. Our technical director is Austin Stevens, production manager, Pavel Vodoski,

The show is edited by Ali Hinkle. Our audio is mixed by Mike Coramina. Hair makeup is done by Cherokee Hart, and our production coordinator is McKenna Waters. The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production. Copyright Daily Wire 2021. BLM threatens riots in Kenosha. The White House hangs Kamala out to dry, and Ted Cruz destroys Joe Biden's Secretary of Homeland Security. Check it out on the Michael Knoll show.