Ep. 1546 - Yesterday’s Epstein Files Release Was A Total Disaster

Have you checked lately to see if your home's title is still in your name?

With one forged document, scammers can steal your home's title and its equity.

But now you can protect yourself from this crime.

Home Title Lock's million-dollar triple lock protection gives 24-7 title monitoring,

urgent alerts to any changes, and if fraud does happen,

they'll spend up to a million dollars to fix fraud and restore your title.

Get a free title history report and access your personal title expert,

a $250 value when you sign up at hometitlelock.com and use promo code Daily Wire. That's hometitlelock.com, promo code Daily Wire.
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the long-awaited release of the Epstein files was a massive, disastrous flop. What happened? Why did it happen? And when will we see the actual Epstein files? Also, the Daily Wire obtains footage from inside the prison system in New York

showing just how bad things have actually gotten.

Philadelphia schools plan to defy Trump's executive order

and allow boys to continue competing in girls' sports.

And the House Judiciary GOP decides,

for some ungodly reason,

to troll the people who are waiting for the Epstein files.

This is one of the most tone-deaf things we've ever seen.

Talk about all that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show. My name is Lily, and I've had Hydradinitis Suprativa HS for years.
I finally found some relief since taking Cosentix. Relief means I can show up more.
Gosintex-Ecu-Kucinumab is prescribed for adults with moderate to severe hydrodinitis superactiva, HS. Don't use if you're allergic to Cosentix.
Before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. An increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur, like tuberculosis or other serious bacterial, fungal, or viral infections.
Some are fatal. Tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms like fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough, had a vaccine or...
We'll see you next time. Cosentix or Cosentix.com.
Ask your dermatologist about Cosentix. In the summer of 2019, the FBI rang the doorbell of Jeffrey Epstein's 40-room, eight-story townhouse in Manhattan.
And it was never exactly clear why they bothered to ring the doorbell, given that they were looking for sensitive evidence that could easily be destroyed. But that's what they did.
And then when no one answered, agents forced entry. And once they were inside, they found a safe that they cut open with a saw.
So they came prepared. And ultimately, agents discovered several hard drives and CDs in the residence, both inside and outside the safe.
And additionally, they found numerous black binders with mysterious white labels. And photos of the raid have been available for some time.
You're seeing some of them right now. But at this point, we don't have specific information about what exactly was on many of those CDs and hard drives.
According to the FBI, they left the apartment to seek another search warrant for the property. And when they returned several days later, many of these materials had gone missing.
That's the excuse they came up with. They just abandoned the scene of one of their most high-profile investigative targets.
And what do you know? The evidence went missing. But not all the materials were gone.
On cross-examination during Ghislaine Maxwell's trial, an FBI agent admitted that more than 20,000 images were recovered. But of those images, only a small fraction of these were ever shown to the jury, and the vast majority of them have never been publicly accounted for.

We don't have descriptions. We don't have explanations.
We're meant to forget all about it. And in particular, we're meant to stop asking which high-profile clients might be implicated by those documents.
We were supposed to just wipe that whole question from our memory. But millions of people have not forgotten about this.
Among the many other questions that have circulated since Epstein's death, the question of what exactly the FBI recovered from his townhouse and his private island has remained a topic of intense interest and speculation. It's one of the reasons a lot of Americans voted for Donald Trump.
They wanted transparency. And on Wednesday night, in an appearance on Fox News that got a lot of attention, the attorney general of the United States, Pam Bondi, promised to deliver exactly that transparency.
Watch. Said last week that you have the Epstein files on your desk.
When can we see them and what's taking so long to release them? I do. Jesse, there are well over, this will make you sick, 200 victims.

200.

So we have well over over 250, actually. So we have to make sure that their identity is protected and their personal information.
But other than that, I think tomorrow, you know, the personal information of victims. Other than that, I think tomorrow, Jesse, breaking news right now, you're going to see some Epstein information being released by my office.
What kind? Are we going to see who was on the flights? Are we going to see any evidence from what he recorded because he had all of his homes wired with recording devices? What you're going to see hopefully tomorrow is a lot of flight logs, a lot of names, a lot of information. But it's pretty sick what that man did.
Okay. Well, along with his co-defendant.
Absolutely. And he had help.
That's for sure. He sure did.
Now, everybody watching this clip understood the implication of what Pam Bondi was saying.

We were being prepared for a major document dump on Thursday,

one that would demonstrate the extent of Epstein's depravity beyond what we already knew.

Bondi didn't make it clear exactly how this document dump would take place,

but she was clearly suggesting that it would be significant.

She said, breaking news, this information is going to come out. There's just no way to interpret this clip in any other way.
She had reviewed the information, and she was promising that it would be at least relevant. And then Thursday morning rolled around, and several prominent conservative social media personalities and journalists entered the White House.
And when they emerged outside, they were holding binders that supposedly contained phase one of the Epstein files. The binder specifically boasted on the cover that the administration's transparency was the reason they were being released.
But almost immediately, there was a mixed reaction to this whole scene, as you might imagine. After all, it didn't make a lot of sense to filter this information through anybody.
Why not just post it online so everybody can access it? That would seem to be the most transparent possible approach. And apparently that was the original plan, but it didn't happen, at least not right away, for some reason.
Instead, for several hours, nobody in the public could see these binders. Only a small subset of hand-selected conservative commentators were allowed to see it.
And even those commentators were not allowed to post about the binders right away. There was an embargo for some reason, according to Savannah Hernandez.
Supposedly, the White House was going to stage a press conference where they released the binder publicly, but the presser never happened. Why didn't it happen? Why did it all play out? Why did everything play out this way exactly? Well, that was never explained.
And as the hours went by, people became more and more upset at both the White House and their guests with the binders. And it reminded me of something that had happened in the early days of the Obama administration, when Charles Krauthammer was invited to attend an event at the White House.
He wrote one of his most famous columns about this experience. The event was a ceremony that would mark the end of George Bush's ban on stem cell research.
The White House thought Krauthammer would want to attend because he'd previously advocated in favor of stem cell research. But Krauthammer declined the White House's invitation because as he put it, quote, once you show your face at these things, you become a tacit endorser of whatever they spring.
So in other words, even though Krauthammer ostensibly agreed with what the White House was doing and with the subject of the event, he turned him down because he didn't know what would actually happen once he got there. And indeed, yesterday, all of these prominent conservative personalities were thrown a curveball.
From what I've been told, none of them were there to talk about Epstein. That's not why they were there.
There was a previously scheduled meeting between the White House press team and these influencers, which is a totally normal thing. But then at the meeting, the Epstein binders were sprung on them.
And so now all of those people are getting, to my mind, unfairly criticized for participating in a stunt that they didn't actually sign up for. They were there, again, for something else, and they were handed these binders.
I don't think it's fair to blame them for that. And now, though, the White House says that it didn't sign up for this either somehow.
It turns out that, according to Pam Bondi, late Wednesday night, just hours before the whole binder event, a source of the FBI's field office in New York reached out to the Trump administration and explained that, in fact, all of the Epstein files had not been provided to the White House. All that Pam Bondi possessed, all she was hyping up on Fox News, were 200 pages of redacted documents.
And most, if not all, these documents have already been released in some form, including Epstein's contact list and some of the travel logs. But the source of the FBI's New York office allegedly said that thousands of additional documents remained in the FBI's possession, even though Bondi had requested that every single document be turned over to the White House.
In a response yesterday, Bondi wrote to the FBI director, Kash Patel, this letter you can see on the screen. In her letter, as you can see, Bondi demands that all of these documents are provided to the White House immediately.
She also requests an investigation into why these materials were not provided in the first place. That's a good question.
Why would the FBI flagrantly defy an order from their boss at the DOJ? Why would they hide documents that they have in their possession? How do they think they would get away with that? Now, of course, this letter from Bondi raises several questions. Put mildly, there are reasons to doubt that we're getting the full story here.
First of all, if Bondi had only 200 pages in her possession on Wednesday night, why did she go on Fox News and hype up this document, Did the White House not realize that all of these materials were already available in the public domain? In fact, the really crazy thing is that some of these materials are less redacted on the internet than they were in the binders that Bondi handed out to those conservative influencers. So in fact, not only did they provide information that was already public,

they provided less information than was already publicly available.

In at least one instance, the binder actually redacts Jeffrey Epstein's email address,

even though he's dead, obviously, and doesn't use it anymore.

But online, you can find the same email address, no problem.

Websites like Gawker leaked Epstein's phone contacts a long time ago. Anybody with an internet connection can discover all of that.
Was the White House somehow not aware of this? Did Pam Bondi think she was releasing new information? If so, that would not be an encouraging sign. It's not an exaggeration to say that there is not a single new revelation in this 200-page binder.
Even the fact that Epstein was an FBI informant is not new. We already knew that he provided information to the feds during his prosecution and that a senior FBI official at the time was under the impression that Epstein, quote, belonged to intelligence.
We knew that. So what exactly happened here? If Bondi knew that there was no new information and the FBI was stonewalling her, why hand out binders with Epstein files phase one emblazoned on the front? Why set up these people, by the way, these influencers, to be embarrassed by giving them this information when there's nothing new there? Now, we've known for a long time now that the odds of learning any significant new information about Epstein and his clients are probably very low, but there are obviously legitimate reasons to want the information.
People are interested in knowing whether and to what extent their government was compromised by Epstein. They want to know whether anyone in power is still compromised.
They want to know which rich and powerful people were raping minors and engaging in other acts of evil debauchery. They want to understand the extent of the damage that Epstein has done to his victims and to this country.
And what happened yesterday amounted to basically a mockery of that interest. It was, in effect, a giant middle finger to Americans.
The only question that remains is who exactly was giving us that middle finger and why? Now, right now, Pam Bondi says that she's doing what she can to fix the problem. She says that heads will roll at the FBI.
But as some observers have pointed out, she should not limit her focus to the FBI. After all, it was the Department of Justice that approved Epstein's sweetheart plea agreement, which allowed him to avoid a significant prison sentence and also granted immunity to his co-conspirators.
It was the DOJ that messed up the search warrant of Epstein's property and delayed the creation of a grand jury. Why did that happen exactly? What internal documents does the DOJ possess from that period that might shed light on the decision-making that was going on? The information we already have from the grand jury is about as disturbing as it could possibly be.
Last year, a law in Florida allowed for the release of some of these records. And it turns out that throughout the proceedings, the prosecutors attacked the victims repeatedly.
They also minimized what Jeffrey Epstein was doing. And it got so bad that at one point, a juror had to step in to defend the victims.
Watch. The records show prosecutors called only five witnesses, three investigators, and two victims, one who was only 14 when she was first enticed to Epstein's mansion.
The girls testified how while they were underage high school students, Jeffrey Epstein paid them for massages but sexually abused them repeatedly, including two who were raped.

But prosecutor Lana Belalovic quickly moved to questioning the girls as though they were on trial, asking one, you understand you in effect were committing prostitution yourself. Bella Lavick brought up their MySpace accounts asking an investigator,

and does her website also include pictures of her in skimpy attire, drinking alcohol, and sexually provocative photos, photos she then produced to the grand jury. Belalavik asked the girls about their piercings, drinking beer, and shoplifting histories, asking one, you've had problems with drugs, haven't you? When jurors had a chance to question the victim, they seemed to follow Belilovic's lead, one asking, do you have any idea deep down inside of you that you, what you're doing is wrong? Victim, yeah, I did.
Belilovic also seemed to make allowances for Epstein, asking one investigator, so he didn't make her do anything she was uncomfortable with. One juror did jump in to defend the teenagers, saying, perhaps you were too young to be up against a man of that age who had more control over you and that you knew.
Now, you can watch a million grand jury proceedings and you won't see anything like this. And it should go without saying, but prosecutors are not defense attorneys.
Their job is not to grill their own witnesses. That's especially true when you're at the grand jury stage when the prosecution's only responsibility is to get an indictment.
Usually they go in, present the evidence that will lead to an indictment, and they get the indictment, and they move on to the trial. But in this case, they clearly didn't want to do that.
They wanted to tank their own case. And you have to wonder whether anyone at the DOJ instructed them to do that.
At the moment, we don't know whether Pan Bondi will be able to answer that question. But the truth is, especially after what happened yesterday, it looks pretty likely, sadly, that we'll never get an answer.
We'll also never know how Jeffrey Epstein managed to become a global pimp with no identifiable clients. That's maybe the single biggest gaping hole in the entire narrative we've been sold.
They haven't arrested or even seriously investigated a single one of his clients. At every stage, the government made sure that Epstein's clients would be completely protected.
And to that end, as we learned yesterday, the FBI has apparently concealed and perhaps destroyed the actual incriminating information, and not just in Epstein's townhouse. So this is the sad reality that I think we all need to prepare for.
Yeah, we might find out some more specifics in the coming hours and days, assuming the FBI complies with Pam Bondi's request. But of course, there's no reason to think they'll do so after a cover-up that's lasted as long as this one has.
At this point, it's very possible that there are no Epstein files, not because they never existed, but because some of the most powerful people in this country made sure that they would never be discovered. After all, if there are files out there, documents, video, et cetera, showing the most powerful people in the world engaged in horrific criminal activity, what are the chances that the evidence still exists anywhere six years later? Why would it still exist? If it wasn't released to begin with, it's because powerful people decided to cover it up.
And if they covered it up, they covered it up. That means burning the evidence, not storing it in some safe somewhere for someone to release later.
I hope that's not the case. I hope that these files are out there and that we'll be able to see them one day and all the bad guys will be held accountable.
But my point is that at this point, I have very little faith in that happening, not to be the bearer of bad news. So going forward, if the administration takes anything from this debacle, and it really is a debacle, it should be that retroactive transparency is very difficult, if not impossible.
And that's why transparency is necessary at all times in all contexts. For one thing, the classification system needs a major overhaul.
The vast majority of documents that the government hides from the public should not, in fact, be hidden to begin with. Additionally, all of the agents of the FBI in New York field office who failed to respond to Pam Bondi's request need to be fired immediately.
And whoever was responsible for the evidence, whatever happened, if the files are gone now, if that's true, then we need to find out how that happened and who's responsible for that. And those people need to go to prison.
And while we're at it, we need a full accounting for what exactly Pam Bondi was looking at when she discussed that binder on Fox News on Wednesday night. This is a question that no matter what you think of Pam Bondi, and I think she's generally done a really good job so far, but that needs to be addressed.
We unfortunately may never know the full extent of

Epstein's crimes, but these are the kinds of changes that are necessary to ensure that the

next serial pedophile like Jeffrey Epstein and his associates actually suffer consequences

for what they've done. Now let's get to our five headlines.
Attention investors, while this is a paid endorsement, we've got some good news to share. We believe that we've turned the tide in the battle for the soul of America.
Donald Trump has been elected. He's beginning the Herculean task of pushing back against the forces of wokeism in America.
It's true that many businesses are beginning to mothball their DEI, CRT, and ESG programs and focus on serving customers, all customers, rather than political interests. What about you? Have you joined the movement of Americans who are using their investments to hold companies accountable for their ethical behavior? I'm not a client of the firm, but if you'd like to join other patriotic citizens by aligning your investments with your conservative values, go to ConstitutionWealth.com slash Matt for a free consultation.
Constitution Wealth is a registered investment advisor. You should review Constitution Wealth's disclosures at ConstitutionWealth.com to understand their services and their fees.
All investing involves risk, including the risk of loss. Daily Wire reports graphic footage obtained by the Daily Wire appears to showcase how violent New York prisons have become for inmates, correctional officers, and other workers since the Democrat-backed Halt Act took effect in 2022.
A source who wishes to remain anonymous out of fear of retribution leaked the alleged footage from Greenhaven Correctional Facility wishing to expose how dangerous conditions are as 15,000 correctional officers and sergeants across the state remain on strike. The source said, quote, I send this footage to you to help the public understand what it is we face and why we're on strike.
This is not about money. It's about the liberal agenda, how the liberal agenda has destroyed our justice system.
As Daily Wire previously reported, the strike began on February 17th with officers asking for the Halt Act to be repealed and have other safety measures put into place, including stopping mandated shifts that officers say can sometimes last days at a time. The footage, the source says, shows staff at Greenhaven Correctional Facility being attacked and inmates assaulting, even slashing each other's faces.
The video opens up with an inmate slicing the face of a woman who went to the prison to visit the inmate.

Additionally, footage starting at the 2 minutes, 209 mark appears to show the fatal stabbing of 30-year-old inmate Jarrett Frost. And there's other things in the footage as well.
I can't play

the video from Amanda's report, Amanda Prestigiacomo, who's the DW reporter on the story.

I can't play the video because YouTube would take it down. YouTube would take this whole show down, the whole video, because of the violent content.
So if I played it, I had to blur everything. You wouldn't be able to see it.
But you can go to Daily Wire or go to my X page, and you can see it there. It's brutal.
It's just really bad. And I've also gotten, at this point, dozens of messages from corrections officers, many in New York, but also across the country, as I've been talking about this just over the last few days.
And they all tell me two things. Number one, the situation in our prisons is terrible.
I mean, which maybe doesn't come as a shock, but it's very bad. The inmates are given way too much power.
Guards have very little leverage. They're subjected to just constant abuse and harassment, assaults, physical and sexual.
It's a nightmare scenario, and this

has all been enabled and fueled by left-wing prison reform efforts, so-called prison reform.

Now, obviously, it's a prison, so it's not going to be a lovely environment no matter what.

If you become a corrections officer, you know that going in. You're going into a tough situation

no matter what because it's a prison, and these are all the worst people in society who are there.

That's kind of the nature of the thing.

But prisons don't have to be places of total chaos.

You can have some semblance of order and even safety, at least for the guards, in a prison. You can have that.
We've had that in the past. But we don't have that now because of all these reforms that have been pushed, not exclusively, but mostly by Democrats.
And all of their reforms. Anytime a Democrat is talking

about prison reform, changing prisons, it is always on behalf of the criminals. They are

never suggesting any reforms to make the prison guards, the correction officers safer. They don't

care about that. So every reform, it just gets worse and worse and worse, but every reform,

whether on the federal or state

level, it's always about making sure the prisoners are more comfortable, that they have more freedom, that there's more things they're able to do. And the more freedom you give to the prisoners, the more you empower the inmates, the more risk you are causing for the guards, the more vulnerable the guards become.
So that's, this is like unanimously what I'm hearing behind the scenes. And then, too, the other kind of unanimous sentiment is that they feel totally ignored.
Their plight is not getting much press because the left-wing press is much more interested in the plight of convicted murderers and rapists than in the suffering of prison staff. They don't care about it.
And also, again, the left, their reforms, their policies have caused this situation. So of course, they have no interest in talking about the negative consequences of their own policies.
So they're ignored. And the corrections officers are kind of hung out to dry, left to deal with this on their own.
I got one message from a corrections officer who kind of explained it this way, because in New York now, thanks to the Halt Act,

a prisoner can only go to solitary confinement, which isn't what I've been told, isn't even really solitary confinement, not how we think of it anyway. But he can only go for 15 days.
So the guy's point to me was that if he gets assaulted, he as in the corrections officer, the worst punishment that his attacker can get is 15 days.

Now, if you're assaulted on the street, in theory anyway, the attacker is punished for years. And we know it actually doesn't work out that way very often, which is why the streets are also becoming increasingly more dangerous.

But in theory, if somebody attacks you on the street and physically assaults you, there's a years-long punishment. But that's not how it works in these prisons now.
So there's basically no disincentive to stop inmates from assaulting guards. There's essentially no punishment.
And if you're a lifer, if you're in there for life, there isn't even any real consequence for killing a guard. I mean, think about that.
What's the consequence? If you have life without parole, there's basically no solitary confinement anymore. You got all these prison reforms in place.
And everybody is given this obsessive focus on the comfort of inmates. You're not going to leave anyway.
What's to stop you from killing a prison guard? And if there's no death penalty, because that's another thing that could stop you. But they don't do that in New York, and they don't do that in most states either.
Even in the states where they have the death penalty, they rarely use it. So you're in prison for life.
You can't be executed. You're never going to leave.
They can't put you in solitary confinement. And you're a violent, evil sociopath with nothing to lose.
Why not kill a prison guard? There's like no reason why they wouldn't. Why not stage a prison riot? Why not cause as much mayhem as you can every single day? There is nothing stopping you.
You have no reason to not. At this point, we are relying entirely on the inmates' own sense of decency and propriety.
That's the only thing stopping them. Of course, they're violent sociopaths, so they have no such sense.
And this is what happens as a result. So, you know, I'm going to stay on this story.
I'm not going to, I mean, it's not the kind of story that drives engagement or gets a ton of clicks, but it really does matter because we are depending on corrections officers to do a job that none of us would ever want to do.

You know, what happens if they all go on strike?

What if 100% of corrections officers go on strike?

What then?

What do we do then?

You know, this is not like, you know, this isn't like with, say, public school teachers where,

because if they go on strike, first of all, it doesn't affect me personally at all.

We homeschool our kids.

Thank you. where, because if they go on strike, first of all, it doesn't affect me personally at all.
We homeschool our kids. And we could get rid of the entire public school system.
In fact, I think we should. Privatize the whole thing.
And a combination of private education and homeschooling, in my opinion, is how, that's what the education system should be. So we can actually have a functioning society without public schools.
We definitely can. There have been many functioning societies, including our own, that did not have public schools.
So when public school teachers go on strike, and look, I think I still, even though I'm very critical of the public school system, I still think that teachers do an important job. I mean, educating kids is a very important job.
And there are plenty of public school teachers that are really good people, and they care about their job. And it's also a thankless job in many respects.
Not nearly as thankless as being a prison guard. That's for damn sure.
But even so, the job of a public school teacher is not one that we actually need. You can do that at home.
You really can. We cannot, though, have a functioning society without prisons.
I homeschool my kids. I would not want to run a home prison for the murderers and drug dealers in my community.
I wouldn't want to do that. So if the public school teachers say, oh, we're all going to go on strike, all right, fine.
I could teach my own kids. If the prison guards say, okay, we're all going on strike, I'm not going to say, okay, fine.
I'll put the murderers in my, we got a spare guest room. We'll put them there.
Nope. No big deal.
So this is why the story should matter to everybody. And I will say that I've also gotten some messages from former inmates in the New York correction system, kind of giving the other side of the story.
Not as many, but I've read a few messages from people like that. And they say

that I have it all backwards, that the guards are the ones who inflict abuse on the inmates, and the guards are given free reign to be as violent as they want to be. So that's the inmate perspective.
But to be honest with you, I'm sure that kind of thing does go on

I'm just frankly not nearly as worried about that. And, you know, because I'm not a psychopath, okay? When you've got two groups, you've got prison guards and inmates, and you got to give the benefit of the doubt to one group or the other.
I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the prison guards, not to the violent sociopaths who are in prison because they are not functioning members of society. None of us are there in prison every day.
And nobody is perfect on either side of this thing. There's going to be abuses that happen.
That's just that comes with the territory. But you kind of have to give benefit of the doubt to one side or the other.
And it is just madness that in society and even most of our political leaders, especially the Democrat Party, kind of instinctively give the benefit of the doubt to the inmates, to the violent sociopaths who are in prison because they have committed serious crimes already. and people who, as part of being a violent sociopath, by the way, just lie constantly.

Just like lie about everything. That's it.
You talk, that's whether a corrections officer or law enforcement officer, you talk to any of these people, that's one thing they'll tell you that they're just dealing with people who just lie about everything all the time. They just are constantly lying.
It's one of the reasons when you see these body cam videos from arrests, and you've got the person who's being arrested saying, I can't breathe, I can't breathe. Of course, there's the one very famous incident of that.
But that's a common refrain that officers hear all the time, especially now, but even before. And you watch the videos.
And of course, if you're a moron, you watch it and you go, well, why aren't they taking that more seriously? Why aren't they listening? He said he can't breathe. Because they all say that.
Because they just lie. They just simply lie to get out of trouble always.
Okay, that's why. So if you're a corrections officer or law enforcement officer, you're dealing with people who lie about everything always.
And then we get mad at them. Why don't you, they tried to warn you.
Why don't you listen to these poor people? Maybe because they're lying psychopaths

Maybe because they're lying psychopaths. Maybe because they're dealing with the kinds of people who would happily slit your throat and kill you for your shoes or for nothing.
Maybe that's why. All right.
The Enquirer has this. The Philadelphia school district has indicated that it will ignore a rule directing schools to ban transgender athletes from participating in sports that match their gender identities.
The move comes after the school's interscholastic athletics governing body changed a key policy regarding transgender athletes. The Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association Board of Directors last week voted to revise its transgender athlete policy to comply with an executive order issued by President Trump.
But the Philadelphia schools say that they are going to defy this and they're going to continue to allow boys and girls sports. So obviously, Trump needs to pull all federal funding from Philadelphia schools.
They receive tens of millions of dollars a year in federal funding. I don't know exactly how much, but I think it's 15 to 20 million, something like that.
Pull it all, just to begin with, pull all the funding. But there's only so much Trump can do.
And that's why Congress needs to codify these executive orders. Congress needs to pass laws.
We need actual laws. Executive orders are not enough on their own.
So there needs to be a law banning men from women's sports. That needs to be one law.
There also needs to be another law, much more importantly, banning child gender transitions. And neither one of those laws have been passed yet.
And because of Trump's first several weeks in office and how successful it's been, we talk about the Republican Party as though it's new and improved. This ain't your grandfather's Republican Party.
But it might be. It might be the same.
It might be the same ineffectual blob that it's been for decades. That remains to be seen because they need to step up.
We know that this is a different Trump administration than it was the first time around. Is it a different Republican Party? That very much remains to be seen because they need to actually pass laws.
This needs to happen soon. And in the meantime, apparently some of these school districts are just going to defy the executive order and do what they want.
Because there seems to be a real split on the left between those who are determined to sort of die on the trans hill and those who don't want to die on it. And if they decide they want to die on it, great.
I mean, so be it. The left has a a chance right now, has an opportunity right now to leave all that, to just abandon all that madness and try to pretend it never happened.
We should not allow them to pretend it never happened, but politically, that would be their smartest move. Just move on.
they could do that or they could double down. They can double down on this totally losing argument.
And it seems right now that that's kind of what the civil war in the Democrat Party is about. And if the pro-trans side wins that war, then the Democrat party will have consigned itself to basically permanent irrelevance.
We'll see how that plays out. All right.
A bit of entertainment news on a Friday. This is from Variety.
Zendaya is taking her talents to the swamp.

The in-demand actor has joined Shrek 5 as Felicia, the daughter of Shrek, played by Mike Myers, and Fiona, Cameron Diaz. So there was a teaser for Shrek 5 that was just put out.
And I didn't see the teaser, but apparently the teaser involves a very current TikTok joke. So I guess Shrek is using some version of TikTok.
Who could have seen that coming, that we get the TikTok joke from Shrek 5? And listen, Shrek 5 is not the most important news in the world. Probably not even top 10, frankly.
Probably not. But I do want to say, first of all, that if you go and see Shrek 5, you lose the right to, well, you should lose the right to vote.
I mean, that should be the first thing. There should be, we should have people stationed at the theaters when Shrek 5 comes out, and just documenting every single person who walks in to see Shrek 5, every single person over the age of 18 who does not have a child.
If you're bringing your kid, I'll allow it, even though that's the movies, the whole franchise is like garbage. I wouldn't bring my kid to see it, but I'll allow it.
Any adult without a kid who goes into Shrek 5, I want it documented, and you immediately lose at least your right to vote, probably other constitutional rights as well. That's what I would like to see.
It's probably not going to happen. That's what I would like to see happen.
And if that doesn't happen, at a minimum, you lose the right to ever again in your life complain about a lack of originality in Hollywood. And yet people will do this.
They'll go and buy a ticket to Shrek 5, and it'll make a billion dollars. And then those same people, the same people will say that Hollywood has run out of ideas.
And all they do is put out the same reheated slop over and over again. And this will be adults who go see this movie.
The Shrek franchise is not for kids, really. My kids don't care about Shrek.
If you're around my age and you have kids, do your kids actually care about Shrek? They couldn't care less about Shrek. The original Shrek came out like 25 years ago.
It's for millennials. This is a bunch of now middle-aged millennials who go and see this just soulless dreck.
Think about this for a moment. They've been making Shrek films for 25 years.
I had to look it up. The first one came out in 2001.
So about 25 years A quarter century

Of Shrek films. A quarter century of making Shrek movies.
The first one was sort of mildly amusing for about 30 minutes if you were alive and a child in the year 2001. That's the most we could say about the original Shrek.
It was also obnoxious, and the animation is quite hideous, and it's lazily written, and it's just not a good movie by any stretch of the imagination. But in the year 2001 specifically, if you were a child, it was kind of amusing.
And yet from this original film, which at best, at the very best, was sort of amusing, they've been able to launch a five-film franchise that spans the entire century so far. And people will keep watching the movies.
They'll keep paying for tickets. They'll just keep rewarding this sludge, this just empty, tedious tripe, and then complain about it.
What? Why do we keep getting terrible, you know, unimaginative films from Hollywood? They complain as they give their money to the people who are making exactly that kind of material. I don't get it.
And then there's Zendaya, which I have to say, I just don't get the Zendaya thing. Is it Zendaya or Zendaya? I don't know.
And I'm not trying to be a hater. I mean, I am being a hater, but I don't try to be.
It just kind of works out that way. And I honestly don't understand why this woman is in every movie now.
She appears in like 19 movies a year, and yet she is. I mean, she has to be the least interesting actress in Hollywood.
Has she ever had an interesting role in anything? Like, what's a movie where you would say, oh man, that Zendaya performance was tremendous. Have you ever said to yourself, oh, Zendaya's in that one? I got to it.
Has anyone said that? I get it. I'm probably not the target demo for a Zendaya performance, but does anyone feel that way? She's either kind of a non-entity or she actively makes the movies worse.
The Dune films. I like Dune.
I think the director, Vela Nueva, however you pronounce his name, is probably the best director working in Hollywood today. I think all of it, he has not made a bad movie.
All of his movies have been good. And there's not very many directors you can say that about.
The one major problem with the Dune films is Zendaya, who just almost ruins it single-handedly. She's just kind of this sulking, humorless, lump on a log the whole movie.
And she's very good at that. She's very good at

sulking in movies. So if there's a role in a movie where you need someone to sulk,

if you need some good sulking in a movie, then bring in Zendaya for that. She's the one.

I don't get it. So the sentence, Zendaya will star in Shrek 5 is to me one of the least

appealing combinations of words ever assembled in the

English language or any human language. Yeah, people will watch it.
They'll watch it.

And we'll get 10 more Shreks. It'll be the year 2100, and we'll be on Shrek 65 at that point.

All right, let's get to the comment section. If you're a man, it's required that you grow a beard.
Hey, we're the sweet baby gang. Grand Canyon University is a private Christian university in beautiful Phoenix, Arizona.
Believes that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. GCU believes in equal opportunity and that the American dream starts with purpose.
GCU equips you to serve others in ways that promotes human flourishing and creates a ripple effect of transformation for generations to come. By honoring your career calling, you impact your family, your friends, and your community.
Change the world for good by putting others before yourself to glorify God. Whether your pursuit involves a bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree, GCU's online, on-campus, and hybrid learning environments are designed to help you achieve your unique academic, personal, and professional goals.
With over 340 academic programs as of September 2024, GCU Meets You Where You Are provides a path to help you fulfill your dreams. The pursuit to serve others is yours.
Let it flourish. Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University.
Private, Christian, affordable. Visit gcu.edu.
Many Canadians know the truth. There were no masked, unmarked graves.
The Indian chiefs themselves debunked the initial reports. Two, the indigenous peoples of Canada requested the schools.
They were not forced to send their children. Many children withdrew after a basic public school level education, ensuring basic literacy, math skills, and general knowledge.
Note, there was some abuse in some schools, but that came later. The problem in Canada is that we have a long ingrained history of government-funded news that was needed when technology was limited and expensive because of the vast geography of the country.
However, in the last 50 years or so, the reality has been exploited by the so-called progressive liberals to control narratives. Most Canadians have not realized that these once trusted institutions have become propaganda instruments.
Yeah. I don't know much about the residential schools in Canada, I confess.
It's not a story. It's not a story and history that I've studied in any great depth.
I do know, we all know, that the mass graves narrative was total bunk. So we know that.
But I've read several comments like this saying that the whole story about, because even now, even people who will admit that the mass graves, that was a false narrative and that there were no mass graves. Most of them will still say that, yeah, okay, maybe there were no mass graves, but the residential schools were still an atrocity and they were a terrible thing.
And it was, you know, it was, it was indigenous, so-called indigenous children were ripped away from their families by force. And it was an awful thing.
Most people seem to still think that. And, but I have read a few comments like yours saying, well, no, the whole narrative about residential schools is just wrong.
And that would not surprise me to learn. I sort of suspected that the whole narrative itself is probably bunk, or at the very least, extremely incomplete.
And at this point, we should know this. We should know about basically any historical episode where there's a kind of an established mainstream narrative.
It doesn't mean that the narrative is false. It doesn't mean that.
But there's no reason to assume it at this point.

There's no reason to assume that the established mainstream narrative about any historical episode is automatically true.

Especially when it's one that the left has used to guilt people, to manipulate and heap guilt on people, especially in those cases. Which is why you do actually have to go and do your own research.
And this is why I drone on about this kind of thing all the time when it comes to the story of the, quote,

indigenous peoples of the United States or what became the United States. And that whole narrative, which claims in the narrative that Europeans came here and it was just nothing but one atrocity inflicted.
It was a one-sided campaign of genocide against the natives that lasted for hundreds of years. That's the official mainstream narrative.
And in that case, that is something I've studied quite extensively. And so I know, and I could only really discover this by taking the time to read about it on my own.
But I know that narrative is absolute nonsense. All right.
As a Canadian, I'm ashamed that I live in this woke country. Glad everything is coming out in the light.
Well, don't be ashamed of your country, though. I mean, despise your political leaders, sure, but you're Canadian.
You should love your country. Be proud to be Canadian.
I mean, I know I have a lot of fun at the expense of Canada, but I'm not Canadian. So, you know, you should be a patriot for your country.
You should hold your leaders accountable and be critical of them and be critical of the aspects of your culture that are worth criticizing.

And it seems like there's a lot.

But no, you shouldn't be ashamed to be Canadian.

This is your country.

Which is also, you know, when I make fun of Canada, which again, I admit that I do sometimes.

And I get angry comments from Canadians. I don't begrudge them that.
In fact, you should be angry. You should get kind of ticked off when someone like me is making fun of you.
You should be defensive about your own country. As a Lord of the Rings fan, I think we should stop.
Matt is never going to change because I think he enjoys arguing with people who really love something with logic that works at face value. I think this because he does it in the same way as my father, whom I can argue with over an opinion that we share for literally hours.
It never goes anywhere and we agree with each other. Well, I will admit I come from a long line of people who love to argue even though they agree.

So that is, I don't know if it's an Irish Catholic thing or what, but it is, it may be shared by other cultures, but it's certainly an Irish Catholic thing.

Matt, your list of fake tasks you performed at your job was hilarious.

Well done.

Nothing hilarious about it.

I mean, this is serious stuff.

If your boss asks you for a list of things that you did last week, you need to know how to use buzzwords. It's all about the buzzwords.
In fact, I realized I left out, I think I left out a really important buzzword, which is comprehensive. So that's a good one.
You want to make sure that you inform your management that you did stuff comprehensively. That's an

impressive word. When they see the word comprehensive, they go, wow, he's working.
I don't know what he's doing, but it's comprehensive. That's all I know.
So one of the items on your list could be that you implemented comprehensive strategies for developing more productive client engagement.

Implemented comprehensive strategies for developing more productive client engagement. Implemented comprehensive strategies for developing more productive client engagement.
What does that mean? That doesn't mean anything, but it sounds good. Another good term is identifying opportunities.
That's a really good one. that's a great one.
You need to know that one. Because you can always say that you identified opportunities.
Like you don't need to have done anything with those opportunities. Because you didn't claim you did anything with the opportunity.
You just said you identified it. And what does identifying mean? I mean, you can identify.
You could just, I could sit here like this and identify stuff. That's all internal.
So I identified opportunities for greater cross-departmental collaboration. I identified opportunities for greater cross-departmental a collaboration.
That's a good one. That sounds...

I mean, that'll get you a 50% raise just based on that alone. So, or you could actually do real things in your job, and then you don't have to come up with BS phrases like this.
First, we released Am I Racist in theaters nationwide.

It became the number one documentary

of the decade.

Then we dropped it exclusively

on Daily Wire Plus,

where it became the number one

piece of content ever released

on our platform.

Maybe you saw it in theaters.

Maybe you joined Daily Wire Plus

just to watch it.

Hopefully you did both.

But here's what you haven't done.

Watched it with me, the director,

and the cast talking over

the whole thing.

Good news.

Well, now you can do exactly that.

The Am I Racist commentary edition is streaming exclusively on Daily Wire+. It's like we're all sitting on the couch right next to you without the awkward actual couch sharing part.
You can go stream the Commentary Edition of M.I. Racist right now on Daily Wire+.
Now let's get to our Daily Cancer. With reliable connectivity, enhanced cybersecurity, and advanced fiber solutions,

Comcast Business helps turn today's small businesses into engines of modern business.

Powering the engine of modern business. Powering possibilities.

Now through April 21st, new customers can get started with 150 megabit internet and security edge for $49.99 a month for 12 months with a two-year agreement.

Plus, ask how to get a $500 prepaid card on a qualifying gig bundle.

Call today.

Restrictions apply.

Equipment tax and other fees extra and subject to change.

Well, this is a very simple and obvious cancellation.

So obvious that there probably isn't much to say about it, but I have to cover it because it is easily the most cancelable thing anyone did yesterday. So today we're going to cancel the Republicans of the House Judiciary Committee, or at least whoever runs their X account, after their response to the non-release of the Epstein files on Thursday.
Now, shortly after the influencers were given binders with what turned out to be a bunch of information we already knew, the official ex-account for the House Judiciary Committee, the House Judiciary GOP rather, tweeted this. Breaking, Epstein files released.
And then there was a link to the files, except that if you click the link to the files, you discover that it was not the files at all, but rather Rick Astley's 1987 song, Never Gonna Give You Up. Yes, this was a rickroll.
The Republicans of the House Judiciary Committee apparently decided to use the occasion of the Epstein files release or alleged release to pull a rickroll prank on the public. Now, as you know, I am a big supporter and proponent of trolling.
There are few people in public life who enjoy trolling more than me. It is one of my great passions and one of my skills.
It probably is my only skill. And I also am not above a good Rickroll.
As a general rule, Rickrolling is now such an old joke and has been done so many times that it's funny again. So Rick Rowling went from very funny when it first began to not funny anymore because it had been done too many times.
And it was not funny for like a good 10 years. But recently it's funny again because now it's been done so many times that it's once again funny.
That's the way it goes.

So my point is that I have nothing in principle against trolling and against rickrolling,

quite the opposite. But the Epstein files are not a time for that, especially not from government

officials. We should remember that when we talk about the Epstein files, we are talking about

records of the systematic rape and abuse of minors. I mean, that's what the Epstein files are, if we ever actually see them.
So the people running this account, you know, to include perhaps some elected Republicans, thought that files related to child abuse presented a great opportunity for a fun, lighthearted prank. And it went over about as well as you would expect.
I mean, if you're not on X and you didn't see the backlash, just imagine in your mind how you think most people would respond where an official government social media account makes a joke about the mass rape of minors. Like exactly what you're imagining is what happened.
And the tweet was eventually deleted, though nobody has

been held accountable. Nobody has apologized for it.
And we haven't been told who was responsible

for that tweet. Now, as I said, it's very obvious, obvious to everyone except people running this

account, apparently, that trolling the American people over the Epstein files is wildly inappropriate.

It is a truly stunning display of poor judgment. That much is very clear.
I don't think I need to

Thank you. people over the Epstein files is wildly inappropriate.
It is a truly stunning display of poor judgment. That much is very clear.
I don't think I need to explain that point any further.

The American people want to actually see the files. We deserve to see them.
The victims and

their families most of all deserve for this information to be out there and for Epstein's

pervert pals to be exposed and held accountable. We don't deserve to be trolled over this.
I love trolling, but I also believe in trolling only those who deserve to be trolled. And the people demanding to see the Epstein files don't deserve to be trolled for that.
I mean, that's very clear. But I want to make a broader point because to me, this story is part of a larger trend.
And I don't mean a larger trend of government officials rickrolling the public. It's not about rickrolling specifically.
I'm talking about politicians, politicians who use ghetto slang, lawmakers challenging their colleagues to step outside during committee hearings, which happened recently. Political candidates posting thirst trap photos and on and on and on.
It's the larger trend of just a general

lack of seriousness by our political leaders. We need seriousness from the people running our

country. We need you to be serious people.
Now, Trump himself is a unique case. Trolling and

joking has been his style from the very beginning. It's part of what makes him effective.

But all the rest of these people, the rest of our government officials, elected and unelected, they're not Trump. And they should not try to act like Trump.
Let Trump be Trump, but we won't let the rest of you be Trump because you're not Trump. And in fact, even Trump is far more serious and far less jokey this time around for good reason.

Trolling the media is fun, but we have more important things to do, and Trump is trying to do them.

As for the rest of these people, we want seriousness of purpose, dignity, class.

30 years ago, the House Judiciary GOP would have never posted a Rickroll on X,

not just because Rickrolling didn't exist and X didn't exist, but because it's an extremely stupid and childish thing to do. And for most of American history, we really didn't have stupid and childish people in leadership positions in this country.
Now, sure, we've had bad people in leadership many times. We've had corrupt and incompetent people.
But stupid and childish is kind of a new flavor for our political leaders. It's only in recent years that a person like, say, Jasmine Crockett could hope to be elected to national office.
She's obviously not a member of the House Judiciary GOP, but she's a perfect example of this problem. She's a ridiculous, dumb, unserious person, And there are far too many of those people in leadership positions in this country.
So here's the message to our political class. We don't need you to entertain us.
We don't need or want theatrics. Leave the jokes to people who are actually funny and who don't have more important jobs to do.
We want you to be serious. We want you to be

boring. Okay? We want you to focus on the job we've elected you to do.
And that job is not to

be an influencer or an actor or a comedian. And that is why the House Judiciary Committee, GOP,

and all other unserious politicians are all today canceled. That'll do it for show day and this week.

Have a great weekend. Talk to you on Monday.
Godspeed. Did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families.
With Greenlight, you can set up chores, automate allowance,

and keep an eye on your kids' spending with real-time notifications.

Kids learn to earn, save, and spend wisely.

And parents can rest easy knowing their kids are learning about money with guardrails in place.

Sign up for Greenlight today at greenlight.com slash podcast.