Some of the most revealing moments from the sordid saga of Jeffrey Epstein came when government officials were asked direct questions, then ducked them without any real explanation. Case in point: Five years ago, the Labor Secretary at the time, Alex Acosta, was speaking to reporters about his handling of the first Epstein criminal case from 2008, when Acosta was a U.S. Attorney in Florida. This was the press conference right before Acosta&#8217;s resignation as Labor Secretary. For roughly an hour, Acosta tried to explain why his office had offered an extremely lenient <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/labor-secretary-to-hold-news-conference-to-defend-himself-amid-outcry-over-handling-of-epstein-plea-deal/2019/07/10/b136b9a4-a321-11e9-b7b4-95e30869bd15_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">plea deal</a> to Epstein — one that offered immunity to his co-conspirators, and barely required Epstein to spend any time in a jail cell. Acosta was generally responsive to most questions during this press conference. In fact, at one point, he waved off his assistant who wanted to end the press conference early.
But there was one question that Alex Acosta very clearly did not want to answer. It concerned <a href="https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/i-was-told-epstein-belonged-to-intelligence-and-to-leave-it-alone" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reporting</a> in the Daily Beast that, in a discussion with Trump administration officials before his appointment as Labor Secretary, Alex Acosta had said that Epstein, &#8220;belonged to intelligence.&#8221; In other words, Acosta had reportedly suggested to the Trump team that, when he was the U.S. Attorney, he was told by senior U.S. government officials to go easy on Epstein so that he could stay out of jail. Presumably, the idea was that Epstein could then continue connecting various powerful figures to his sex-trafficking ring. That would, in turn, benefit U.S. intelligence agencies in some way. Maybe they might want to blackmail Epstein&#8217;s associates or collect information about them, for example.
Here&#8217;s how Alex Acosta answered — or rather, didn&#8217;t answer — a reporter&#8217;s question about the Daily Beast&#8217;s reporting:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="006 Acosta V2" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/L9xkKZHB-6k?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
That wasn&#8217;t exactly a denial. Instead of saying, &#8220;No, I wasn&#8217;t told to go easy on Jeffrey Epstein because he &#8216;belonged to intelligence,'&#8221; Alex Acosta said that department policy prevented him from offering any kind of response. It&#8217;s not hard to conclude that Acosta was hiding something. That&#8217;s especially true since, according to public documents in Epstein&#8217;s plea deal, it&#8217;s stated that Epstein had <a href="https://x.com/TheViewFromLL2/status/1149424300438577153" target="_blank" rel="noopener">agreed</a> to provide, &#8220;information to the FBI.&#8221;
The government&#8217;s handling of Epstein&#8217;s case raised the obvious question of how many other deviants like Epstein might enjoy protection from the government, in one way or the other. How many other sex traffickers have been operating with impunity because the government is deliberately looking the other way?
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1445-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
That&#8217;s a particularly important question to be asking after what happened yesterday involving Sean Combs — a.k.a. Diddy, a.k.a. Puff Daddy, a.k.a. P. Diddy. The U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York held a press conference announcing a series of criminal charges against Combs, including racketeering and sex trafficking. And by the U.S. Attorney&#8217;s own admission, these alleged offenses have been occurring for a very long time, and often involved something that Combs called &#8220;freak-offs.&#8221; Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="007 Freak offs" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QhzFdgNgvQk?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
According to the U.S. Attorney, there&#8217;s overwhelming evidence that these illegal &#8220;freak-offs&#8221; occurred, such as text messages, videos, and more than a thousand bottles of baby oil and lubricant. As soon as the feds executed the search warrants earlier this year on two of Combs&#8217; mansions, the evidence was all there. And according to the indictment that was unsealed yesterday, there&#8217;s also a lot of evidence that Sean Combs has been committing serious crimes for the past decade, right <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/u/1/d/1iSrpU9eql323koZY7Omi0TmOWzrIOpSQ/view" target="_blank" rel="noopener">out in the open</a>: &#8220;Physical abuse by Sean Combs &#8230;. was recurrent and widely known. On numerous occasions from at least in or about 2009 and continuing for years, Combs assaulted women by, among other things, striking, punching, dragging, throwing objects at, and kicking them.&#8221; That&#8217;s directly from the Grand Jury indictment.
<h4><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here!</a></h4>
What&#8217;s not stated in the Grand Jury indictment is why this &#8220;widely known&#8221; conduct was ignored for so long. Why wasn&#8217;t Sean Combs charged criminally for any of this conduct at any point until yesterday? Why was he allowed to allegedly commit crimes that were, &#8220;recurrent and widely known&#8221; ever since 2009? As it happens, that was the very first question that the U.S. Attorney received at yesterday&#8217;s press conference. Here&#8217;s how the U.S. Attorney responded:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="008 why it took so long" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ilyQwegdtgY?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Like Alex Acosta, he has no answer whatsoever. But this is the single most important question he was asked during the entire press conference. How exactly can people have any confidence in the government, or federal prosecutors, if — by their own admission — it takes them well over a decade to bring charges when someone is allegedly committing crimes that are &#8220;recurrent and widely known&#8221;? Why exactly shouldn&#8217;t we believe that P. Diddy was being protected for some reason, just like Jeffrey Epstein was apparently protected? 
At this point, the burden of proof is not on us to answer that question. The burden is on the government.
It certainly looks as though there was ample reason to at least investigate Combs, going back a long time. There&#8217;s so much creepy and inappropriate footage involving Sean Combs that we could spend all day going through it. Here for example is a video of Combs with Justin Bieber, who at the time was just 15 years old. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Given “custody” of him. Signed to usher. 
This interaction is not normal and I want to know what, if anything, happened to Justin Bieber.
Glad Diddy was denied bail. 
 <a href="https://t.co/ixEfCIoMAE">pic.twitter.com/ixEfCIoMAE</a>
&mdash; Jordan Karr (@JordanLkarr) <a href="https://twitter.com/JordanLkarr/status/1836148616475611464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
What kind of adult records a video like this with a child? He&#8217;s saying he&#8217;s going to do some undisclosed things with Justin Bieber. He&#8217;s talking about having custody of him, like he had custody of Usher. This would be disturbing even if there were no other videos like it. But there&#8217;s a lot of videos like it. Here&#8217;s another. Watch as Sean Combs tells Kevin Hart that he used to &#8220;wrestle&#8221; with Usher when Usher was just 10 years old. And then he says something else that sounds inappropriate, and Kevin Hart reacts as you&#8217;d expect. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Sean &quot;P Diddy&quot; Combs telling Kevin Hart that him and R&amp;B singer Usher used to wake up and &quot;wrestle&quot; in the morning when Usher was only 10 years old <a href="https://t.co/FMG7Sdxq2D">pic.twitter.com/FMG7Sdxq2D</a>
&mdash; Vision4theBlind (@Vision4theBlind) <a href="https://twitter.com/Vision4theBlind/status/1762828449180217605?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
These kinds of videos have been all over the Internet for years. Did anyone in the government follow up on any of this? Did they ask anyone any questions about them? Did they apply for any kind of search warrant to look closer at Sean Combs&#8217; text messages, or to look for incriminating evidence on his properties? If not, why not? And for that matter, why wasn&#8217;t Combs charged after this video surfaced from a hotel in 2016, which appears to show him violently beating a woman on camera? Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
NEW: Sean “Diddy” Combs won’t be charged for the 2016 Century City hotel beating of his former girlfriend that became public on Friday
The DA’s Office said it found the video “disturbing,” but charges couldn’t be filed due to the amount of time that has passed
“We are aware of… <a href="https://t.co/pvBBpIrnLF">pic.twitter.com/pvBBpIrnLF</a>
&mdash; Unlimited L&#39;s (@unlimited_ls) <a href="https://twitter.com/unlimited_ls/status/1791924566828130731?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
How exactly did that footage stay hidden for so long — long enough that the statute of limitations ran out, and local prosecutors couldn&#8217;t bring charges anymore? That&#8217;s the kind of question that a lot of people in the entertainment industry have been asking for a very long time. When there are multiple videos where you appear to be committing a crime, or engaging in very bizarre and disturbing conduct, then under normal circumstances you&#8217;d expect some follow-up. But there wasn&#8217;t any follow-up here. For his part, Kanye West repeatedly called Sean Combs a &#8220;fed&#8221; — both in interviews, and in text messages — probably because there didn&#8217;t appear to be any other rational explanation for how he could get away with this for more than a decade. How can anyone engage in conduct like this, without suffering any consequences for it, for so long?
One theory is that, like Epstein, Sean Combs was very well-connected with powerful people in Washington. In April of 2020, for example, Kamala Harris tweeted out <a href="https://x.com/KamalaHarris/status/1248624302682828802" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this message</a>: 
&#8220;Thank you, @Diddy, for hosting this town hall last night. There&#8217;s a lot at stake for our communities right now and it&#8217;s critical we bring to the forefront how coronavirus is perpetuating racial inequality and health disparities.&#8221;
So Sean Combs was helping to push Democrats&#8217; messaging that COVID was racist. This was during the summer of 2020, when calling everything racist was the Democrats&#8217; official campaign strategy. Meanwhile, other prominent &#8220;entertainers&#8221; — people like Jimmy Kimmel — suggested that Sean Combs could serve as president of the United States. After all, he&#8217;s not morally bankrupt like Donald Trump, right? Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hi <a href="https://twitter.com/jimmykimmel?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jimmykimmel</a>, will you still be running for office as P Diddy’s Vice President? 
 <a href="https://t.co/DyxF4SHjnh">pic.twitter.com/DyxF4SHjnh</a>
&mdash; Cernovich (@Cernovich) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1836098537102414079?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
One of the main takeaways from this is that the entertainment industry is full of extravagantly degenerate scumbags. These are people engaging in debauchery and opulence once reserved for the most corrupt Roman emperors. Diddy produced some low IQ gangsta rap in the 90s and found himself in the same position. This is why so much of what the entertainment industry produces is garbage. It’s made by morally reprobate parasites. These aren’t flawed artistic geniuses like we’ve had in the past, but vacuous airheads who’ve figured out how to sell trash to an audience even more vapid than they are. 
Jimmy Kimmel probably knew Sean Combs was a piece of garbage when he did this interview. But Jimmy Kimmel is also a piece of garbage, along with pretty much everyone else in the industry. So we get clips like that one.
<h4><a href="http://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH THE TRAILER FOR &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; — A MATT WALSH COMEDY ON DEI</a></h4>
Meanwhile, the &#8220;#MeToo&#8221; movement successfully canceled a lot of guys for some bad dates, but somehow it missed Sean Combs. Somehow he flew under the radar for more than a decade, even though, according to yesterday&#8217;s indictment, he wasn&#8217;t particularly good at hiding what he was doing. If those details are true, Sean Combs is an Epstein-level monster, if not worse. And yet no one did anything about it.
The question now is whether Sean Combs will meet the same fate as Jeffrey Epstein. Combs was just denied bail, even though his defense team offered to put up a $50 million bond, secured by his various properties. That&#8217;s a sign that he&#8217;ll be staying in jail at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn for a very long time. So as with Epstein, the government is now bringing down the hammer on Sean Combs, abruptly and without any real explanation. And if the Epstein case is any indication, we probably will never get an explanation.
All we can say with certainty is that a lot of people in Sean Combs&#8217; orbit are probably very nervous right now. And in turn, that should make Sean Combs himself very nervous. Five years after the death of Jeffrey Epstein, we&#8217;re no closer to getting a full explanation of his crimes or who he was associated with. Instead, with the arrest of Sean Combs and the sudden disclosure of his &#8220;freak offs&#8221;, there&#8217;s reason to think that yet another massive coverup is already underway.

Giggs And Diddy Perform At O2 Shepherd’s Bush Empire In A Special One Night Only Event

Did The Government Shield Diddy Like Epstein?

Jeffrey Epstein

Jimmy Kimmel

Justin Bieber

Readers Pass

Sean 'Diddy' Combs

Sex Crimes

Sexual Abuse

I am one of countless women who are fighting a battle that was never meant to be ours alone. My journey began at the tender age of 17 when I brought my first child into this world without the safety net of family support. Today, I am the mother of three beautiful children, who are my heart and soul. I worked tirelessly in my twenties, juggling three jobs while attending night school to earn a bachelor’s degree. This pursuit for a better life left me with $60,000 in student debt — a shadow that looms large over my future.
Today, I gross $6,000 a month, working 15-20 hours of overtime each week. It’s an income I once idolized and aspired to during my studies, believing it was the key to making a name for myself. Yet, the harsh reality is that after taxes, $2,400 in rent, $800 in health insurance, $700 in childcare for my toddler, $400 in utilities, $250 in car insurance, and another $400 in legal fees each month — stemming from a bitter custody battle with my ex-husband — I find myself $1,900 in the red every month. I receive $400 in child support, but it barely scratches the surface of what’s needed.
I share these detailed financial numbers to underscore the stark reality that we are all confronting in this country. This isn&#8217;t just my struggle — it&#8217;s the shared plight of countless Americans burdened by an unforgiving economic system.
My car payment is an additional burden, an expensive necessity because financing a vehicle was cheaper than paying any amount in full for something I would own. I am using old food stamp money I had saved up for food when I lost my job last year, but that is dwindling and will run out in a month or so. Soon, I will have no money for food.
In the midst of these struggles, I watch in despair as politicians spend more time in political arenas fighting amongst themselves, rather than putting the needs of Americans like me at the forefront. I feel forgotten, as if my reality is not important to those who profit from the political use of the hurt that people like me endure.
I find myself ensnared in a relentless cycle, each day feeling like I am shackled in a form of modern-day slavery — laboring endlessly, knowing deep down that no matter how fiercely I fight, breaking free seems impossible. It&#8217;s as if my very essence is owned, my labor dictated, my freedom stolen by an unyielding system. This economy, this broken system, holds me captive, squeezing every ounce of strength from my soul as I desperately struggle to break free from the chains of my invisible master.
<h4><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here!</a></h4>
I write this not only as a call for change, but out of personal desperation. I hope that by voicing my struggles, I can somehow make sense of the daily battles I face, and in doing so, find a way to make them more bearable. Each word is a plea, a testament to the resilience I must muster every day, yearning for a glimmer of hope amidst the overwhelming darkness.
I am exhausted — mentally, physically, and emotionally. It feels as though all my energy is spent on mere survival and my relationship with my children suffers because of it. My health is deteriorating, and I can’t afford the copay to seek help. I make too much to qualify for state assistance, but not enough to survive.
In desperation, I&#8217;ve resorted to taking out small credit cards with excruciating interest rates, just to afford basic necessities. Yet, even these lifelines slip from my grasp as I let payments lapse, unable to keep up with the relentless financial demands. Each month, I sink deeper into a quicksand of debt, watching helplessly as it pulls me further under.
Every day, I send out numerous job applications, hoping to break through the algorithmic barriers that online hiring processes have erected. In a desperate bid to gain an edge, I pay for subscriptions to job board websites, yet the opportunities seem scarce in a sea where everyone is striving for the same lifeline. It&#8217;s a bitter pill to swallow knowing my teenage son has more in his savings than I do, and I wrestle with the urge to borrow from him just to afford basic necessities like laundry detergent.
I see women my age turning to platforms like OnlyFans, tempted by the possibility of financial relief. I hold onto my faith, my dignity, and my love for my children as a shield against that reality. Yet, the temptation lurks as bills pile up and my credit score plummets. Emails from creditors with &#8220;Payment Declined&#8221; messages haunt my inbox. My bank account teeters at $3, and payday is a mere cycle of temporary relief before the next wave of bills crashes in.
Each month, I face the agonizing decision of which bills to pay and which to defer, forced to prioritize their importance to my family&#8217;s immediate well-being. This constant juggling act leaves me perpetually behind, always scrambling to catch up, yet never quite able to break free. It&#8217;s a relentless cycle that chips away at my resolve, leaving me feeling defeated and powerless.
I ask you: How can it be that earning $60,000 to $70,000 a year leaves me scrapping for survival? Why are hardworking people like me stuck in a system that seems to reward the few at the expense of the many?
Each day, the dream of owning my own home slips further away. With every missed payment, my credit score plummets, and any chance of building savings evaporates. The soaring prices of homes stretch far beyond my reach, transforming the American Dream into a distant mirage that taunts me from the horizon.
My heart aches as I watch illegal immigrants walk into this country and receive more support than I do. I cry in solitude, locked in my bathroom, journaling and praying for change. This is not just my story, but the story of many women in America who are slowly being crushed under the weight of an unyielding system.
I am choosing to vote for Donald Trump because I yearn for a life where my hard work truly counts, where I can live on my own terms without depending on government handouts just to survive in a system that those in power have broken. I implore those who share my struggles to make the same choice, recognizing that more government band-aids will only lead to restricted freedoms and make it increasingly difficult to get ahead. We need to reclaim our autonomy and ensure our labor reaps the rewards it deserves.
I&#8217;m not seeking handouts or &#8220;free government money&#8221; — I&#8217;m demanding real, substantial change. I vote conservative because I believe in a future where dedication and determination pave the way to personal success and dignity. We need policies that uplift working mothers, honor our contributions, and empower us to provide for our children without sacrificing our health and well-being.
This is a plea for action, for reform, and for a future where we are not punished for striving for better. America, the land of opportunity, must become a reality, not just a dream. Change is not a luxury; it is a necessity for mothers, for families, and for Americans like me.
* * *
Kirsten White is a hardworking mother of three who lives in Idaho.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Cropped shot of mother carrying a shopping cart, doing grocery shopping in supermarket

I’m A Single Mom. Here’s Why I Am Not Surviving Under The Biden-Harris Economy.

Biden-Harris administration

Children

Economy

Inflation

Motherhood

Opinion

Parenting

Student Loans

For those of you who missed this week’s presidential debate because you were doing something more rewarding like twisting your navel lint into the shape of circus animals, not to worry, the Daily Wire is here to bring you this handy blow-by-blow recap.
The debate began with a question from David Muir, ABC’s crack anchorman — and when I say crack, I mean but crack.
The butt crack anchorman asked Kamala, “Oh mimsy, you’re so nummy, your numminess is yummy, why does my yummy mummy make my tummy gummy?”
Vice President Harris responded, “I have a plan to rain destruction on America by controlling food prices so that grocery store shelves are empty, crippling the energy industry for no discernible reason and leaving babies to die if they violate a woman’s right to choose by surviving an abortion. Also, Trump’s golf game sucks.”
President Trump responded: “What do you mean my golf game sucks? I have a great golf game. Some say I have the greatest golf game anyone can remember. I would be playing great golf right now if the Biden-Harris administration hadn’t flooded our country with illegal immigrants who are eating our cats…”
But at this point, ABC’s Linsey Davis interrupted, saying, “I have to stop you there, Mr. President. We have many other things we want to discuss besides the issues. For instance, President Trump, can you explain to the nation why I hate you so very much? This is not your ordinary hatred. This is an obsessive detestation that has caused me to violate every principle of journalism until I disgrace the profession with my seething, livid, bug-eyed presence. Why have you done that to me?”
President Trump responded, “I have won many, many golf tournaments, and my handicap is now under three.”
At this point, Vice President Harris announced she would end the war in Gaza by ensuring Iran developed nuclear weapons and killed all the Jews before bombing America to rubble, and she added that Trump’s rallies were boring.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Andrew Klavan Show</a></h4>
Screaming that his rallies were in fact terrific, Trump went into a rage, grabbed Harris and dragged her out of the studio, holding her in one hand as he clawed his way up the side of the Empire State Building with the other. David Muir flew after them in a weaponized bi-plane, screaming, “Don’t worry, mimsy, I’m coming to save my yummy nummy mummy!” He then opened fire on Trump with the bi-plane’s machine guns in what the Washington Post described as “the greatest act of journalism since journalism became an attempt to shoot Donald Trump with a biplane’s machine guns.”
In the wake of the debate, opinions were divided. 85% of women who hadn’t been laid in over a year were very impressed with Harris’s performance. “She really rocked that lovely pants suit,” said one woman named Brian Stelter. “And when she walked across the stage and invaded that scary man’s space, she was such a girl-boss, I burst into tears and spent the rest of the day in bed.” Ms. Stelter then burst into tears and got back into bed, sobbing, “Why did I ever return to CNN? I feel so invisible.”
On the other hand, 75% of men with operational sexual equipment felt Trump had done an excellent job of climbing up the Empire State Building with only one hand free, and they added that the ABC moderators had been so unfair, they’d decided to join a militia and overthrow the government.
Commentators also took different sides. For instance, on the Right, Tucker Carlson said the debate was the result of a secret deal struck between invisible demons pretending to be space aliens and CIA Agents in league with the Jews. Carlson said he knew he would be canceled for courageously attacking sacred cows, although possibly it would just be because he was babbling like some kind of nutcase.
On the left, the New York Times, a former newspaper, ran an editorial saying “Kamala Harris has proved herself to be the sort of woman we would include in a throuple if we were heterosexual.”
To which David Muir added, “Oh, my mummy. Nummy, mummy, mummy. Yummy mummy.”
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. He is the bestselling author of the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fourth installment, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1613165536?ref_=dbs_m_mng_rwt_calw_thcv_3&amp;storeType=ebooks" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A WOMAN UNDERGROUND</a>,” is now available for PRE-ORDER. Follow him on X: @andrewklavan
The views expressed in this satirical article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

ABC News Hosts Presidential Debate Between Donald Trump And VP Kamala Harris At The National Constitution Center In Philadelphia

Your Blow-By-Blow Recap Of The Presidential Debate

ABC News

David Muir

Donald Trump

Humor

Kamala Harris

Presidential Debate

Satire

Today is the day that my new film “<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Am I Racist?</a>” releases in theaters nationwide. This is the most significant moment in my own career personally, and a seminal achievement for all of the incredible people who worked on our film — starting with our director Justin Folk, our producers Sean Hampton, Brian Hoffman, Benyam Capel, and Dallas Sonnier. And of course The Daily Wire and the executive team — Jeremy Boreing, Caleb Robinson, and Jon Lewis, along with Ben Shapiro, who is an executive producer on the film and one of the first people to see the original cut and give us notes. This film would not be what it is now without every person that I listed, and many others that I haven’t listed. I’m not going to read through the whole list. You’ll have to watch the movie and stick around for the credits for that. And by the way: you should stick around for the credits. This isn’t a Marvel movie but we do have our own little post-credit scene you don’t want to miss.
Anyway, the point is that this film was incredibly ambitious from the start. We knew what we wanted to do and what sort of movie we wanted to make, but we had no idea if we could pull it off, especially given my increased profile and notoriety from the success of &#8220;What Is A Woman?&#8221; Some day I can tell the whole story of how exactly we managed to navigate all of the land mines and create the film that you can now watch in a theater near you. I will say that it took significantly longer than I thought, and was even more difficult than I imagined it would be. 
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1726313279401000&amp;usg=AOvVaw115_qPFFEePDP86-Fvo-Vd">Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here!</a>
When we finished filming, finally, about a year after we shot our first scene, the odyssey had only just begun. Now came time to take this unwieldy, mammoth of a thing, with all of its dozens of hours of raw footage, and shape it into a cinematic narrative. Fortunately, we have a brilliant artist for a director in Marshall Lee, who made this painful process much easier than it had any right to be. We also have Justin Folk, our director, who knows how to comb through footage and find the story. We also spent many cumulative hours in the edit bay and in screening rooms with Jeremy, discussing and debating every last detail of this thing. It was a painstaking and sometimes necessarily painful creative collaboration, but that’s what’s required to make something great. And none of us were going to settle for anything less than great — something we can all be proud of.
Sadly, not everyone involved in this film is proud of it, apparently. Some of my co-stars — the people I shared the screen with — have demonstrated some embarrassment about their role in the movie. In fact, quite tragically, four of the DEI experts I interviewed or featured in the film have deleted their Twitter accounts. A number of them have also denounced the movie in recent days. Kate Slater, the anti-racist educator now famous for discussing the racial implications of Disney princesses, posted on Instagram this week that the movie is a “piece of s***” and she is “going off the radar” to avoid criticism that may arise from it. Meanwhile, one of the hosts of Race to Dinner — Saira Rao — who is featured in one of the pivotal scenes of the film, reportedly condemned the movie during a Race to Dinner digital book club event. She warned people not to see it, calling it a “fascist Nazi white supremacy film.” She claimed that she was “conned” into being in the film. As a con artist herself, of course, she knows a lot about being conned. Though apparently not enough to avoid it happening to her. If we did con her — which of course we did not, for the record. We simply gave her an opportunity to appear in our documentary about anti-racism. An opportunity she was eager to take advantage of. And we did, in fact, make a documentary about anti-racism. No conning involved. I mean, how could Saira Rao accuse me of being a con artist? Who does Saira Rao think I am? Saira Rao? 
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1442-the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: THE MATT WALSH SHOW</a>
Finally, just yesterday, Robin DiAngelo issued a statement. It is lengthy. It is also everything that you’d want a statement from Robin DiAngelo to be. Posted to her website on Thursday, her statement is titled: “About That Film…” Here’s what she says, in part: 
<blockquote>Back in 2023, I was contacted by a group who claimed to be making a documentary film called Shades of Justice, about efforts to address racism in the United States. They planned to interview anti-racist activists, authors and thought leaders in service of supporting the cause of racial equity. They offered me between $10-20,000 for an interview. I said let’s meet in the middle with $15,000 and agreed to participate (I have since donated that sum to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund).</blockquote>
Side note: yes, Shades of Justice is one of the organizational names that we used. It doesn’t really mean anything but we figured it’s the kind of meaningless name that would resonate with the woke crowd. And it did. I will also say that I appreciate Robin’s generosity in “meeting in the middle” with $15,000. She really gave us a deal, you see. It was a bargain. Only 15 grand to sit down for an interview. She continues: 
<blockquote>When I arrived for the interview, a few things felt off. The grips would not make eye contact with me and the interviewer, who was introduced as “Matt,” appeared to be wearing an ill-fitting wig.</blockquote>
Now, let’s stop here again, Robin. First of all, the wig fit very well. That was a nice wig — an authentic wig. It was made from real human hair. I harvested the hair myself from a homeless guy in exchange for a Snickers bar and a bottle of Jack Daniels. Second, more to the point, you claim that you noticed I was wearing a wig the moment you sat down — and yet you still did the interview? In your version of events, the crew was nervous and shifty (which they weren’t), and I was sitting there in my ill-fitting wig, and things felt off. Yet, Robin, you still sat there and talked to me on camera for two hours. Whose fault is that? If what you say is true, then we can only conclude that you were willing to do anything just for the money. Which is basically the whole point of the movie. Thank you for emphasizing it for us. 
Reading on: 
<blockquote>Matt presented himself as someone new to antiracist work and seemed earnest, and his questions did not come across as adversarial. By the end, however, things got weird. Matt asked what I thought about reparations for Black Americans. I said that I agreed with reparations but that it was not my area of expertise. He then pulled up a chair and invited a Black crew-member who went by “Ben” to sit with us, took out his wallet and handed Ben some cash. He said that if I believed in reparations, I should also give Ben cash. While some Black people have asked white people to engage in reparations by giving directly to individuals, reparations are generally understood as a systemic approach to past and current injustice. The way Matt set this up felt intended to put Ben and I on the spot. Because Matt was pushing this on us, I expressed my discomfort and checked in with Ben, to be sure he was okay with receiving cash in this way. Ben reassured me that he was, so I went to my wallet and handed him my cash and the interview ended.</blockquote>
So let’s back up here and review, again, your version of events, Robin. You walked into the room to do an interview with an organization you knew very little about. Things felt off. The interviewer was wearing a strange wig. Then the interviewer, in this wig, forces a black man to sit down and receive cash reparations. You felt like the whole thing was a setup and intended to put you on the spot… But you still paid the reparations. Even despite all of that, you still paid. That’s your defense. Now, as for me, I don&#8217;t want to give spoilers away for the film. I don’t care how many times some of these spoilers are reported by the media. I refuse, on principle, to officially confirm the legitimacy of any of the spoilers. Everyone will have to go to the theater this weekend to watch “Am I Racist?” for themselves. But if what you say is true, then it would seem to make you not only a fool but a money-grubbing grifter. Which, again, is sort of the point of the film. 
I will say that your assumption that my black friend Ben was manipulated into taking part in this alleged reparations exercise is quite demeaning and infantilizing to him. No great shock coming from the woman who demeans and infantilizes black people for a living. If this reparations thing actually did happen — as you claim — how do you know Ben was not a willing participant? In fact, how do you know that he wasn’t forcing me to do it? Maybe I’m the innocent victim in all of this. Have you thought about that, Robin? 
Continuing on: 
<blockquote>After reviewing the sequence of events and discussing it with colleagues, I realized that they had lied about their agenda and I had been played. I spread the word on my networks. Unfortunately, last month I started receiving hateful and misogynistic emails. Some referenced the Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro’s website), which announced that the film is indeed being released. It is not titled Shades of Justice nor is it meant to support the anti-racist cause. It is a Borat-style mockumentary titled Am I Racist? and designed to humiliate and discredit anti-racist educators and activists.
Their deception was carefully planned and well-funded… The interviewer was in fact, Matt Walsh, a far-right provocateur backed by Shapiro and DailyWire+ (and yes, wearing a wig)… Am I A Racist? is not only about me and I was not the only one who fell for their deception. Sadly, many of those being mocked are women of Color. I have not seen the film nor do I plan to watch it, so I don’t know what they have used of my interview or how they have edited it, but if you see clips or the full film, consider the source: Matt Walsh. So, who is Matt Walsh and what is his – and his backers’ – agenda? Luckily for us, he has clearly answered that question, without shame, time and time again.</blockquote>
She then goes on to quote the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hit piece on me. They say that I’m a white supremacist shock jock, etc. All in all, much of what she says about me, The Daily Wire, and our film is not true. Especially when she claims that our film was well funded. In fact, this was a very low-budget operation — at least by Hollywood standards. Borat — which she compares our film to — had a budget of around $18 million 20 years ago. Our budget was about 16% of that. From a quality perspective, the film does look much more expensive than that. Which is maybe what Robin DiAngelo was picking up on. And I appreciate the compliment. 
She is completely correct about one thing. She says our intentions are to humiliate and discredit anti-racist educators and activists. On that point, she could not be more right. That is in fact our agenda with this film. We have other things we want to do, too. We want to entertain you. We want to make you laugh. We want to prove that conservatives can successfully make a film like this. The kind of film that, until now, only liberals like Sacha Baron Cohen have pulled off, or even attempted. We have many things we wish to achieve with this movie. But most of all, yes, we want to expose the so-called “anti-racist” movement. We want to humiliate and discredit these grifters. Or, I should say, we want to give them an opportunity to humiliate and discredit themselves. And that is an opportunity that Robin DiAngelo took full advantage of. She only has herself to blame. And you can see it for yourself, right now, in theaters. You really don’t want to miss it.

“Am I Racist?”

Robin DiAngelo Freaks Out Over ‘Am I Racist?’ And It’s Glorious

Robin DiAngelo Freaks Out Over 'Am I Racist?' And It's Glorious

Am I Racist

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Matt Walsh

Robin DiAngelo

The Daily Wire

The following is a transcript excerpt from Dr. Jordan Peterson’s interview with The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh about his new movie, <a href="https://www.amiracist.com/">“Am I Racist?”</a> In this segment, Walsh describes witnessing the real phenomena of white guilt when filming. He explains that without religion, people’s inability to interpret the feeling of guilt caused by sins becomes misplaced. In search of understanding, people are deceived by con artists who make money showcasing white-guilt subterfuge and the like, causing white guilt to become a replacement for religion. For more from Dr. Peterson, see his <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/watch/jordan-peterson">extensive catalog</a> available on DailyWire+. You can <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/the-jordan-b-peterson-podcast/tbd-matt-walsh" target="_blank" rel="noopener">listen to</a> or <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/tbd-matt-walsh-ad-free" target="_blank" rel="noopener">watch</a> the full podcast episode on DailyWire+.
Start time: 1:28:58
Jordan B. Peterson: What did you learn as a consequence of doing the movie, and why should people go see it, as far as you&#8217;re concerned?
Matt Walsh: I think there are several things. Maybe the main thing that I learned — and I don&#8217;t know if it&#8217;s learned so much as had illustrated for me — but a lot of people who fall for this… You know, there are the people that push it: the Robin D&#8217;Angelo types, the women who run the race to dinner we have in the film—
Peterson: Oh, yes. Saira Rao … She runs those dinners where the white women pay to be humiliated by two unbelievably narcissistic <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/characteristics-of-a-psychopath-and-the-making-of-the-dark-tetrad">psychopaths</a> so that they actually feel good about themselves without actually having to do any more or having to put in any of the moral effort.
Walsh: Exactly, exactly. And that&#8217;s the thing. Those types of people, the people who are running the show, that&#8217;s one thing. And I don&#8217;t know how much they even believe a lot of what they&#8217;re saying. I don&#8217;t think they believe all of it, certainly. And there&#8217;s not a lot to be learned about them. I think that they&#8217;re grifters. They&#8217;re con artists. They&#8217;re making a lot of money on this stuff. That&#8217;s a big part of the motivation. It&#8217;s not very complicated. 
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1726313279401000&amp;usg=AOvVaw115_qPFFEePDP86-Fvo-Vd">Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here!</a>
But what&#8217;s more interesting to me are the women who would sit around that table who are paying money to be there, or the people who would willingly attend one of these seminars that we have in the film, people who would willingly read Robin D&#8217;Angelo&#8217;s book. I&#8217;ve always been more interested in them. Like what&#8217;s going on with them? And what I found making the film is that, you really can&#8217;t overstate the guilt that these people are walking around with. White guilt. White guilt is a very real phenomenon. I knew that making the movie, but having it illustrated so profoundly was still pretty enlightening to me, that a lot of these people are just walking around with a lot of guilt.
And, for a sane, rational white person like myself and you, it can be hard to understand because I&#8217;ve never spent any time feeling guilty about slavery or Jim Crow. I had nothing to do with it. I&#8217;ve never spent any time feeling guilty about it at all. And so it&#8217;s hard for us to understand people who, not only have they felt guilt about it, but they&#8217;re overcome with guilt by this kind of thing. 
Peterson: How much of that, though, too, is that they want to signal how overcome by guilt they are so that they look like hypermoral agents? I see the same thing with mothers, in particular, who brandish their <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-identity-crisis-a-struggle-with-ones-self">trans children</a> like their flag of pride. It&#8217;s like, “Oh, look at how upset and confused my child is, and yet I&#8217;m still wonderful enough to love them no matter what.” It&#8217;s a really malevolent game. And that parading your self-flagellation indicates the profundity of your guilt, that&#8217;s a pretty bloody ugly game too. 
Now, I understand that there&#8217;s a fair bit of genuine moral confusion mixed in there, but the self-serving in public — you notice that those women go to those dinners in groups. It&#8217;s not Saira Rao and her pathological partner with one woman. They have to do that group so they can signal to each other the depths of their moral virtue.
Walsh: Yes, I think that’s certainly right. There&#8217;s a certain amount of virtue signaling that goes into it for sure. But the race to dinner — just using that again as an example — that&#8217;s seven or eight minutes in the movie, but, of course, you&#8217;re making a movie, especially a movie like this, they take a lot longer to film, and that was really two hours. I mean, that dinner went on for two hours, and you can see these women sitting around at this table at various points crying, seemingly very much overcome with emotion talking about their racism that they feel, given opportunities to talk about examples of when they committed racist acts, and then they share their examples. And it&#8217;s like none of the examples they give are actual racism.
And yes, again, some of that is them just showing off, but I do think that at the core of it, there is real guilt here. And we could spend another two hours psychoanalyzing this, but my own theory about how they can feel this guilt is that it&#8217;s a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/substitutes-for-religion-are-meaningless">replacement for religion</a>. Almost all of them are irreligious people. Even if they would call themselves Christian, they&#8217;re not really. And traditionally, religion has given us an answer for guilt. 
Now, I don&#8217;t feel any racial guilt, I don’t feel any white guilt. But I do feel guilt. I do experience guilt for things that I do that are wrong. If I commit sins, I feel guilty about them. But then, I turn to my faith and that gives me an answer for, number one, why I feel that guilt, what that guilt is from, and then what to do with it, what I do about that guilt. And I can turn to my faith and get an answer to all of that. 
But if you take religion out of it, well, now you&#8217;ve still got people that are sinning, that are doing evil acts, and so they&#8217;re still going to feel the guilt because of it. But they don&#8217;t have a way of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-its-psychologically-dangerous-to-confuse-political-ideologies-with-religious-movements">understanding that guilt</a>. They don&#8217;t have any way of interpreting it. And so they look around for someone to tell them what to do with the guilt. And then these racial husslers are there, and then they&#8217;ll tell you, “Oh, I&#8217;ll tell you why you feel guilty. It&#8217;s because of this.” That’s a big part of it. 
Peterson: Well, I think that&#8217;s a good analysis. When you were a somewhat profligate 24-year-old, you needed to channel the meaninglessness and the guilt that was associated with your unmoored life into something that was properly sacrificial. And you <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/an-act-of-faith-why-marriage-is-far-better-than-the-single-life">got married</a> and you <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-marriage-is-the-highest-form-of-play">had kids</a>. That provides a pathway where you can <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/a-more-reliable-and-meaningful-aim-than-happiness">discharge your moral duty</a>. That&#8217;s the thing. 
It&#8217;s necessary for human beings to discharge their moral duty; otherwise, they&#8217;ll be overwhelmed by feelings of inadequacy and self-deprecation. That&#8217;s because we are communal and social creatures, and we have to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/family-dinners-shared-meals-and-the-importance-of-social-engagement">live in relationship</a> to other people. If we don&#8217;t do that, we violate our deepest instincts or our most divine calling.
As you said, for the typical person, you find that expiation of your self-centeredness in responsibility to your wife, like long-term committed responsibility, and to your kids, to your grandkids, and to that multi-generational endeavor. If we didn&#8217;t have that propensity for guilt, we wouldn&#8217;t be social the way that we are. And it can be exploited by the sadistic, narcissistic, histrionic psychopaths. And the women who run that race to dinner are great examples of that. Man, they’re something to watch.

Jordan Peterson/Matt Walsh

Interpreting Guilt: How White Guilt Becomes A Replacement For Religion

Jordan Peterson

Leftism

White Fragility

According to the media, the presidential race is effectively over, with a couple of months still left to go in this election.
Normally, in a presidential race, this is where the race heats up. It&#8217;s not where the race ends.
That&#8217;s particularly true this year because one of the candidates is still a complete unknown. And yet the media have declared — since the news cycle moves so fast and since Trump is such a known quantity — that because Trump did not perform well in the debate this week and because the media ganged up with Kamala Harris in the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-most-rigged-debate-in-history" target="_blank" rel="noopener">most rigged debate</a> in presidential history, Trump is effectively done.
A <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-debate-frank-luntz-1952518" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Newsweek</a> article published this morning cites pollster Frank Luntz as predicting Trump’s loss: “I think this race is now over. Donald Trump has blown it. It&#8217;s completely done. … I&#8217;m trying to decide if I want to go on record, and the answer is yes. I think that he loses because of this debate performance.”
The answer to that is simple: Luntz is wrong. Trump does not lose because of this debate performance.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2046-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: THE BEN SHAPIRO SHOW</a>
To begin, the ratings on this debate were good, but not historically amazing. Apparently, about 67 million total viewers watched this debate. But of those 67 million total viewers, how many of those people were the undecided voters or independents who are actually going to decide this election?
That is the real question.
Sixty-seven million people sounds like a lot of people, yet the first presidential debate in 2020 garnered 73 million people. The very first debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton in 2016 garnered 84 million people.
The debate between Trump and Harris did not do that well in terms of ratings compared to historic presidential debates.
But more importantly, the vast majority of Americans have already made up their mind. This race is going to come down to extremely small margins, truly tiny margins, in seven different states: North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. All of those states are currently within the margin of error.
Nate Silver, who I think is the best poll analyst in the country, contended that it would be four to seven days after the debate before any polling is truly accurate and another week or two before the reality of the race is clear.
But a week in American politics is forever in American politics. Remember, two weeks from now will be the vice-presidential debate. A lot can happen between now and then.
Silver has suggested Harris will probably get between a one-and-a-half-point bump nationally. According to Silver&#8217;s model, he thought Harris was a fairly significant underdog going into the debate. But because she performed well, because Trump underperformed, and because the media were, of course, jumping on Trump&#8217;s back to basically facilitate Harris’ victory, she’ll probably get a boost, but not enough of a boost to actually make this into a solid win for her.
What had to happen in that debate for each side was different. Trump failed in the debate because there were three things that he had to effectively establish, which he did not do.
One, he had to establish that she is Biden. She is responsible for everything the Biden administration has done. If you don&#8217;t like what&#8217;s going on right now, you need to change it up. You need to move away from Harris.
He did not do his job in actually tying her that closely to Biden. She was able to evade those punches with the help of David Muir and Linsey Davis, who should be on the DNC payroll at this point.
But that is a proposition most Americans do agree with right now: that Harris is not the agent of change; that she is, in fact, tied at the hip to Biden; and that she is responsible for his policies.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/">Am I Racist? ONLY In Theaters Tomorrow—Get Your Tickets Now!</a>
Second, Trump had to drive home that Harris is dangerously far-Left. He tried to do that and the media just lied about it. Muir and Davis fact-checked Trump when he called out Harris’ far-Left policies on abortion or illegal immigration. They were lying on her behalf.
Third, he had to paint her as incompetent. But because he did not seem particularly competent on the stage while she was massaged into competence and never challenged by the moderators as she spewed out answers she’d memorized, she didn&#8217;t appear incompetent.
So Trump didn&#8217;t do what he had to do on stage.
But — Kamala Harris also did not do what she needed to do on the stage.
This is why it is still a 50-50 race. Roughly two-thirds of people who watched the debate thought she won. But back in 2012, two-thirds of people thought Mitt Romney destroyed Barack Obama in the first debate, and then Romney lost the election.
What did Harris actually have to accomplish? She had to dodge all the punches, which I think she did. But she also had to establish that she is different from Biden in some fundamental way. She tried that routine, but it didn&#8217;t land.
Did anyone believe that she is there because she is so different from Biden? She&#8217;s a new coat of paint on an old broken jalopy, and they&#8217;re trying to pass it off as a Lamborghini.
Thus, she had to establish she&#8217;s wildly different from Biden. Did she accomplish that?
I don&#8217;t think so. She also had to establish that she&#8217;s a moderate who somehow moves her positions for good reason. She never established that because she never bothered to explain why she moved from the far-Left in 2019 to her supposed current positions in 2024.
She never explained why she reversed her stance on fracking. She never explained why she reversed her stance on decriminalization of border crossings — if she did. She never explained why she reversed her stance on mandatory gun buybacks. She never explained why she reversed her stance on electric vehicle mandates.
She didn&#8217;t explain any of those points. That is the problem for Harris. All of these systemic disadvantages that she currently has as a candidate remain true today.
Those perceptions have not been changed by the debate.
An article published by <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/11/kamala-harris-post-debate-image-00178773" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Politico</a> yesterday claims, “Harris’ campaign advisers made clear she will be doing more media interviews, including with unconventional outlets.”
But none of them are going to be adversarial. They&#8217;re going to use the debate as the opportunity to say she has now answered every question she had to answer. That means she can go hang out with Charlamagne tha God. That means that she can go hang out with the ladies of “The View.” It means that she can go hang out with a bunch of friendlies from here all the way to the election.
The Kamala Harris campaign is betting that what people saw from President Trump Tuesday night was so off-putting that they simply will not vote for him and, instead, vote for her by default.
But the problem is this: As much as people are saying that Trump was super terrible, awful, no good, very bad, the question is this: Was Trump a standard of deviation different from what he normally is? I would say no. I think Trump was pretty much who he always is, and we&#8217;re all pretty used to it.
Harris will not explain why she changed her positions, but she has to establish she&#8217;s different from Biden. I don&#8217;t think she&#8217;s doing that.
RFK Jr. stated that Trump lost the debate but won in terms of his governance.
That is the point.
Harris’ policies remain a horror show, and her policies are the same as Biden&#8217;s.
There will be ads all over the place that talk about Harris’ hard-leftism. You will see them from now until the election. And they will matter.
Today is September 12. The election is not for 54 more days. The notion that it&#8217;s all settled, that it’s over?
Not by a long shot.

Post-Debate, Trump STILL Has The Advantage

2024 Election

It’s official. Pop superstar Taylor Swift <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-reacts-to-taylor-swifts-kamala-endorsement" target="_blank" rel="noopener">is on Team Kamala</a>.
What does it mean? That depends on both Vice President Harris and how much Swift wants to invest in her presidential campaign.
Some background is in order.
Swift soared to superstardom without getting her hands dirty in politics. That changed in the wake of the 2016 presidential election.
A certain real estate mogul stunned the world, and the press turned on Swift for having stayed out of the fray. Need an example? The Daily Beast <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/its-time-for-taylor-swift-to-denounce-her-neo-nazi-admirers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">insinuated</a> she’s sympathetic to white supremacists for not denouncing their love for her.
The singer eventually declared a major. She embraced the Democratic Party and threw her support behind both Joe Biden and other leftists running for office. They even made a movie about her transformation – the Netflix documentary, “Miss Americana.”
In 2023, she hit the road and became the biggest act in the world. And, along the way, she stuck to the music. No lectures. No social media messages attacking Donald Trump or boosting Biden policies.
She shut up and sang. And, for what it’s worth, reigned over pop culture in a way not seen since Michael Jackson or The Beatles.
Yet she’s been shockingly silent on politics in 2024. She watched the various primary battles come and go without flexing her social media might (95 million X followers … 284 million on Instagram).
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/">Am I Racist? ONLY In Theaters Tomorrow—Get Your Tickets Now!</a>
Even during the heat of the Biden/Trump battles she stayed quiet. She didn’t even push the media’s brief but embarrassing “cheap fake” narrative to explain away Biden’s senior moments.
Days before the first (and only?) Trump-Harris debate <a href="https://variety.com/2024/music/opinion/taylor-swift-kamala-harris-1236138123/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Variety Magazine</a> bullied Swift into taking a side. And there’s only one possible side, of course.
Swift finally took the plunge on debate night.
“I’ve done my research, and I’ve made my choice. Your research is all yours to do, and the choice is yours to make,&#8221; she <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/C_wtAOKOW1z/?igsh=MWtoMzMxam14eGRvbQ%3D%3D" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>. &#8220;I also want to say, especially to first time voters: Remember that in order to vote, you have to be registered! I also find it’s much easier to vote early. I’ll link where to register and find early voting dates and info in my story.”
Now what?
She’s already proven to be a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/11/taylor-swift-harris-endorsement-election-voting-site.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">boost</a> to voting rolls. In the past, she’s promoted voter registration efforts and found some success. Will those “new” voters actually flex their constitutional might on November 5? That remains to be seen.
The biggest way to influence this election is to convince the independents and wall sitters alike. Can a major celebrity’s social media musings do the trick?
We’ve collectively downgraded our views on political stars in recent years. When the umpteenth celebrity vows to leave the country if Politician X wins, and then they stay put post-election, it hurts their collective cred.
So does the fact that mega-stars can ride out high inflation and soaring crime rates while most people can’t. It explains why the recent DNC convention <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/politics-news/dnc-2024-harris-campaign-celebrities-1235978655/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">tapped the brakes</a> a bit on its celebrity quotient.
Even actor Zach Galifianakis, who previously promoted both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama with his comedy, <a href="https://ew.com/zach-galifianakis-wants-democrats-focus-less-on-celebrity-more-on-rural-america-8700977" target="_blank" rel="noopener">warned</a> against playing the celebrity card too hard in 2024.
Swift is all toured out at the moment, so she can’t bring her pro-Harris message to stages across the country. That could have made her voice heard by thousands of adoring fans and, in turn, sparked a series of news stories about her proclamations.
The corporate press would be only too happy to spread that message.
She also could work the late-night TV circuit to promote her music and the Harris/Walz ticket. That audience is already sold on the Democrats, so few hearts or minds would be changed there.
Swift’s biggest advantage could be pushing out fake news to her flock. Millions follow and at least partially trust her on a variety of issues. So if Swift tag-teams with the corrupt corporate press that could have a distinct pro-Harris benefit.
Imagine if she boosted the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/medias-wall-to-wall-coverage-of-trump-bloodbath-comment-delivers-zero-context" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“bloodbath” media lie</a> from earlier in the election cycle to taunt Trump. Countless Swifties would assume she was sharing actual news.
Yet that seems unlikely. Why?
Her pro-Harris statement wasn’t brimming with the usual celebrity bile. Yes, she picked a side, but she didn’t demean Trump or his fan base. She also waited forever to pick a side this election season, suggesting her heart isn’t quite into it. Can you blame her?
She’s also protective of her brand to a fault. Her apolitical past wasn’t an accident, nor was her staying on the political sidelines during 2023’s Eras Tour.
Everything is a calculation.
Even if it appears she’s working alongside the Harris/Walz campaign it could ding her brand in some quarters. That seems like a losing proposition for the starlet. Plus, after having done all that “research” on Harris she must know she’s an empty suit saying whatever it takes to win come November.
And if the polls show Trump has momentum in the campaign’s waning weeks she may decide to go quiet again.
In the end, Swift’s endorsement matters, but she could be preaching to a considerable choir. Young women and “childless cat ladies” already plan to vote for Harris.
Christian Toto is an award-winning journalist, movie critic and editor of <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HollywoodInToto.com</a>. He previously served as associate editor with Breitbart News’ Big Hollywood. Follow him at <a href="https://x.com/HollywoodInToto?lang=en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@HollywoodInToto</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Taylor Swift

Taylor Swift Backs Kamala, But Is Her Heart Really In It?

Celebrities

One of the many lies you&#8217;ll often hear about multiculturalism is that it&#8217;s an ideology of tolerance. We&#8217;re a melting pot. Diversity is our strength. We&#8217;re stronger together. And so on.
No one really believes any of that, least of all the proponents of multiculturalism. In reality, as Thomas Sowell has pointed out, multiculturalism is an ideology that tolerates every culture except one, which is Western culture. When it comes to Western culture, no level of hatred or self-loathing is beyond the pale. Anyone who belongs to this disfavored culture must apologize repeatedly for his own existence. He must grovel at every opportunity on account of his skin color and ethnicity. And ultimately he must turn on his own family, and sacrifice them at the altar of multiculturalism.
That&#8217;s exactly what happened on Tuesday, at a city commission meeting in the town of Springfield, Ohio. In the past few days, Springfield has found itself in the center of a national political firestorm after several residents reported that animals are being sacrificed, and in some cases eaten, by the tens of thousands of Haitian nationals that have flooded into town in the past four years. And despite what ABC News says, there is clear merit to these claims. The Daily Wire is on the ground in Springfield, where we&#8217;ve found evidence that the heads and carcasses of slaughtered pigs are being left out in public.
As disturbing as this is, all of the talk about animals obscures a more important point, which is that human beings are being killed as well. One of them, as I mentioned earlier this week, was an 11-year-old boy named Aiden Clark. He was killed &#8212; and more than a dozen other students were seriously injured &#8212; last year by a Haitian national who crossed the center line and crashed into a school bus on the first day of school. This Haitian national was on the roads illegally. His driver&#8217;s license was from Mexico.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1441-the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: THE MATT WALSH SHOW</a>
On Tuesday, the father of Aiden Clark addressed the national coverage of his son&#8217;s death. Here&#8217;s what he said:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
The parents of Aiden Clark say they wish he had been killed by an older white man, instead of a Haitian, because they say his death has been used to spread hate towards migrants. Aiden’s father asks for Republicans to stop using his death for political reasons. <a href="https://t.co/jzlzm5EI9q">pic.twitter.com/jzlzm5EI9q</a>
— TheBlaze (@theblaze) <a href="https://twitter.com/theblaze/status/1833645016251605361?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Before I go any further, I&#8217;ll say this: Losing a child is the single worst thing that can happen to a person. It’s the greatest pain a human being can experience. That’s why, as a father, I almost never criticize people who have gone through something like that. I don’t criticize them for how they grieve. I don’t criticize them for what they say in the aftermath. It’s a horror so unthinkable that there just is no way to know how a person will react.
But after these remarks, unfortunately, I feel compelled to say something because, for one thing, the man is slandering people — people like myself — who have spoken up for his son. He is attributing false motives to us. He&#8217;s labeling us racists and &#8220;hateful&#8221; and so on. He&#8217;s also claiming that no one &#8212; including politicians &#8212; has the right to even mention his son&#8217;s name.
None of this is true. And we have a right to correct the record, especially since this man is now using his son’s death to make a political statement. It’s a false statement. It&#8217;s a harmful statement. So we need to speak up because this is a matter of national importance.
I&#8217;m going to repeat what the father of Aiden Clark said. “I wish that my son, Aiden Clark, was killed by a 60-year-old white man.&#8221; That was the line he wrote down, prepared, and then delivered. He didn&#8217;t say that he wished his son was never killed, Instead, he said that he wished someone else had killed his son, so that other people wouldn&#8217;t draw any unapproved conclusions.
His comments only go to show that white guilt is a sickness &#8212; an infection that has burrowed deep inside this man’s mind and soul. So deep that even the death of a child did not shake him free of it. I cannot comprehend how a thought like this even enters your head. A man kills your child and your wish is that a man of a different race had killed him? How does that thought occur to you? I would expect that you&#8217;d wish that a Haitian immigrant hadn&#8217;t killed your son because you wish nobody had. But to wish that someone else had killed him is incomprehensibly deranged.
His implication, if you want to be as charitable as possible, is that the tens of thousands of Haitians who have moved into Springfield are safe drivers. They&#8217;re just as safe as the American citizens who have been living there for generations, supposedly. But everyone living in Springfield knows that&#8217;s not true. The journalist Taylor Hansen is in Springfield. He just reported, &#8220;Every resident I’ve talked to is scared of driving, and they are dealing with increased insurance rates due to unlicensed and uninsured Haitian drivers causing multiple accidents on a daily basis. There’s no punishment taking place for Haitians driving without insurance, but if an American citizen does it they can have their license suspended.&#8221;
Hansen also put together a compilation of some of the car crashes he&#8217;s seen involving Haitians in Springfield. Here are just some of them:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Here is a short compilation I put together of car accidents caused by Haitian drivers in Springfield, Ohio.
Every resident I’ve talked to is scared of driving, and they are dealing with increased insurance rates due to unlicensed and uninsured Haitian drivers causing multiple… <a href="https://t.co/29LKnBPCpe">pic.twitter.com/29LKnBPCpe</a>
— Tayler Hansen (@TaylerUSA) <a href="https://twitter.com/TaylerUSA/status/1834025777664270666?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
So this is what&#8217;s happening in Springfield. It&#8217;s all predictable. When you increase the size of a town by one-third &#8212; and all of the new arrivals are from a dysfunctional hellhole like Haiti &#8212; you&#8217;re going to get a lot of bad drivers who don&#8217;t obey the rules of the road. That&#8217;s common sense. And some of those bad drivers are going to kill children on their way to school.
It&#8217;s understandable that Aiden Clark&#8217;s father is angry. But his anger is directed at the only people who have expressed any concern over his son’s death. He attacks the only people who actually care that his son is dead. It seems to me that, after suffering such a tragedy, most of your anger would be reserved for the man who actually killed your son. The rest of the anger should be directed at the politicians who let that guy into the country. If he hadn’t been allowed in, if your immigration system was functional, if our borders were enforced, his son would be alive. The terrible racist Right-wingers he hates so much? Guess what: if we had our way, his son would be alive. But we&#8217;re the problem in his mind.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/">Am I Racist? ONLY In Theaters Tomorrow—Get Your Tickets Now!</a>
And it&#8217;s not just this father who thinks like this. I watched some more of this Springfield City commission meeting. The whole thing resembled a struggle session, where no one felt they could speak their minds. They all had to affirm the virtues of multiculturalism. For example, you might remember this woman who spoke a few days ago about her experiences in Springfield. This clip went viral at the time for obvious reasons. Here&#8217;s some of it:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Springfield, Ohio woman says homeless Haitians are trying to camp out on her front yard, says she “wants out of this town.”
“I have men that cannot speak English in my front yard, screaming at me, throwing mattresses in my front yard.”
“Look at me, I weigh 95 pounds. I couldn&#8217;t… <a href="https://t.co/eShzG8grC1">pic.twitter.com/eShzG8grC1</a>
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) <a href="https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1833134591076704691?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 9, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
She&#8217;s understandably frustrated. She&#8217;s clearly telling the truth about her firsthand experiences. And yet here was that same woman on Tuesday:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="City Commission Meeting, Sep.10, 2024" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/S2v8-HIvvoU?start=4165&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So now, after her comments generate outrage &#8212; appropriate, justified outrage &#8212; she&#8217;s backtracking. Now that they make Democrats and the ideology of multiculturalism look bad, she&#8217;s apologetic. She doesn&#8217;t say she lied before. She just recognizes now that what she said was inconvenient for the ideology she&#8217;s required to hold, if she wants to stay in the good graces of her community.
Again, the whole council meeting went like this. One speaker after another affirmed the values of &#8220;diversity.&#8221; Here&#8217;s another:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="City Commission Meeting, Sep.10, 2024" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/S2v8-HIvvoU?start=6058&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
It&#8217;s like watching someone with Stockholm Syndrome. She knows the huge influx of Haitians has caused problems for Springfield. She heard all the residents saying so, just a few days ago. But then she implies that there&#8217;s no use complaining about it because no one&#8217;s ever going to remove all of these people. No one in power is going to send these foreign nationals back where they came from. So she might as well smile, and hold back tears, as she pretends that &#8220;diversity&#8221; is strengthening Springfield.
This is the essence of multiculturalism, as it&#8217;s being applied in the United States. It is not an ideology of tolerance or empowerment. It&#8217;s an ideology with one goal, which is the destruction of Western culture. And if this city meeting in Springfield on Tuesday is any indication, a lot of American citizens &#8212; even those who have suffered unimaginable horrors as a result of &#8220;multiculturalism&#8221;&#8211; are perfectly fine with that.

Nathan Clark

Diversity Killed His Son, But He Wishes A White Man Did It?

Haitian immigrants

Migrants

Ohio

In the 21st century, America’s public education system has emphasized one value over all others: inclusion. There is no more ubiquitous word in the public education system than this. Visit the campus or website of nearly any public school — whether it be an elementary school in rural Alabama or a university in California — and you will be inundated with references to the many permutations of the word. School administrators have spent billions of dollars on so-called inclusivity initiatives.
In fact, most public universities have established departments dedicated to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion. By the time students graduate from college, they will have been instructed on the importance of “inclusion” countless times. Yet, decades of institutional emphasis on inclusion has not made students themselves more inclusive. America is far more divided on almost every measure than we were 25 years ago. And our disagreements are marked by suspicion and animosity towards people who think differently.
So, the question is: Why? Why did these efforts fail? The answer is simple: Actions speak louder than words. While mouthing the platitudes of inclusion, public school administrators have been simultaneously censoring, shutting down, and punishing anyone who expresses an opinion different than the school-approved orthodoxy. The examples are innumerable.
Middle school student <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/lm-v-town-middleborough?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Liam Morrison</a> arrived at his Middleborough, Massachusetts, school one day wearing a T-shirt saying, “There are only two genders.” While his school openly advances the idea that gender is a limitless spectrum — and they encourage students to wear clothing supporting that idea — Liam decided to take a peaceful stance that biology matters when it comes to human sexuality.
For that, school officials first <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/middle-school-banned-boy-from-wearing-two-genders-shirt-family-prepares-to-sue" target="_blank" rel="noopener">demanded that he remove</a> his shirt. When he declined to take it off, they sent him home. Not long after, the school sent him to the principal’s office again when he wore a shirt saying, “There are [censored] genders.” Liam is currently pursuing an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit denied him the right to free speech.
In 2022, <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/dejong-v-pembrook?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Maggie DeJong</a> was a graduate student in Southern Illinois University Edwardsville’s (SIUE) art therapy program. Like most college students in America, Maggie posted on her social media accounts to discuss a variety of hot topics, including religion, politics, COVID-19 restrictions, and more. Maggie also expressed her opinion on these topics in class discussions and private messages to her fellow classmates, often taking a different viewpoint than other students.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1723831707612000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0pyrv88A5nsmWM2F2Wr9As">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
It’s normal to have disagreements. And it’s not unusual to feel hurt by a disagreement, even if the other person has all the best intentions in the world. What is not normal is government officials punishing students for discussing their own opinions.
Yet that’s exactly what SIUE officials did to Maggie when a student complained to the university, which then issued unconstitutional no-contact orders between Maggie and three other students. Alliance Defending Freedom, where I serve as a senior counsel and the director of the Center for Academic Freedom, helped Maggie sue the university. In the settlement in Maggie’s favor in 2023, the university agreed to change its no-contact rule policy and required three professors to undergo free speech training conducted by ADF attorneys.
Punishing people based on their speech isn’t just limited to students. <a href="https://adflegal.org/case/josephson-v-ganzel?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dr. Allan Josephson</a> is a distinguished child psychologist who once was employed by the University of Louisville. Not only is he well-respected in his field, but he also took the university’s struggling Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology in 2003 and turned it around.
In 2017, Dr. Josephson was invited by The Heritage Foundation — in his own personal capacity — to speak about children struggling with gender dysphoria. Dr. Josephson cautioned against the rush to treat a child’s discomfort with their sex with irreversible medical procedures (a position that is increasingly being validated by health authorities throughout Europe). But, because his view clashed with other university officials’ positions, the school ostracized and ultimately fired Dr. Josephson. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit recently <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/6th-circuit-vindicates-louisville-professors-freedom-speech?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> in favor of Dr. Josephson, allowing the case to go on to the trial phase.
Schools that preach “inclusivity” are some of the worst offenders when it comes to excluding people for their beliefs — from middle school to graduate school; from students to faculty alike. That is the textbook definition of hypocrisy. Our kids know what it is even if they don’t have the word to define it. And they can tell that it’s wrong.
Kids learn the ABCs of civility from adults — always tell the truth, be open-minded, care for others — and then see their teachers act the exact opposite. This foments resentment and division, not unity. In other words, despite all of the emphasis on inclusion, America’s public schools are creating division, not inclusion.
How do we turn down the temperature of this ever-increasing rage that’s widening the division in our country? It may seem like a large task, but the first step is relatively easy: School officials have to practice what they preach. Inclusivity applies to everyone, not just those who express the government’s approved message. If we must follow the science, then follow the science, even if science disproves your preferred narrative.
And while all ideas must be open for expression (and equally open to question), appropriate boundaries must be drawn for how ideas are put to the test. Universities must enact and enforce rules that neutrally promote peace and civility, not a descent into violence and chaos. If school officials truly want to foster a culture of inclusivity and unity, they must lead by example.
Tyson Langhofer is senior counsel and director of the Center for Academic Freedom with <a href="https://adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://x.com/ADFLegal" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Classroom

Public School Educators Don’t Practice The ‘Inclusivity’ That They Preach

Education

Public Schools

Teachers

The presidential debate on Tuesday night was a full-scale disgrace.
The debate was rigged on behalf of Kamala Harris, soup to nuts, beginning to end.
ABC News should be ashamed of themselves. They destroyed any credibility they had. David Muir and Linsey Davis were doing the bidding of the people at the top of the chain of that network.
Harris has joked that Dana Walden, a 30-year friend of hers and co-chairman of Disney Entertainment (who owns ABC News), and Walden’s husband are responsible for Harris meeting her husband, Doug Emhoff.
The bias is real. Last night was a rigged game, beginning to end.
The most significant element of the debate — by far — was the moderators, who did themselves lasting damage. The legacy media made itself appear to be precisely what it is: a Praetorian Guard on behalf of the Democratic Party. David Muir and Linsey Davis were so far up Kamala Harris’ a**, they were performing active colonoscopies with their eyeballs.
It is impossible to overstate how far in the tank they were for Kamala Harris.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2045-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: THE BEN SHAPIRO SHOW</a>
The basic format of the debate was this: The moderators asked Trump a question about how terrible his policies were, and then immediately swiveled to ask Harris how terrible Trump&#8217;s policies were. It was unbelievable.
There would be a question that effectively amounted to, “Mr. President, when did you stop beating your wife?” He would attempt to defend himself. Then, they would turn to Harris and say, “What do you think of him lying about beating his wife?”
It was insane.
And the data supports this. There were four active fact-checks last night. Donald Trump was the subject of all four fact-checks.
But it wasn&#8217;t just the fact-checks. It was also the interruptions in the follow-up, as they would interrupt Trump when he was talking. They always let Kamala Harris finish. They did not interrupt her a single time during the entire debate. Trump would be in the middle of the thought, and they would interrupt him or follow up and push him. They never followed up on Harris.
They never pushed her. Not once.
They pressed Kamala Harris zero times for follow-ups. Zero.
They will claim Trump is dishonest. But Harris lied incessantly. She repeatedly uttered outright, full-scale debunked lies ad nauseam last night.
But the media had a game plan, and the game was to follow hers. She laid out her game plan pretty early on, suggesting that it was all going to be about the playbook, the lies, and the grievances.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1723831707612000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0pyrv88A5nsmWM2F2Wr9As">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
The media picked up on that playbook; they were going to repeat the playbook all night long.
What has been apparent for months is that the media are not going to do the job of informing the American people about Harris. If you watched that debate last night, you came away with zero new information about her.
You know no more about Kamala Harris and her positions today than you knew yesterday or the day before.
Trump&#8217;s best moment came on abortion. He pointed out that the Democrats are radical on abortion, which is true. And he pointed out that Harris’ vice presidential pick, Tim Walz, has been in favor of abortion across the board, which is also true. He said Democrats are against legislation like the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, that Democrats want to make it so that if a baby is “accidentally born” due to a botched abortion there will be no criminal liability to let the baby die.
That is true. Democrats do want that. That is why Tim Walz opposed a Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Minnesota, and eight babies have been born during botched abortions and died on the table in Minnesota. Trump said that, and he was correct.
So what did the moderators do? They lied. Because it turns out the “fact-checkers” are there to lie on behalf of Kamala Harris.
“Her vice presidential pick says abortion in the ninth month is absolutely fine,” Trump stated. “He also says execution after birth, its execution, no longer abortion, because the baby is born, is ok. And that&#8217;s not ok with me.”
“There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it&#8217;s born,” moderator Linsey Davis interjected.
That’s a lie. They fact-checked Trump, and it was a false fact-check.
Ralph Northam, the former governor of Virginia, actually said that if a baby is accidentally born alive during an abortion, you put the baby off to the side, and make the baby comfortable until you decide what to do with the baby.
They lied about this because Linsey Davis and David Muir are liars, lying on behalf of their preferred political party.
I would bet David Muir and Linsey Davis have been saying to each other over coffee and to the rest of their colleagues for years and years, “You know, if I ever get Trump in front of me, here&#8217;s what I&#8217;m going to ask him. And if he lies, I&#8217;m gonna fact-check him so hard, I&#8217;ll make his head spin.” They&#8217;ve been prepping this for years.
Cabot Phillips, who covers election-centered news for The Daily Wire and was actually at the debate with the rest of the media, said the media in the spin room were actively cheering and guffawing during the debate, mocking Trump, actively groaning at him.
There is an entire media apparatus that is designed to propagandize on behalf of Harris, and they made themselves apparent last night in that room.
Harris lied later, saying Trump would sign a ban on abortion nationwide. Not only is that not true, JD Vance, who is pro-life, has also said that&#8217;s not true.
So, she lied to the moderators. Fact-checked? Of course not. Of course not.
Where were the fact-checkers? Off in the cornfield where no one knows?
Trump himself tried to prompt the moderators, asking, “You should ask: Will she allow abortion in the eighth month? Ninth month? Seventh month?” He turned to Harris, “Would you do that?” He turned back to the moderators: “Why don&#8217;t you ask her that question? Because under Roe v Wade, you could do abortions in the seventh month, the eighth month, the ninth month, and probably after birth.”
Harris responded, “That’s not true.”
Yes, it&#8217;s true. Yes, it&#8217;s true.
So where were the fact-checkers? Where were they when Harris repeated the Charlottesville lie? Where were they when she repeated the “bloodbath” lie when Trump was actually talking about an economic bloodbath?
If there were a professional guild in charge of moderating debates, these people would be out on their a**es. But of course, there isn&#8217;t. So they will be vetted and celebrated by the mainstream media as having done a wonderful job.
I do think the American people are smart enough to see through a lot of this.
I think the American people can see that the media rigged this debate on behalf of Harris.
There are two months to go. That’s still a long time. If the Trump campaign focuses on defining who Harris is — a hard-core leftist — and sticks to that, pummels her on that, Trump can win.
But they won’t be fighting just the Harris campaign.
They’ll be fighting the legacy media centipede every step of the way.

ABC News Hosts Second Presidential Debate

The Most Rigged Debate In History

Dear Taylor,
As a die-hard Swiftie since your career’s conception in 2006, I have always been your biggest fan. Your music encouraged me to live “fearlessly” and “speak now” on the issues that matter most. I took those words to the core of my heart and made it my life’s 
mission to protect innocent and defenseless preborn children from abortion.
However, your recent <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/C_wtAOKOW1z/?igsh=MWtoMzMxam14eGRvbQ%3D%3D" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Instagram post</a> endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and your stance on a “woman’s right to her body” sadly leads me to believe you don’t understand the value of the fans in your stands and fans yet to be conceived.
You see, I could have been one missing bright light at nine of your concerts if my mom hadn’t chosen life. At age 22 and a senior in college, my mom became pregnant with me. Despite her boyfriend and others pressuring her to abort and “consider other options,” she ignored them. Ironically, it’s the same message abortion supporters use to “empower” women to choose abortion.
You’re a self-proclaimed feminist who said you did your research, but I&#8217;m doubtful. If you critically researched like you proudly boast, you would join the pro-life Swifties and stand against Harris and Walz’s late-term abortion stance.
If you did your research, did you know that Walz signed the &#8220;Protect Reproductive Options Act&#8221;? It&#8217;s abortion-ese for legalizing and codifying abortion for any reason up to nine months with zero protection for babies who survive abortion.
If you did your research, you’d know that Walz signed three bills for “abortion rights” while his Democrat allies in the Senate shot down over 60 amendments to help women and children, one of which is sex-discriminatory abortion. Because you consider yourself a feminist, it&#8217;s hard to comprehend how you could support anti-feminist, anti-human legislation.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1723831707612000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0pyrv88A5nsmWM2F2Wr9As">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
Harris threatening to codify Roe v. Wade isn’t empowerment. It would encourage abortion by telling women they aren’t strong enough by prioritizing convenience over compassion and pushing death over life.
I wouldn’t be here today if my mom had caved to the pressure. You have the platform to encourage mothers to do the same, and as a bonus, you have more grateful and enthusiastic fans.
It could be easy to dismiss &#8220;one potential fan” considering the record-breaking demand for your Eras Tour which can fill at least 900 stadiums with approximately 70,000 seats per stadium.
That&#8217;s a staggering 63 million fans—an equivalent number to the lives lost due to abortion in the United States since Roe v. Wade. All those bright lights “Bigger Than the Whole Sky” for one show multiplied by 900 over almost 50 years vanished—it’s hard to imagine.
At your 1989 World Tour, you told your audience, “You have never looked more beautiful than you do tonight, all 76,000 of you. You should know one thing about me before we begin &#8211; I was born in 1989!”
Your mom gave you life but remember that your entire fandom would not be here today if their moms didn’t embrace life. You, and everyone else, deserve a birthday.
But back to your endorsement. Your statement isn’t merely a political statement; whether intentional or not, it’s a morally void one. Even if it’s an unpopular opinion amongst this young generation or among women, even you, Taylor Swift, will not convince me to stop standing against the poisoning, suctioning, and dismembering of a human child.
Promoting a stance that allows for late-term abortions undermines the potential of those lives yet to be lived. There is a better stance that empowers women and preborn children.
We can advocate for women without slaughtering their children.
We can provide support, resources, and compassion to women facing unplanned pregnancies without flushing preborn children down the toilet through chemical abortion or ripping them from their mother’s womb.
Taylor, at best, you haven’t actually done your research, and at worst, you’ve accepted and celebrated one of the greatest evils of our time. I hope it’s the former.
Please advocate for Swifties to live out their eras in their truest form, beginning in the womb. Who knows, maybe one day you’ll embrace pro-lifers like former President Donald Trump embraces Swifties. Together, we can work toward a society that respects and supports all lives, offering hope and opportunity rather than division.
I hope this letter serves as an invitation for further reflection on this crucial matter. Your influence can foster a more nuanced discussion about life and choice, and I believe that together, we can champion a future where every voice is heard and valued.
For Life,
Mary-Logan Miske
A Swiftie and Advocate for Life
Mary-Logan is a graduate of the University of San Diego with a BA in Communications Studies and a minor in Political Science. She served as the Presidential Intern for Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, in the summer of 2021.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

COMBO-US-VOTE-POLITICS-MUSIC-CELEBRITY-HARRIS-SWIFT

Open Letter To Taylor Swift: Research Harris And Walz’s Anti-Woman Abortion Extremism

Abortion

Pro-Life Movement

Tim Walz

It was just a few months ago that police in Chicago attempted to pull over a man named Dexter Reed for driving with illegally tinted windows. I talked about this incident on the show at the time, when the media was trying to turn Reed into the next George Floyd. As soon as the traffic stop began, Reed began acting suspiciously. He repeatedly refused officers&#8217; commands to lower his window so they could see what was going on inside his car. Then he raised the tinted window to completely obstruct the officers&#8217; view of the inside of the vehicle. And then, within seconds, Dexter Reed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaO3HPpewdw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">opened fire</a>.
Police officers train on footage like this all the time. There are hundreds of videos like it all over the internet. And they all tell the same story, which is this: When the police pull someone over, and that person attempts to hide what he&#8217;s doing, then the situation has just become extremely dangerous. All traffic stops involve some level of risk. But when someone rolls up a tinted window instead of complying, that risk gets exponentially higher. That&#8217;s especially true when the suspect has a criminal history. So police have no choice but to respond quickly and decisively, and potentially with force, because they&#8217;re in a life-threatening situation. Otherwise, they might get shot and killed before they can even see what&#8217;s coming.
As I said at the time, there was an attempt to portray Dexter Reed as some kind of BLM martyr. But it fell apart the moment this footage was released. Everyone understood why the officers drew their weapons. Everyone understood that Reed had put the officers in fear for their lives, even before he started shooting. The entire media-driven narrative &#8212; that Dexter Reed was an oppressed victim of police brutality &#8212; fell apart. And no one spoke of it again.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1440-media-paints-millionaire-athlete-as-another-oppressed-victim-of-police" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: THE MATT WALSH SHOW</a>
But there&#8217;s always someone waiting in the wings to claim that mantle of oppression, especially in an election year. And this week, Miami Dolphins wide receiver Tyreek Hill is going for it &#8212; even though his traffic stop, in many ways, has a lot of similarities to Dexter Reed&#8217;s. Tyreek Hill, like Dexter Reed, was pulled over for a lawful reason. In Tyreek Hill&#8217;s case, he was speeding near the Hard Rock Stadium, where the Dolphins play. That&#8217;s all caught on camera. And like Dexter Reed, Tyreek Hill also had an existing criminal record at the time of his stop, although the officers probably weren&#8217;t aware of that. In Hill&#8217;s case, that record included a prior guilty plea for serious offenses &#8212; including domestic assault and battery by strangulation.
And then, when he was pulled over, Tyreek Hill, like Dexter Reed, refused lawful orders to lower his tinted window. Instead, he started raising the window in clear defiance of the officers. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Tyreek Hill ARREST body cam FOOTAGE released.. 😲‼️
Did the cops have a power trip, or were they just doing their job? 🤔 <a href="https://t.co/MUrSiffh2u">pic.twitter.com/MUrSiffh2u</a>
— DramaAlert (@DramaAlert) <a href="https://twitter.com/DramaAlert/status/1833281051059490877?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 9, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Instead of complying, Tyreek Hill rolled up a tinted window while the police were trying to talk to him. They responded aggressively to his belligerence. Then, Tyreek Hill refused to sit on the curb as instructed, saying he had just had surgery, so he can&#8217;t sit down. He can play in a professional football game a few hours later and score a touchdown, but he can&#8217;t possibly sit down. That&#8217;s just asking too much. So the officer again used some force, this time to put him on the curb. The officers also detained one of Hill&#8217;s teammates, Calais Campbell, after he approached the scene in the middle of the road. Ultimately the authorities cited Hill for reckless driving but didn&#8217;t arrest him. They also didn&#8217;t charge him for obstructing an officer, which is a misdemeanor in Florida punishable by up to a year in prison.
Speaking to reporters, Hill claimed he had “no idea” why he was placed in handcuffs. “No idea. It’s crazy. No idea. I wasn’t disrespectful because my mom didn’t raise me that way. Didn’t cuss. Did none of that. I’m still trying to figure it out… Don’t be disrespectful.”
Of course, the truth is that Hill could have avoided all of this by acting like an adult rather than a spoiled toddler. He knows that. Everyone watching the video knows that. But the media and the Left are pretending otherwise. They&#8217;re completely ignoring the evidence and running with the same narrative we&#8217;ve seen a million times before, even if the facts don&#8217;t remotely fit. Over on ESPN for example, they&#8217;re acting as if Tyreek Hill was just killed. They&#8217;re mourning him as if he died, by comparing him to a bunch of other BLM martyrs. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
When Tyreek Hill says &#8220;What if I wasn&#8217;t Tyreek Hill..&#8221; he&#8217;s absolutely right.
&#8211; <a href="https://twitter.com/ChrisCanty99?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ChrisCanty99</a> on the detainment of Tyreek Hill <a href="https://t.co/JKCafYSwdm">pic.twitter.com/JKCafYSwdm</a>
— UNSPORTSMANLIKE Radio (@UnSportsESPN) <a href="https://twitter.com/UnSportsESPN/status/1833467225786736673?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Just to be clear about this: Sandra Bland, Walter Scott, and Philando Castile are all dead. That&#8217;s not to relitigate all of those cases &#8212; all of which the media lied about to one degree or another. It&#8217;s just a fact. This guy is comparing several dead people to Tyreek Hill, who in fact is not dead. Tyreek Hill is very much alive. He&#8217;s still earning $30 million a year. He&#8217;s still a famous celebrity. What happened to Hill is that on Sunday, he endured a minor inconvenience that was entirely attributable to his own actions. This was such a minor inconvenience that he was able to play in a football game afterwards and mock the whole situation with a celebration after he scored a touchdown.
All of this fake hysteria is intended to obscure an obvious point, which is that Hill &#8212; like so many other BLM heroes &#8212; didn&#8217;t comply with lawful orders that were given by police officers. He put them in a dangerous situation as a result. And he suffered the predictable consequences of that decision. When the outraged ESPN personality says he&#8217;s &#8220;frustrated&#8221; that the country hasn&#8217;t &#8220;reckoned with race,&#8221; what he&#8217;s really saying is that black people should be able to do whatever they want when the police pull them over. They should be able to put the police in danger, apparently. Or maybe that&#8217;s only the case if they&#8217;re driving expensive cars, like Tyreek Hill was. Maybe the law just doesn&#8217;t apply to football players.
That&#8217;s the position of Tyreek Hill&#8217;s team, the Miami Dolphins. In a statement, the team said they &#8220;urge&#8221; the police department &#8220;to take swift and strong action against the officers who engaged in such despicable behavior.&#8221; The team didn&#8217;t even mention Tyreek Hill&#8217;s decision to put people in danger by driving recklessly on the way to the stadium. They didn&#8217;t mention that he disobeyed the officers&#8217; commands. They pretend as if the officers had no reason whatsoever to treat Hill like a potential threat to their lives. This is the lose-lose situation that cops are in. They&#8217;re being told that they have to ignore suspects who roll up their tinted windows, and just hope that it doesn&#8217;t turn out to be another Dexter Reed situation. If they do anything to protect themselves, those cops are “despicable.&#8221;
Meanwhile, the brain trust of former athletes over on FS1 took the melodrama up ten more notches. Here’s former NFL star LeSean McCoy in a conversation with former NFL player Emmanuel Acho. These are some of the most oppressed people in America. They were paid millions to play a game. Now they’re paid millions to talk about playing a game. But that doesn’t make them any less oppressed. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The most vulnerable, heartfelt and gut wrenching conversation I’ve ever been a part of on live television.
“We do not feel safe around cops and that’s crazy… Black people do not feel safe around cops.” <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TyreekHill?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TyreekHill</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FinsUp?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FinsUp</a><a href="https://t.co/jJ24MNiX5Y">pic.twitter.com/jJ24MNiX5Y</a>
— Emmanuel Acho (@EmmanuelAcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/EmmanuelAcho/status/1833543879876087872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> 
Oh is that what you tell your kids? You tell them if the cops are there, get to some light? Have you considered telling them to comply with lawful commands? Have you thought about that? Why don’t you tell your kids to simply comply with lawful orders given by officers of the law? If they do that, then everything will be fine.
We’re told that black men are afraid of the cops. They’re terrified that they’re going to be executed on the spot. Tyreek Hill was afraid, allegedly. Well if that’s the case, why are you going out of your way to antagonize them? Why are you doing everything in your power to make your interactions with the police as stressful and contentious as possible? When I see videos like the one with Tyreek Hill — or any of the footage of any BLM martyr — I do not see black men who are afraid of the cops. I see black men who completely disregard the cops and act as though they are above the law and impervious to the basic rules and standards of conduct that govern the rest of us. If you’re afraid for your life while dealing with the cops, why would you roll up a tinted window? How is that going to make you safer? How is that going to make the situation LESS volatile? You are making it more volatile. You are directly, actively, making it into a more volatile situation.
But this does not occur to these kind of commentators. We can’t blame them for that. They’re emotional. In fact, these guys were so emotional that when they came back from commercial break, they were still comforting each other:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Moments after a sad, infuriating, tear evoking conversation on Tyreek Hill, I attempted to continue the show as if all was normal. It wasn’t.
I’m grateful for James Jones, who did not allow us to rush by our humanity.
On <a href="https://twitter.com/TheFacilityFS1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheFacilityFS1</a>, we’re not doing TV, we’re doing life. <a href="https://t.co/zU6d5yghG9">pic.twitter.com/zU6d5yghG9</a>
— Emmanuel Acho (@EmmanuelAcho) <a href="https://twitter.com/EmmanuelAcho/status/1833602039915680240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> 
What brave warriors. What heroes. My God. They had to overcome the trauma of talking about a football player’s briefly unpleasant interaction with the police. They somehow had to soldier through and find a way to keep talking about football. It’s painful, you see. It’s painful to think about the minor inconvenience that a millionaire football player experienced. A minor inconvenience of his own making. They are shaken up. They are barely able to hold it together.
For his part, the head coach of the Miami Dolphins, Mike McDaniel, was even more hysterical than the sports commentators. He appeared to be choking back tears as he said he couldn&#8217;t imagine what it&#8217;s like to be as oppressed as Tyreek Hill is. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Dolphins?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Dolphins</a> HC Mike McDaniel got very emotional and choked up talking about Tyreek Hill getting detained on Sunday.
&#8220;The thing that f***** me up honestly, to be quite frank, is knowing that I don’t know exactly. I don’t know what that feels like.&#8221;
Full answer via <a href="https://twitter.com/MiamiDolphins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MiamiDolphins</a>: <a href="https://t.co/Pwrlr3XZ5t">pic.twitter.com/Pwrlr3XZ5t</a>
— Ari Meirov (@MySportsUpdate) <a href="https://twitter.com/MySportsUpdate/status/1833227060887638125?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 9, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Fifty years ago a guy this weepy and emasculated would never be the head coach of a football team. It just wouldn&#8217;t have been possible for a theater kid to get a job like this. But here we are. Mike McDaniel is &#8220;triggered.&#8221; It really messes him up, to not know &#8220;what it feels like&#8221; to be Tyreek Hill. He&#8217;ll never be able to experience that level of oppression.
But the coach could find out pretty easily. He could start driving his sports car, as recklessly as possible, around slow-moving traffic. And when he gets pulled over, he can roll up his tinted windows and dare the cops to do something about it. Very quickly, Mike McDaniel will experience something similar to what Tyreek Hill experienced on Sunday. And if that happens, Mike McDaniel would deserve to be forcibly removed from his car and treated like a threat, just like Tyreek Hill was.
Predictably, no one in the corporate press wants to point this out. Instead, they&#8217;re affirming Tyreek Hill&#8217;s story of racial grievance at every opportunity. Here&#8217;s CNN for example. Watch as they allow Tyreek Hill to claim &#8212; without any pushback &#8212; that, if he weren&#8217;t a football player, the police officers would have executed him on the side of the road. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
Tyreek was on CNN last night playing the victim and claiming if he wasn&#8217;t Tyreek Hill then in the worst-case scenario he could have been mu*dered. What a joke. Hill is a horrible human being who beat up his pregnant girlfriend several years ago. <a href="https://t.co/aowlTV2L5E">pic.twitter.com/aowlTV2L5E</a>
— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) <a href="https://twitter.com/RedWave_Press/status/1833514276314878426?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 10, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Try to follow the logic here. According to Hill, the police knew he was a famous NFL player, with a very high profile. So they knew they had to be on their best behavior. That&#8217;s why they decided not to just shoot him outside the stadium. That&#8217;s what the police supposedly do to every other black person, but they don&#8217;t do it to NFL players. At the same time, according to Tyreek Hill, these same police officers didn&#8217;t have any problem risking their entire career just to rough him up on camera for no reason. So they&#8217;re cautious police officers, but they&#8217;re also extremely reckless at the same time.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1723831707612000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0pyrv88A5nsmWM2F2Wr9As">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
That&#8217;s the explanation that flies on CNN, apparently. But it doesn&#8217;t make any sense. What makes more sense is that the police did exactly what they were trained to do, which is to treat everyone who behaves like Hill did &#8212; regardless of how much money they have &#8212; as a potential threat. That&#8217;s especially true when, like Dexter Reed, they have a criminal record and start rolling up their tinted window instead of complying.
The only way to explain the reaction from the corporate press, and the Miami Dolphins, is that these people really believe that a black man should be able to do or say literally anything he wants when confronted by police. Whatever happens will always be the cop’s fault, no matter what. The point is to absolve “people of color” of any blame.
But the effect is that they’re infantilized. They&#8217;re treated like children incapable of controlling themselves. They&#8217;re given no incentive to improve their own behavior. Instead, they&#8217;re given more incentive to act like Tyreek Hill &#8212; with all the entitlement and hysteria that entails. We saw where that approach leads in 2020. It leads to police pulling out of black neighborhoods, and fewer people choosing to become police officers. And that, in turn, leads to a lot more black people dying. Narcissists like Tyreek Hill claim they&#8217;re afraid of that outcome. In reality, they&#8217;re doing everything they can to ensure it keeps happening.

Menu