REVEALED: The Dark Truth About Becoming An Organ Donor | Ep. 1628

0:00 Today, Matt Wall show, the conspiracy theorists have been proven right again. New reporting reveals that there are very good reasons to be hesitant about putting yourself down as an organ donor on your driver's license. Also, Trump pushes to have the NFL team in Washington change its name back to the Redskins. And a new alleged police brutality case goes viral. We'll take a look at the full context and find out who's really at fault. All that and more today on the Matt Wall Show. [Applause] [Music]

0:46 How many times have you told someone, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Now, that's great advice most uh of the time, but not so much for a cell phone. See, over time, the battery life fades, the processors can't keep up, and it's fallen in the toilet one too many times. Fortunately, thanks to Pure Talk, your cell phone is uh something that you can replace without feeling guilty. When you switch to Pure Talk this month, they're going to give you a Samsung Galaxy A36 for free with a $35 qualifying plan. Just 35 bucks a month for talk, text, and data, and a free Samsung phone with scratch resistant Gorilla Glass, and a battery that lasts all day. All America's most dependable 5G network really uh does make life here at the Daily Wire simpler with easy, reliable service. Look, supporting companies like Pure Talk is a good thing. You win by

1:32 cutting your cell phone bill in half. They win by uh hiring more Americans and helping more veterans. Make the switch in as little as 10 minutes. Go to puretalk.com/walsh to get your phone today. Again, that's puretalk.com/walsh to switch to my wireless company, America's wireless company, Pure Talk. In every single state in the country, when you go to the DMV to get your driver's license, you're asked whether you want to become an organ donor. And this is how the vast majority of people, more than 90% of them, end up on the National Registry of Oregon Donors. And usually people are happy to sign on. It's seen as a pretty unambiguous act of virtue. In fact, it's long been seen as the most virtuous act that can possibly take place at a DMV, which, you know, admittedly isn't saying much. Uh, and most people don't really think about it. They just check the box. Yes. on the theory that one day if they

2:19 end up in a horrible accident and they die, then their organs could be used to save a life. But if you think about it for a second, as many so-called conspiracy theorists quote unquote have done over the years, a lot of questions begin to emerge. For one thing, why exactly are we pairing organ donation with getting a driver's license? I mean, no other government program works like this. Even with the motor voter law, there are still a handful of DMVs that don't ask about voter registration. uh organ donation stands alone as the only issue that every DMV without exception is fixated on, you know, aside from like actually driving. They're not interested in signing up for a gym or helping you file your taxes or making sure you know how to service your car or finding you a quality gutter cleaner or any of that.

3:05 Uh human organs are the one thing on their mind. There also aren't any other major medical decisions that they expect you to make on the spot when you go for your driver's license. like they don't try to upsell you on a a root canal or lasic eye surgery or anything else. Organ donation again stands alone. Now, you might say that, well, a lot of people die in car accidents and it's good to have a plan B for their organs, so that's not creepy at all. But if that's the reason, it's strange that the DMV doesn't pester you to say hire an attorney to draft your will just in case you die in a horrible car accident. Or does the DMV bother you to check to see if you have good health insurance, which is obviously pretty important if you get into a wreck. The DMV doesn't care about any of that. They just want you to sign up to uh to have your organs taken away in case you die. Now, the legal basis

3:52 for the DMV's question is found within the uh Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, which was backed by every major medical organization. This law encourages states to add organ donors to a national registry. It was first passed in the 60s, but it's been revised several times, most recently in 2006. In the latest version of law, quote, expanded the list of persons who can consent to organ donation on behalf of an individual, gave every individual the opportunity to donate the organs at or near death, and stated that individuals who refuse to donate must explicitly state that. In other words, because not enough organs were being donated, the law changed from opt in to opt out. And the legal presumption is that you want to gift your organs uh to strangers. Now, as they watched organ donation become a bigger and bigger priority for

4:38 the government, a small and highly skeptical group of people wondered whether all of these major medical organizations and lawmakers might have a conflict of interest. After all, organ transplants are extremely lucrative procedures. A double lung transplant can easily cost $2 million. A liver transplant can run over a million dollars. Kidney transplants, which are kind of the bargain bin of the organ donation world, cost merely hundreds of thousands of dollars. So given all these numbers, it's reasonable to ask whether a hospital when confronted with a seriously ill patient who happens to be an organ donor might have an incentive to murder that patient or at least let them die or at least not give them all the care that they otherwise would. Like there's a lot of money on the line. It's

5:24 certainly reasonable to ask what safeguards are in place to prevent something like that from happening. Exactly. Now, go on the website of the Mayo Clinic, which is supposedly the number one hospital in the world, and you'll find an entire page that's devoted to reassuring skeptics about organ donation, but the page doesn't do a very good job. Instead, it simply states, quote, "Myth, if I agree to donate my organs, the hospital staff won't work as hard to save my life. Fact, when you go to the hospital for treatment, the healthare team tries to save your life, not someone else's. You get the best care you can get." Close quote. Well, that's that. The Mayo Clinic promises that you'll get the best care. No one in the hospital would ever dream of killing you or letting you die so they can harvest your organs. And uh you'll just have to take their word for it. And if you can't trust the sterling

6:10 reputation of America's leading medical experts, then who can you trust? And you'll notice, of course, that this is a common theme in the fact-checking industry. People who are skeptical of the official narrative will find that their skepticism is quote unquote debunked by the fact checkers simply repeating the official narrative. As it turns out though, uh once again, we have been lied to. And once again, these so-called conspiracy theorists were right. Uh at hospitals all over the country, new reporting reveals uh and there's now a federal investigation being launched into this uh to look into this by the HHS. Uh this new reporting reveals that patients are indeed being rushed into surgery to remove their organs even when they're still alive. And we're not talking about one or two cases here. This is a systemic problem.

6:56 It's also an inevitable problem given the way that the incentives have been set up. Consider the story of a Kentucky man named TJ Hoover. Back in 2021, doctors said that he was brain dead. They convinced the families to remove his life support so that his organs could be harvested. Uh meanwhile, according to an employee with the Oregon procurement company named Nikki Martin, Hoover was actually displaying signs of life, including tracking with his eyes, moving around, trying to pull his tube out, uh trying to pull his hands away. But the family apparently wasn't told about any of those signs of life. And Hoover was ultimately brought to an operating room so that his organs could be harvested. But just before his life support was cut off and the surgery began, Hoover woke up. And then even after he woke up, the organ harvesters at Kentucky Organ Donor alliances or uh Kota reportedly weren't deterred. The

7:42 harvesters were still dead set on finding a doctor to perform the surgery on this guy who just woke up. That's according to one medical professional who was in the operating room with TJ Hoover. Watch. >> What you are watching is the honor walk. It's one of the most revered traditions in a hospital. It's when family, friends, and staff all pay their respects as someone is wheeled off to give the ultimate gift, donation of their organs. [Music] Except this man, TJ Hoover, was still very much alive. So, we did track down someone who was in the operating room

8:28 that day and did see what happened firsthand. Her name is Natasha Miller. She's a transplant profusionist and I'm driving to see her now. From what I understand, he was mouthing the word no and pushing hands away and things like that. >> Yes, he was very aware. The pronouncing physician comes in and when she comes in, she walks back out and she says, "I'm not doing this. I'm not doing this case. I don't feel comfortable." The organ coordinator that was there, she steps out to call the supervisor at the time to tell him that the pronouncing physician was refusing to do the case. She said that he was yelling at her, telling her she needed to find another physician to come and she's like, "There is no one. There's no one else to come do this case." >> Is there any part of this that makes sense to you? Was any part of this defensible?

9:13 >> No, because it seemed like at first they were saying, "Well, family family consented. Family consented. Family consented." And I get that, but again, it seems like family wasn't made fully aware of his actual state. None of it makes sense. We should have never went to O. I was a registered organ donor and I'm not anymore. >> Really? Because you don't trust the system. >> I don't trust the system. >> What is TJ's life like now? >> He wasn't supposed to make it a year if he made it. Hold your head up, love. >> For TJ, it's not just about being alive, but living and getting to be a part of these moments, like walking his sister down the aisle. >> The Oregon harvesting company, Kota, has has denied all wrongdoing. They said that they don't get any kickbacks when organs are harvested, and they claimed

9:59 that all the procedures were followed. But when you listen to the testimony of the former Kota employee who was in the operating room, the company's denial isn't exactly convincing. And on top of that, if you can follow procedures and still come close to ripping the organs out of a living patient, then obviously the procedures need to change. And that shouldn't be controversial in any way to say. That's especially true given that as horrible as T.J. Hoover situation was, the organ harvesting industry has been involved in operations that are somehow even more horrifying than that. In some cases, the mistake wasn't caught in time. We're talking about, you know, situations where the surgical operation began even though the patient wasn't dead. Last May, for example, a 42-year-old woman named Misty Hawkins, who had a lifelong cognitive disability and lived with her mother in Alabama, uh

10:46 choked on a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and ended up in a coma. By the time doctors removed the obstruction, she had suffered severe oxygen deprivation and had to be hooked up to a ventilator. And that's when the doctors reportedly gave the mother a choice. She had 72 hours to decide whether she wanted to terminate life support and donate the organs or send her daughter to a nursing home. And the mother decided to let her daughter die on the theory that uh she didn't want her to suffer. And here's what happens next. This is from the New York Times uh report that just came out. Quote, "In the operating room, a hospital doctor took Miss Hawkins off the ventilator and gave her drugs for comfort. The doctor declared her dead 103 minutes later, near the outer limit of organ viability. The surgeons entered the room. They began operating after a five-minute waiting period. All circulatory uh death

11:32 donations require a waiting period to ensure the heart does not restart. Almost immediately, they saw Miss Hawkins heart moving. Records from the procurement organization also noted subsequent gasping respirations, a type of breathing. The surgeon stopped and left the room. Another doctor sewed up Miss Hawkins. It's unclear if she was given any anesthetic. 12 minutes later, she was again declared dead. Now, nobody informed Hawkins family about any of this according to the Times. They just told the family that her organs turned out to be unusable. It took more than a year for the family to learn what had actually happened. And they made the discovery by talking to the New York Times. Something similar happened to uh Hoover's to Hoover's family in Kentucky. For all the respect that these hospitals supposedly have for organ donors, they became extremely

12:17 quiet and secretive when things go bad. In Hawkins case, doctors interviewed by the Times assessed that it was quote, "All but impossible that her heart restarted after the waiting period." So, in other words, the doctors were probably wrong when they declared that she was dead. It looks a lot like she was alive. And despite that inconvenient detail, the doctor started carving her up, presumably without providing anesthetic because supposedly this person was dead. And this isn't something you think a hospital could possibly mess up, but apparently that's what happened. And again, it's not particularly uncommon. There are plenty of cases just like this one. Quoting again from the Times, uh, quote, "In 2022, when she was 38 and homeless, Miss Galagos was hospitalized and went into a coma, doctors at Presbyterian Hospital in Albuquerque

13:04 told her family that she would never recover. On the day of the planned donation, Miss Galagos was taken to a pre-surgery room where her two sisters held her hand. A doctor arrived to withdraw life support. Then, a sister announced that she had seen Miss Gleos move. The doctor asked her to blink her eyes and she complied. The room erupted in gasps. Still, hospital workers said the procurement procurement organization wanted to move forward. A coordinator said it was just reflexes and suggested morphine to reduce movements. The hospital refused. Instead, workers brought her back to uh her room and she made a full recovery. Yes. Yes. Uh just seconds before they were about to kill this woman and harvest her organs, the family noticed that she was still alive. And then even after the family pointed this out, the organ harvesting organization still wanted to cut her organs out and now

13:52 she's fine. And yet through all of this, no one has been arrested or fed to the alligators. No one suffered any consequences at all for trying to harvest the organs of a person they knew was alive. Stories like this led the Trump administration to investigate the organ procurement and transplantation network, which administers the organ transplant program that Congress established. The administration looked into a relatively small number of incidents, a total of 351 cases where organ donation was authorized but ultimately not completed. And here's what they found. Quote, the 103 cases, 29.3%, showed concerning features, including 73 patients with neurological signs comp incompatible with organ donation. At least 28 patients may not have been deceased at

14:39 the time organ procurement was initiated, raising serious ethical and legal questions. Evidence pointed to pure neurologic assessments, uh, poor neurologic assessments, rather, lack of coordination with medical teams, questionable consent practices, and mclassification of causes of death, particularly in overdose cases. Vulnerabilities were highest in small and rural hospitals, indicating systemic gaps in oversight. Okay, so to repeat, according to this data, 73 patients had neurological signs incompatible with organ donation and at least 28 patients may not have been deceased at the time organ procurement was initiated. And this is just based on an investigation of 351 cases where organ procurement was was authorized but not completed. We're now looking at the cases where it was completed.

15:25 Um, in nearly 10% of those cases, and potentially as many as 20% of them, the patient wasn't actually dead. Keep in mind, these are these are the most conservative estimates we have. The real figures are almost certainly even worse. And nothing on the Mayo Clinic's web page on organ donation talks about any of this. Nor will the DMV inform you of these statistics when you go to renew your license. Instead, as is so often the case, the conspiracy theorists on social media will give you more accurate information uh than official expert sources will. Once again, the conspiracy theorists were on to something just as they were about masks and social distancing, the co shot, Wuhan Wuhan lab leak and and so on and so on and so on and so on. This is yet another blow to the credibility of the expert medical

16:10 establishment which unlike many of the patients whose organs they want to harvest uh has been dead and gone for a very long time. The the least credible people on the planet have been proven to be liars once again. And that's not the only reason that we shouldn't be surprised by these revelations. In every other context, the medical industry already treats human beings like lab rats and/or commodities. And we've seen this again and again with abortion and euthanasia, uh, so-called gender affirming care and so on. Doctors who don't value the dignity of human life will eagerly commit unspeakable horrors in the name of ideology or profit or both. And they'll do it without any hint of shame whatsoever.

16:58 They'll tell anti-lockdown protesters to stay home while they encourage BLM riers to flood the streets. They'll carve up the bodies of young children even as they privately admit that those children can't consent. And as we're seeing now, they'll slice open the chest of an organ donor who's not even dead, and then they'll get angry when the organ donor wakes up in the middle of the operation, thanks to a law that's been adopted by every state. Your local DMV, uh, you know, the lady at your local DMV wants you to ignore all of this. She wants you to believe that really all these incidents aren't a big deal. And, uh, I mean, even if they seem like outtakes from a Saul movie, we just don't worry about it. just sign on the dotted line and and uh like any good and decent person would and and and become an organ donor. After all, how could it possibly be a bad idea to be an organ donor? That'd be

17:46 like saying it's a bad idea to save a helpless puppy, the kind they show on TV as that Sarah Mccclaclin song plays, or at least they used to. And for most of this country's history, the DMV lady would have a point. But the DMV lady doesn't have a point anymore. Give immoral people a position of power and they'll corrupt everything they can. Put the medical industry in the position of taking lives intentionally as they do with abortion, euthanasia. You've created all kinds of conflicts of interest already. You've you've turned the the medical field into something that doesn't just treat and help people, but in fact intentionally harms and kills them. In some cases,

18:31 they'll turn unambiguous acts of virtue, like agreeing to be an organ donor, into a catastrophic blunder that can get you murdered in an operating room. That's what people, the people running some of the most powerful hospitals and medical organizations in the country have done as a result of their corruption. Uh, here's the stark choice that we're left with the next time we go to the DMV to get our license renewed. We can either make it harder for people to receive organs they need or we can sign a license to have doctors butcher us in the operating room while we're still alive. Yeah, those are the choices. And there's no good option. That will remain true until the people responsible for all these cases I mentioned and many cases I didn't mention are criminally investigated and if appropriate charged for what they've done. There needs to be a full accounting here. Absolute transparency

19:17 is necessary along with actual consequences. And until that time comes, no one, especially not the DMV lady, should be doing the bidding of these surgeons and organ harvesters. The DMV should stick to handing out licenses and doing eye tests. And the medical profession, for the first time in a generation, should focus exclusively on helping and treating people instead of wantingly destroying even more human life for profit. Now, let's get to our five headlines. [Music] When budgets are stretched thin, Kickoff offers a smart path to genuine credit building without the burden of costly credit card balances. No credit check required, no interest charges, only $5

20:02 monthly. It can actually boost your score quickly with clear, budget friendly plans beginning at only $5 a month. No surprise charges and zero interest rates. Kickoff helps you win big on the credit front. Straightforward. You make timely payments. Credit agencies noticed positive habits and your credit can improve very quickly. Users with credit under 600 grew an average of 84 points in their first year with on-time payments. Plus, with over 1 million users and hundreds of thousands of positive reviews. There's a reason why Kickoff is the number one credit builder on the app store. We have a few different Daily Wire producers that use Kickoff and they can attest to the simplicity and ease of the app and how straightforward it is for getting you on the right path to increase your score. Sign up in minutes from your phone. No credit check. Cancel anytime. Start building credit with kickoff today. And you can get your first month for as little as $1. That's 80% off the normal

20:49 price when you go to getkickoff.com/walsh today. That's kickoff without the c. Getkoff.com/walsh. Must sign up via getkickoff.com/walsh. Activate offer. Offer applies to new kickoff customers. First month only subject to approval. Offer subject to change. Average first year credit score impact of plus 84 points. Vantage score 3.0 0 between January 2023 and January 2024 for kickoff credit account users who started with a score below 600 who paid on time and who had no delinquencies or collections added to their credit profile during the period. Late payments may negatively impact your credit score. Individual results may vary. All right, I've been meaning to uh mention this and uh you know I've got a few things to say about it. President Trump over the weekend launched a pressure campaign to force the Washington Commanders football team to

21:35 change their name back to the Redskins. Uh Fox News has the latest. President Donald Trump threw a curveball into the NFL world over the weekend when he That's a mixed metaphor. That that's that's no good. Threw a curveball into the NFL world. You can't that's that's baseball. That's just you got to rework the opening sentence there. Um anyway, how about they he uh he did a trick play or or something like that. I don't know. Quarterback sneak. Um anyway, over the weekend when he threatened to put the Washington Commander RFK Stadium site in jeopardy if they didn't change its name back to the Redskins. Um and he uh Trump wrote on Truth Social, "The

22:21 Washingtons should immediately change their name back to the Washington Redskins football team. There's a big clamoring for this," Trump wrote. Likewise, the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams with a storied past. Our great Indian people in massive numbers, want this to happen. Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We're a country of passion and common sense. Owners get it done. Uh and then he followed up later at this he was also saying that he's going to as it said he's going to potentially hold up um what's happening with the stadium the the new stadium if they don't get this done and he says my statement on the Washington Redskins is totally blown up but only in a very positive way. I may be I may put a restriction on them if they don't change the name back to

23:07 the original Washington Redskins and get rid of the ridiculous moniker Washington Commanders. I won't make a deal for them to build a stadium in Washington. the team should be much more valuable and the deal will be more exciting for everyone. Uh, okay. So, and this was like on Sunday getting into the week, they're talking about this. Now, I don't think this is going to happen. They they're not going to change it back to Redskins. Like, that's just it's not going to happen. Uh, it just won't. And I will say, you know, I have to say to start with that, look, this whole thing does strike me as a pretty unsuttle attempt to change the subject. Okay, it is it is hard for me to stomach the idea that um Epstein is a boring and unimportant and dumb story as Trump has

23:54 said, but the name of the football team in Washington isn't boring, dumb, or unimportant. I mean, that's the problem. You can't you can't come out and say this is totally ridiculous. Why are we talking about this? It doesn't matter. and then a few days later launch into a series like spend a day talking about the name of the football team in Washington. How in the world is that important enough uh to require the president of United States to not only speak out about it but to get involved actively? So that's important enough for that but not the Epstein files. Like that that doesn't make any sense. So when critics claim that this pivot to the Redskins is kind of a ploy to change the subject. Yeah, I think it is. Just being honest.

24:39 And I know it's gonna annoy some of you that I'm saying that even though you know him, right? It's it's gonna annoy you because like, yeah, yeah, but be a team player. Don't we all know that of course that's what he's doing, but don't say it out loud. Um, but I I I don't that's a game I don't play. I don't I'll be I'll I'll say out loud whatever I happen to think about a subject and I'm not going to worry about Well, we don't want to say that because we we got to think about the strategy. I I'll fully admit I'm not as worried about strategy. I'm just going to tell you what I think. Right? That's cuz that's what I consider my job to be. And so in this case, yeah, this is very clearly a an unsuttle attempt to change the subject and uh kind kind of clunky and clumsy and it doesn't work and it's it's too transparent, you know. So just like strategically it doesn't work anyway. Um and I don't even think we should

25:26 change the subject because I think that the subject epsene subject is important. All that said on the merits of of the case here, I do agree with Trump. I mean, I've been saying this myself since forever. I I don't I don't think it's the kind of issue we need the president to be focused on right now, but because it doesn't rise to that level, but I agree in principle that yeah, the name should not have been changed. Uh Trump also wants to bring back the Cleveland Cleveland Indians name, and that's another one that should not have been changed. I agree. Mainly though, I wanted to talk about this this angle for for a minute. You uh because you hear this kind of argument all the time from the left and somebody posted this It it has like 60,000 likes, 10 million views. It's an argument that resonates on the left. You hear this a lot when we talk about the the names of of teams.

26:12 And so we'll put that up on the screen. You can see it there. The account is ironically suggesting that rather than change the Cleveland name back to the Indians, we should call the team the whites and have a mascot of a white guy with a mustache and glasses and a fedora. And so the idea is is like, well, how would you like this? Oh, you think it's so great to have the Indians as a name? Well, how would you like it, white people? How would you like this if it was called the whites? And the guy who posted this, by the way, is Indian. Uh, it looks like, you know, feather ind American Indian. So, the point is that we're supposed to find this really offensive or something as white people. But but of course, every time the left makes this point, the response from most white people is

27:00 uh hell yeah, that would be awesome. I would totally support a baseball or football team called the whites or the Fighting Caucasians or whatever. You go I Yeah, let's do it. Call our bluff. Let's go ahead and do it. How about the great whites? That That's a good one. You know, the team is called the Great Whites, and the mascot is a is a Caucasian shark. So, it's kind of a combination. It could go either way. It's a shark. It's a shark with a fedora and a and a good credit score. That's how you know it's a he's a a white shark. He's a shark holding up a paper with an 850 credit score. Anyway, um I'd have no problem with that. But the irony here, the really funny thing is that we all know that if some team

27:49 did change their name to the whites, which of course would never happen, but if that were to happen, it would not be white conservatives complaining. It would be leftist. Leftists would complain because they would see the team name as a celebration of the white race, which of course isn't allowed. You're not allowed to celebrate white people or or show that you're in any way proud of them or anything like that. Um, so they would see it as a celebration, glorification of the white race. And we all know that it would 100% only be leftists complaining and they would be hysterical about it. I mean, they would be completely hysteric. So, we're supposed to believe that if if a team changed their name to the whites that there would be this hysterical reaction from white conservative people like me that I I would be completely

28:35 offended by it when in reality it would be I mean people on the left they would be they would actually be rioting in the street. They would storm the stadium. Okay. And burn it if that were to ever happen. They would be you know apoplelectic with rage. Absolutely. We and again we all know that. And yet when a team is named after Indians, they they so in that case they would be offended because they'd see, oh well that's you're celebrating white people. We can't do that. But then if you name it team after the Indians, they don't see that as a celebration. They see that as an attack on Indians rather than a celebration or glorification of them. when it is in fact the latter. That's that's like when you name a team, that's why nobody you name a team after something that you admire, something you think is good, something you think is uh

29:21 uh you know, something that that has some uh gravitas to it. That's why you name the team after them. That's why you're never going to have a football team called the whatever the Philadelphia Wimps or something. Um, it's always something that has, you know, it's the eagles, right? It's like something um when you name it after animals, you name it after animals that are that that we think of as like strong, right? So, but when it comes to the the Indians, that's how they see. So, so what's the moral of the story? Well, they'll complain no matter what. That's the moral. And their victim narrative is always vindicated no matter what. in in their minds, their victim narrative always

30:06 uh is always proven correct no matter what happens. All right, the recount has this viral video from a town hall in Jonesboro, Tennessee, where a um a woman claims that she was the victim of Christian extremism at her OBGYn, which you gota you got to watch out for that Christian extremism. Um, so a little background here. Ten Tennessee recently passed a bill called the Medical Ethics Defense Act. And the point of the legislation is to protect medical providers from being forced to be involved in or administer procedures that contradict their religious and their moral beliefs. Um, namely, most obviously, this is about making sure that medical providers aren't forced against their will to

30:53 participate in abortions or quote unquote gender affirming care or that sort of thing. That's why you need the legislation. Well, this woman says that she has fallen victim to this legislation. And this is the it's kind of like when when these kinds of bills are proposed or when they're passed, uh the left will talk about all these wild sort of worst case scenarios that might occur if we allow people to have this kind of freedom and then what do you know this woman comes along and says that she had one of those worst case scenario type things happen to her. This has been picked up by multiple media outlets, all reporting it uncritically, of course, as though it's a verified fact, even though it isn't. There's nothing verified here at

31:38 all. But anyway, here's what she had to say. Listen, >> I just found out that I'm pregnant again. Um, I've been I've been with my partner for about 15 years, though we're not married. I just had my first visit. Um, and that provider told me that thanks to that act, they were not comfortable treating me because I am an unwed mother and that goes against their Christian values. >> I I'm lucky enough to live in a part of the state where I can seek care across state lines. And that's what I'm doing. Traveling Virginia to Virginia for my prenatal care. scared out of my mind that I will go into labor and not be able or have to deliver in this state

32:26 with a provider who feels that that child's life is more valuable than mine. Um, while we do love and want this child, I also have a 13-year-old and I can't leave her behind. Um, I call Marsha's office twice a day. I am either I'm either blocked or she has all calls going directly to voicemail. I've never even reached a staffer. Um, and when I contacted Bill Hagert's office, I was told that he's not obligated to listen to his constituents. Um, love that. >> Okay. So, she claims that her OBGYn refused her care because she's an unwed mother. And then she claims that she tried to contact her senator's office,

33:13 Bill, uh, you know, Bill Hagerty, Senator Hagerty, and was told, quote, The senator isn't obligated to listen to his constituents. Gasps. Gasps from the crowd. Now, first of all, I flat out don't believe any part of this story. I just don't believe it. And that's where I'm at with, you know, people like this making any any any claim. This is where I've been for a long time. I just don't believe you. Like, I don't I just don't believe it. Well, how could you say this? I I just I don't believe anything you say. I think you're a liar. I think you're a pathological liar. I think if you're a leftwing activist, you're a pathological liar. I think you lie about everything. I don't trust anything you say. Anything you tell me about something that happened in your personal life, especially something that conveniently

33:59 helps to prove some sort of point that you want to make. I just don't believe it. And I don't even care what it is. I don't care if you told me that you had, you know, toast for breakfast this morning. I just don't believe it. I'm going to assume you're lying about that. I don't believe anything you say ever about anything. Uh so I will just flat out to your face say, "Yeah, I think you're a liar. I I think you're full of crap. I think you're lying. And uh so that's the problem here. I just don't believe it. Starting starting at the end and working backwards, I guarantee that Senator Hagert's office did not say to her when she called, "Oh, well, he's not obligated to listen to his constituents, you pee on. He doesn't have to listen to the likes of you." Uh that's not No, that is not how the conversation went. I 100% guarantee

34:45 that's not how the conversation went. I guarantee that quote was not said. Guarantee it. Uh I don't know how it went. I wasn't there. I just guarantee that that wasn't it. That was not said. So what actually was said like they said something else and then she interpreted it as oh so you're saying that he's not he doesn't have to listen to me. But that's not what she said. And uh more importantly, I don't believe that she was refused care because she's an unwed mother. I don't believe that to begin with. That is not what Christian teaching dictates. There's nothing in the Bible or Christian teaching that would prevent an OBGYn from giving care to an unwed mother. Quite the opposite. In fact, quite the opposite. um this woman I mean this is if you're a

35:31 an any any mother is wed or not wed uh Christians believe that that you know you you should get medical care and uh particularly if you're an unwed mother and in this case she's a whack job liberal uh and you're you are going to and you're not going to kill your baby you you're going to allow your child to be born. Well, then certainly we want to encourage that and uh and give you all the I mean that's why there's uh you know pregnancy resource centers, Christian pro-life pregnancy resource centers all over the country that are giving care to very often unwed mothers.

36:18 So this woman is revealing the basic misunderstanding that's very common on the left. The the distinction they fail to grasp. But which every Christian I know grasps perfectly well. There's this basic distinction that I' I've never met a Christian who doesn't understand this distinction. It it's like second nature to us. Uh but but the the left they don't they really struggle with it. They don't get it. Which is what tells me this story is from her own imagination. And the distinction is between the person and the act, the sin and the sinner. Right? As Christians, we cannot participate in an immoral act. That doesn't mean that we can't help or serve those who commit immoral acts.

37:05 Going back to the gay wedding cake example, there's nothing preventing a, and this is a a point we made a million times about that particular case or cases like it. It's always left-wing activists who who don't understand or pretending they don't understand this distinction. There's nothing preventing a Christian baker from selling cupcakes or muffins or even a cake or any kind of baked good uh or anything else to a gay couple. If you're a Christian baker and a gay couple comes in and says, "We'd like two cupcakes, please." you you there's nothing at all that would prevent you uh morally or um you know theologically from selling them the cupcake. All right, that's that's fine. But if you want me to bake a cake specifically for an event celebrating a

37:53 gay wedding, a gay quote unquote wedding, well now you're asking me to participate in the event and I can't do that. I can I can sell you baked goods, but I can't participate in this event. So that's the distinction. An OBGYn gyn who delivers care to an unwed mother is not participating in or in any way condoning the fact that she is unwed. I' I I've never met again a Christian who doesn't understand this distinction. It's like very it's ingrained in us. I think it should be ingrained in any person any rational person should be but but in particular with Christians this

38:39 is uh this is kind of this is ingrained in us from from you know the youngest ages but this is a distinction that mystifies the left they just don't get it and I think to some extent there's this intentional obtuseness they're pretending they don't understand but I think a lot of them really don't understand it there really is this conceptual they they just they don't get it going back again back to the gay like They they can't they they can't understand that. Oh, I can as the baker I can sell you a cupcake, but I can't I can't custom make you a gay wedding cake. Um they just they can't they can't wrap their heads around that. They don't they don't understand the difference between those two things. Uh so this is a story

39:24 that kind of hinges on this misunderstanding which tells me that it comes from the left, not from a Christian. All that said, you know, when somebody brings up their personal life in public, they invite the rest of us to make judgments about it. If you bring up your personal life in public, you talk about your personal life, then I am free to form an opinion about that fact because like any fact that you bring to my attention, I can form an opinion about. That's my right as an American. It's also it's also unavoidable. It's it's natural. I'm a human being. I have a mind. I can't help but form opinions. I I can't help but have a perspective on anything I'm aware of, right, as a conscious human being. So, so if you don't want if you don't

40:10 want other people to have opinions about your personal life, then don't tell them about it. The moment you tell them any detail about your personal life, they're going to have an opinion about it. And if you're presenting that opinion, this this fact about yourself publicly, then not only do everyone does everyone else have an opinion about it now because you told them, but it's perfectly reasonable for them and they certainly have every right to say that opinion publicly about your personal life. And so I will speak about this woman. I don't know her name, but whoever she is, I'm going to speak about your personal life. Uh it is ridiculous that you have been with someone for 15 years and have two kids and are not married. That is ridiculous. That's shameful. You should be ashamed of yourself. It's wrong. It is a shameful fact about you that you

40:55 have chosen to share with the world. And you've chosen to share it because you're trying to make some kind of political point. And so I'm going to share back with you the fact that that is shameful and ridiculous and you should be embarrassed. You should be embarrassed of that. Uh that is unfair to your children, among other things. By not getting married, all you're doing is telling your kids that you make no promises that you give no assurances that their family will stay intact. You are injecting anxiety and uncertainty into their lives at such a fundamental level that you are harming them. You are doing grave deep harm to your children uh this way. So you know if the OBGYn told you that then uh then they were right. Although I

41:42 think the rest of the story is completely made up. Uh, all right. Let's move now to the comment section. If you're a man, it's required that you grow up. [Music] >> Nearly half of American adults say they would suffer financial hardship within 6 months if they lost their primary income earner. As a father and husband, I know how important it is to protect my family's financial future if the worst were to happen. That's where Policy Genius comes in. Policy Genius takes the complexity out of life insurance, making it easy to find and purchase coverage that ensures your loved ones have the security they need if something happens to you. Whether it's covering everyday expenses, paying off debts, or providing funds they can invest in for long-term

42:28 growth, the right policy gives you peace of mind. With Policy Genius, you can quickly compare quotes from leading insurers to find coverage that works for both your family's needs and your budget. With Policy Genius, you can find life insurance policies starting at just $276 a year for a million dollars of coverage. It's an easy way to protect the people you love and feel good about the future. As a country's leading online insurance marketplace, Policy Genius simplifies the life insurance process by letting you compare quotes from America's tops in with just a few clicks to find the lowest price. Their team of licensed agents walks you through everything step by step, answering questions, handling paperwork, and advocating for you throughout the process so you can make informed decisions about the future. Secure your family's future with Policy Genius. Head to policygenius.com/walsh to compare free life insurance quotes from top companies and see how much you

43:14 could save. That's policygenius.com/walsh. Import Somalians and they will create Somalia. It's amazing how many people don't understand this reality. Well, yeah. And one of the reasons why people don't understand it is that they've been brought up on the lie that all these dysfunctional third world countries are only dysfunctional third world countries because they've been victimized by white western countries. Um and the reality is that one way or another the people of a country will create their country. Every country is a product of its people. So why is Somalia the way it is? Because of Somali, you know. And if you really uh love Somalia and thinks it's a great country, then you shouldn't take that as an insult. You should be proud of that. But but of course, you know, everyone wants to have it both ways. These Somali

44:00 immigrants who come here, they want to have it both ways. And so they want to say that I'm so proud of my homeland. It's such a great place. Uh but then if I if I if they hear me say this or anyone else say, "Well, Somali is the way it is because of uh because of Somali," they'll say, "Oh, it's not our fault. This is all it's all white western colonizers." But I thought you said you're proud of it. Aren't you proud of it? It doesn't sound like you're proud of it. Right. Trying to um deflect the the the blame for why it ended up the way it did tells me that you are fundamentally not proud of this country. And that's just the way it goes. Countries people create countries and uh countries are a reflection of their

44:45 people. Um and that's you know, the the only thing that can really upend that formula is if you start importing people in mass from other countries into a country, uh, which is what we've done here. But even then, I would say it's our that we as people, as Americans, it's up to us to to speak out against this, put a stop to this, to elect people who are going to stop it. Like we we have to fight back against this. Um, the fact that a Somalian migrant can even legally run for mayor of Minneapolis shows how far from our founding we have come. Yeah, I I think I think technically the guy was born in DC or something, but I agree with your overall point. I think certainly for for federal elected office

45:32 certainly for f and you could certainly and you can make an argument for mayors. You can make an argument for any elected office, but without a doubt, federal elected office, national office, we should only allow people who were born here to run and to hold those offices. Uh, I didn't realize George Floyd was buried in a golden coffin, so I Googled it. It costs around $25,000. It's plated with 14 karat gold. He was the third person to be buried in this particular model of coffin after Michael Jackson and James Brown. Oh, yeah. I remember it well. a golden casket for a a career criminal and drug addict. This is just one of those things that um you know our grandchild my my grandchildren are going to you tell them

46:18 about that they're it's that image of a golden casket with this career criminal scumbag in it and the mayor of the city on his knees before the casket weeping. It's like, well, I'll say this. I I hope it is my prayer that my grandchildren when they see an image like that, they'll be completely confounded by it. They'll be totally shocked and confused. Because the other option is that they see that image and they go, "Yeah, well, figures, cuz look at how the country is now." Matt, I agree with you about monogamy over polygamy, but the problem with you and other conservative since is that you refuse to talk about the problems with women and you won't defend the

47:04 patriarchy. So, your take is toothless and weak. That's why men listen to Andrew Tate, not you. Yeah. You know, I hear this criticism uh and it just goes to show that so many of my critics aren't criticizing me. They're not. They're criticizing what they think a guy like me would say or would not say. That is that explains so much and I'm not saying I'm ever validly criticized. There's plenty of things you could criticize me for legitimately, but so much of the criticism I do receive, particularly from the right, from other people on the right. So much of that is not actually a criticism. It's a criticism of what they think, what they assume I must say or must not say.

47:50 Right? Because this rebuttal, which I've heard a lot this week and I hear in general, is a total fantasy. It may not be a fantasy for other conservative commentators. I agree. So, it's true that you you could find other conservative commentators and commentators in general who are very willing to talk about the duties of men and responsibilities of men, but they'll never put the shoe on the other foot. They'll never talk about women, what women should do. They won't criticize feminism certainly. Uh they definitely won't won't defend the patriarchy. They won't defend gender roles, the idea that men are meant to do certain things, women are meant to do, you know. So So that's true of plenty of of people. It's not true of me, though. That's not the

48:37 case for me. Like you really think I'm afraid to attack feminism, to call women out, defend the patriarchy, defend uh uh male headship, male leadership in the home. I do it all the time. all the just spend five minutes on YouTube looking for segments where I call out women and feminism and I defend male leadership and male headship in the home where I talk about uh the the need for respect from women to their husbands and what happens when men are not respected in their own home. spend just before you accuse me, before anyone accuses me of well, you don't you ignore this part of the problem, ju just five

49:24 minutes, just give ju because if you're going to spend a couple minutes writing something or or or criticizing me, I think it's fair to say just just five minutes just just go to Google, YouTube, just take a look at what I've said about those subjects and you're going to find like collectively hours of footage of me talking about this. Uh I do it all the time. I got no problem doing it. Go back Jessica. It was just a couple months ago I did a big monologue uh where I was uh criticizing Megan some of what Megan Kelly has said about men and from my perspective putting the blame on men too much and we that was a a whole thing not just one day it was like a whole it was a whole thing. So you can go back go back and listen to that monologue of what I say there. So the problem is that I can't talk about everything

50:12 every time I talk about anything. Okay, this is so so when I'm choosing to speak about a certain subject, I I I can't say literally everything about it because then every show would be 57 hours long. So all we can do just be if you if you see a tweet of mine or you listen to a monologue or particularly if you listen to a clip of a monologue and you hear what I'm saying or you see what I wrote, you can't assume that that's all I've ever said on the subject or all I think that needs to be said about it. It's just what I'm saying right now on this particular topic focusing on this particular angle. Um, so

50:58 finally, Captain Planet used to piss my dad off so much. Now I understand why. Yeah, my my parents had a a whole bunch of shows in the 90s that they wouldn't let us watch. And I don't even remember all of them, but there was plenty of shows, plenty of shows we were able to watch, but there were also plenty of shows that, you know, all my friends were watching and I, you know, we were not allowed to watch them. And I've had the same re r realization as an adult that many times over that uh I get it. As a child I hated it, right? I hated that. Whatever all all my friends in fifth grade loved uh Renin Stimpy on Nickelodeon and for my parents, no, you're not watching that. You're not

51:43 watching that garbage. So that I found that very annoying at the time. I definitely get it now. And usually when my dad would ban us from watching a show, it wasn't because he was saying the show was necessarily intrinsically evil or satanic or something. It was usually that he would walk into the room and we would be watching a show and he would stand there and this always made us nervous when he would like if he walked into the room we're watching a show and he would just glances over and then leaves the room. It's like okay fine. But if he stops and watches for about 30 seconds then we're all nervous. Then we're like, "Okay, now this this is going to be cuz what what we know is he's not going to watch it

52:28 for 30 seconds and go, "This is a great show. I really like this." Uh, no. What would usually happen is he'd watch it for 30 seconds and then he'd go, "What is this crap? Turn this off. No one, you're not watching this anymore." And then based on that, based on 30 seconds, we it would never be allowed on our television ever again based on a 30-se secondond glimpse of whatever the show happened to be. And uh I totally get it now. I complet I do the exact same thing with my kids. I I just did it the other day. We've been we've been staying at a place this summer that has cable that has basic cable and which which is an interesting experience blast from the past. And so my kids, the younger ones, they were watching Bluey. Um and Blue is a great a great show for kids. I certainly approve of Blue. I think it's a good quality show for children. But

53:16 then another show came on after it and I don't even know what it was, but I I walked into the room. I I still don't know what it was. I watched it for a few seconds and I did the same thing. I was like, "What is this? Turn this off." Well, why? But dad, we like this. Yeah. Don't you want to watch more of the show? No, I don't. Just You're never You're not watching that again. We're done with that. Why? Because Because the glimpse was enough for me to know that this is a really dumb and obnoxious and just kind of ugly show. Ugly. It's like the animation is ugly. It's dumb. It's obnoxious. it and I and I I in this case I didn't even notice anything particularly morally objectionable. I just don't watch I don't want my kids watching dumb obnoxious things. I don't

54:02 need you as a child sitting there right with hypnotized silently staring at this screen while there's dumb obnoxious things being injected right into your brain. Just don't need that. I don't need that for you. You don't need that. Turn it off. go play outside. Uh, so yeah, I totally get all that now. And I would assume every parent does this, but then I hear from whenever I say this, I I hear from parents that say, "Well, how could you how could you do that? How could you stop your child from watching something they want to watch?" It's like, I don't know. Uh the probably about 95% of the shows on TV or on streaming. Uh even the the kids

54:50 shows I'm not going to let my kids watch. And again, most of it is not because it's woke or whatever. Although there's plenty of the woke stuff they can't watch that. Most of it is just this is dumb and obnoxious and that's all. And you don't need to spend your time watching something dumb and obnoxious. Read a book. Go play outside. This episode is brought to you by Pocket Hose, the world's number one expandable hose. If you've ever struggled with traditional garden hoses that constantly kink and crease right at the spigot connection, you'll uh you'll appreciate really the innovative design of the pocket hose copper head with pocket pivot. The clever swivel mechanism rotates a full 360°, ensuring uninterrupted water flow and giving you complete freedom to move around your entire property without fighting against stubborn hose tangles. Whether you're watering flower beds on one side of your

55:37 house or reaching planters around back, the smooth pivot uh makes watering effortless and enjoyable. When your gardening tasks are complete, this remarkable hose offers another surprise. It automatically shrinks back down to a compact pocket-siz coil. It's incredibly easy to handle and store away very neatly that makes my yard work 10 times easier since I don't have to lug around a tangled mess. Built with rust proof materials and anti-burst technology, the super lightweight yet ultra durable pocket hose copper head is engineered to withstand years of regular use. Which is why the manufacturer confidently backs it with a comprehensive 10-year warranty for your complete peace of mind. The brand new pocket hose copper head with pocket pivot is a total gamecher for you and for your yard. For limited time, my listeners can get a free pocket pivot

56:22 and their 10 pattern sprayer with the purchase of any size copper head hose. Just text Walsh to64,000. That's Walsh to64,000 for your two free gifts with purchase. Walsh to 64,000. Message and data rates may apply. See terms for details. We're celebrating a decade of the Daily Wire and that is 10 years of saying the quiet part out loud and building something that actually matters, something the left can't cancel or burn down. We're not slowing down. We're scaling up with new talent like Isabelle Brown and her new show premiering this fall. New docs like Journey to the UFC, the Joe Pyer story premiering Friday on Delaware Plus. And here's the thing, members get all of it first. The drops, the trailers, the truth, uncensored. Plus, you get to connect with a community that doesn't think biology is optional. Celebrate 10 years with us. Join now at dailywireplus.com.

57:08 Now, let's get to our daily cancellation. Well, we have another alleged police brutality case for the Daily Cancellation today. This week, there has been lots of outrage over a video of William McNeel Jr., 22 years old, getting his window broken and receiving a swift punch in the face during a traffic stop. As the story goes, McNeel's only crime was failing to have his headlights on during the day. And the story was accompanied by this video, which as per tradition uh only shows the alleged quote unquote brutality, but none of the events leading up to it. Here it is. >> When he when he pulled me over, he walked up over my door cuz my window don't work. Right. And then he I said I said, "So what I did wrong?" >> Yeah. >> He said, "Well, for one, uh, your

57:54 headlights are off under this weather." I'm like, >> "Okay, >> there's multiple people headlights off." First of all, and then there's And then there's no rain. >> It doesn't matter. You're still required to have headlights on. >> Where? Can you Can you pull that law up? >> Huh? >> Can you pull that law up? >> Yeah. When you step out of the car, I will. >> Can you pull Can you call your supervisor? >> Huh? >> Can you call your supervisor? >> All right. Go for it. Exit the vehicle now. Exit the vehicle. >> Show me your hands >> here. >> So, we see him sitting in his car. His window is smashed and then he gets hit in the face and he's dragged out of the car and arrested. Based on this video, the race hustlers have gone to work hysterically shrieking and saying all the things you expect them to say. Speaking of things you expect, ambulance

58:40 chasing parasite Ben Crump parachuted onto the scene and is now representing McNeel. Trump put out a statement saying that, quote, "What happened to Mc William McNeel Jr. is a disturbing reminder that even the most basic rights, like asking why he' been pulled over, can be met with violence for black Americans." McNeil was calm and compliant. Yet, instead of answers, he got his window smashed and was punched in the face. Now, not to spoil the ending here, but as anyone with an IQ above single digits already assumes, Trump is flatout lying. We'll get back to that in a moment, but uh first, here's the latest on this case from Fox News. Quote, "Police in Jacksonville, Florida are investigating a viral video in which an officer is seen punching a male driver in the face during a traffic stop. Footage that began circling on social media over the weekend showed William McNeil Jr. staring uh at the camera on February 19th as an officer is seen smashing his driver's side window and demanding that he exit the vehicle

59:26 now." The officer then strikes McNeel in the face before he dragged out of the car. Quote, "In my direction, the agency immediately began both a criminal and administrative review of the officer's actions. These administrative reviews are ongoing, but the state attorney's office has determined that none of the involved officers violated criminal law. Jacksonville Sheriff TK Waters said Monday while releasing a longer body cam video of the incident. Water said the arresting officer involved in the incident whom he identified as DB Bowers has been stripped of his law enforcement authority pending the outcome of the administrative review. Um, so the officer has been relieved of his duty while they review the case, but they've already said that no crime occurred here uh on on the part of the officer at least. They also released, as you heard, the body cam footage, which shows the whole interaction because it turns out that if you see a short clip

1:00:11 of an altercation that only shows the moment that the altercation turns violent without any of the leadup to contextualize it, then you don't and can't really understand what happened and who is at fault. This is a lesson that every rational person in the country should have learned by now. In fact, you should have learned it about a thousand times over. But unfortunately, there are a lot of irrational people out there. So, and dishonest people. So,

…