Plot

Matt Walsh covers the rise of illegal immigrant gangs, Kamala Harris's interview, the media's criticism of Trump's Arlington visit, Venezuelan gangs in Colorado, Amendment 4 on abortion in Florida, and more.

Matt Walsh discusses the rise of armed gangs of illegal immigrants contributing to crime and chaos due to an uncontrolled border, Kamala Harris's first public interview since her nomination, and the media's portrayal of Donald Trump's appearance at Arlington National Cemetery. He also addresses incidents of Venezuelan street gangs taking over an apartment complex in Aurora, Colorado, and a fatal truck accident involving an illegal immigrant in the state. Walsh critiques the political and strategic implications of Amendment 4 in Florida, which seeks to enshrine the right to abortion up to birth, and explores the perceived hypocrisy in the media's treatment of political figures at Arlington Cemetery. The Daily Cancellation segment focuses on the media's attempt to smear Trump for his respectful participation in a memorial ceremony at Arlington Cemetery.—J. Spurlin

Matt Walsh opens by discussing the alarming issue of armed gangs of illegal immigrants descending on the country. He argues that this has led to an increase in crime and chaos, which he attributes to the uncontrolled state of the U.S. border. Additionally, he notes that Kamala Harris has made a public appearance, conducting her first interview since being nominated, which he criticizes as unsuccessful. He then mentions how Donald Trump is being attacked for what is described as a "photo op" at Arlington National Cemetery, dismissing it as another anti-Trump hoax. He signals that these topics will be discussed in more detail.

Walsh briefly introduces a story from five years ago involving a 47-year-old man from Senegal who hijacked a school bus full of children near Milan, Italy. The man forced teachers and a janitor to restrain the children using zip ties, clearly stating his intention to carry out a massacre as revenge for the deaths of illegal migrants who drowned.

Walsh recounts the details of the 2019 school bus hijacking in Italy, where the man from Senegal, advocating for open borders, threatened to commit mass murder. During a 40-minute rampage, he rammed the school bus into several cars before setting it on fire. Fortunately, the 51 children on board escaped, largely because the adults did not securely fasten the zip ties used to restrain them. This incident significantly impacted Italian politics, leading to the election of Giorgia Meloni as Prime Minister in 2022, who advocated for stricter immigration policies, including a naval blockade.

Walsh shifts to a recent incident in California, where groups of illegal migrants attempted to board school buses near the Mexican border in the Jamul-Dulzura Union School District. In one instance, three men tried to stop a bus by standing in the middle of the highway, while in another, a group of about 20 migrants was waiting for a bus on a different route. The superintendent of the school district has instructed bus drivers to bypass stops if migrants are present, prioritizing the safety of the children. Walsh sarcastically comments on the absurdity of the situation, questioning why authorities are not arresting the migrants, who are illegally in the country and threatening children.

Walsh criticizes the San Diego Sheriff's Office for hesitating to determine whether these actions constitute criminal acts. He mocks the idea that standing in the middle of the road and attempting to hijack a school bus might not be considered a crime in California. He points out how abstract policy debates become tangible when incidents like this occur, highlighting that Americans, similar to Italians, are growing increasingly intolerant of such events.

Walsh cites a poll reported by Axios, noting that half of Americans, including 42% of Democrats, support mass deportations of undocumented immigrants. Additionally, two-thirds of Americans view illegal immigration as a real crisis, not merely a politically driven narrative. He argues that as the consequences of mass migration become more apparent in everyday life, support for stricter immigration policies will continue to rise.

He describes a situation in Aurora, Colorado, where an apartment complex has reportedly been taken over by Venezuelan street gangs. Surveillance footage shows armed men patrolling the area, and residents report that a surge of illegal aliens has led to a significant decline in the quality of life, with trash accumulating and a sense of lawlessness prevailing.

Walsh continues discussing the situation in Aurora, where crime and shootings have become commonplace due to the presence of Venezuelan street gangs. He highlights that despite appearances, this is happening in Colorado, not Venezuela. Multiple police departments have responded to the situation, with Aurora PD acknowledging the presence of the Venezuelan gang known as TDA. Although the police have begun collecting evidence linking the gang to local crimes, they downplay the issue by labeling these incidents as "isolated."

Walsh criticizes the Aurora Police Department for focusing more on the impact of the gang's criminal activity on migrant communities rather than on the American citizens they are supposed to protect. He finds it troubling that the police statement prioritizes the welfare of illegal immigrants over that of tax-paying American citizens. In contrast, Denver PD issued a statement that at least acknowledged the concerns of local residents but still denied that the apartment complex had been taken over by the gang, despite video evidence to the contrary.

Walsh plays a clip of the mayor of Aurora confirming on national television that several buildings under the same ownership have indeed been taken over by Venezuelan gangs. The mayor also raises concerns about how these Venezuelans were concentrated in these buildings, questioning whether the U.S. government might have funded this situation. Walsh notes that despite this acknowledgment, Denver PD seems to be only gradually becoming aware of the full extent of the gang's criminal activities.

Walsh shifts to another alarming incident in Colorado, where an illegal immigrant, Ignacio Cruz Mendoza, was involved in a fatal truck accident. Mendoza, who did not have a valid commercial driver's license, crashed his 18-wheeler into a car, killing Scott Miller. The maximum sentence Mendoza could receive was one year in prison, which Walsh and others find outrageously lenient. Walsh highlights the grief of Scott Miller's widow, who is frustrated that the District Attorney's office failed to file more serious charges, allowing Mendoza to plead guilty to misdemeanors.

Walsh expresses his frustration with the Democrat-led District Attorney's office, sarcastically suggesting that they made an "innocent little mistake" by only charging Mendoza with misdemeanors. He points out that this failure to charge more serious offenses means Mendoza can only be punished for the lesser charges, with the principle of Double Jeopardy preventing further prosecution for the same crime.

Walsh continues his critique of Tim Walls's response, highlighting the absurdity of his excuses. When asked directly if he misspoke about his military service, Walls first deflects by discussing his opposition to children being shot, which Walsh points out has nothing to do with the question at hand. Walls then blames his supposed misstatement on poor grammar, painting himself as an everyday, relatable guy who occasionally mixes up his words. Walsh sarcastically mocks this excuse, emphasizing how implausible it is to claim that bad grammar could lead someone to fabricate an entire military history.

Walsh continues to mock Walls by suggesting that even Donald Trump, often criticized for being elitist, never pretended to have combat experience. He exaggerates to emphasize the absurdity of Walls's claim by joking about how bad grammar once led him to falsely claim he was the "deposed king of Cambodia." Walsh concludes that the excuses offered by Walls are laughably inadequate.

Walsh shifts his focus back to Kamala Harris's interview, arguing that from a strategic standpoint, it was a mistake for her to agree to it. He praises the Trump campaign for baiting Harris into doing the interview, noting that the right-wing media, including himself, pressured her into it because they knew it would go poorly. He suggests that the only pressure for Harris to do the interview came from conservatives, who anticipated that it would expose her weaknesses.

Walsh then discusses the aesthetic of the interview set, expressing confusion over the choices made. He describes the set as resembling an "empty airport bar" at a regional airport, with Harris and the interviewer looking like "depressed travelers" returning from a business conference. He criticizes the dark lighting and the presence of empty cups in the background, questioning why these elements were deliberately included. Walsh finds the overall vibe of the set to be melancholic and odd, further diminishing the effectiveness of the interview.

Walsh continues to analyze the peculiarities of the interview set, particularly focusing on the excessive number of empty cups placed in the shot. He humorously imagines a scenario where someone insisted on having as many empty cups as possible in the frame, questioning the reasoning behind this choice. He also notes that the clothing colors of the interview participants match the furniture, making them blend into the set awkwardly. Harris, in particular, appears much shorter than the others, giving the impression that she is sitting in a lower seat, which further detracts from the professionalism of the interview. Walsh finds the entire setup bizarre and expresses his sadness that these are the people running for high office.

Walsh transitions to discussing a recent interview with Trump, where Trump was asked about Amendment 4 in Florida. This amendment would overturn Florida's abortion restrictions and enshrine the right to abortion up to birth. When asked how he would vote on this amendment, Trump responded ambiguously, saying that six weeks (the current limit) is too short and that he wants more time. This response led to confusion and anger among pro-life conservatives, as Trump did not clearly state his position on the amendment.

Walsh notes that although Trump did not explicitly say he would vote for the amendment, he also did not say he would vote against it, which has caused significant concern among his pro-life supporters. Walsh emphasizes that Trump needs to be clear and decisive on this issue, as the amendment represents one of the most radical pro-abortion measures ever seen in the United States.

Walsh offers advice on what Trump should say to clarify his position: that as a resident of Florida, he would vote against the amendment because it guarantees a right to abortion until birth, which is radically out of step with both his values and those of the majority of Americans. Walsh stresses that Trump needs to express moral clarity on this issue, particularly given the extreme nature of the amendment, and that doing so is not only the right thing to do but also politically necessary.

Walsh stresses the importance of Trump taking a clear stance against Amendment 4, warning that by not doing so, Trump risks demoralizing his pro-life base. He argues that while Trump's supporters, including Walsh himself, may still vote for him because the alternative is Harris, failing to oppose this amendment could lead to a loss of votes due to decreased enthusiasm among his base. Walsh points out that the only people who would support the amendment are radical leftists who would never vote for Trump anyway, making his hesitation both politically and morally misguided.

Walsh compares Trump's hesitation to potentially supporting a constitutional amendment protecting the right to "transition" children, emphasizing how radical and alienating such a position would be to his base. He reiterates that taking a stance that pleases only those who would never vote for Trump in the first place is a recipe for electoral failure, as it destroys the enthusiasm of his supporters.

Walsh delves into the specifics of Amendment 4, which he says is being misrepresented by the pro-abortion left. The amendment states that no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health as determined by the patient's healthcare provider. Walsh notes that the left claims the amendment only allows abortion up until viability, but he argues that this is misleading and that the amendment is far more extreme.

Walsh explains that the term "viability" is problematic because it lacks a clear definition, meaning that the amendment could effectively make abortion up to 20-22 weeks a basic human right. He asserts that this alone should be enough reason for any pro-life person, including Trump, to oppose the amendment. He acknowledges that while his position on abortion as a federal human rights issue may be unpopular, even from a states' rights perspective, opposing the amendment should be straightforward for anyone claiming to be pro-life.

Walsh emphasizes that the amendment is even worse than it appears because it also includes a provision allowing abortion when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by a healthcare provider. This vague language could be used to justify abortion at any stage of pregnancy, making the amendment radically pro-abortion and a clear violation of human rights.

Walsh further explains the significance of the word "or" in the Amendment 4 text, explaining that it allows for abortions up until birth for any reason under the guise of protecting the patient's health. He points out that the term "health" is intentionally broad, encompassing physical, mental, emotional, and even financial health. This broad definition, coupled with the fact that any "healthcare provider" (not necessarily a doctor) can authorize an abortion, effectively permits abortions for any reason at any stage of pregnancy.

Walsh emphasizes that the amendment is crafted with these loopholes to ensure that any woman can obtain an abortion at any time for any reason. He warns that if the amendment passes, Florida will become a hub for abortion, leading to a significant increase in abortion rates, including late-term abortions. He argues that this is exactly why proponents of the amendment want it to pass, as it would allow for the termination of pregnancies up to 35 weeks or more.

Walsh reiterates his frustration, stating that it should be easy for any Republican, including Trump, to oppose this amendment. He argues that anyone who supports such an extreme measure is not a winnable voter for Trump or any other Republican candidate. Walsh criticizes those who aren't speaking out against this, suggesting that they might not truly care about Trump's chances of winning.

Walsh concludes this segment by transitioning into a discussion about financial stress and promoting a service that offers strategies to help individuals get out of debt without bankruptcy or loans. He ties this into a broader narrative about economic challenges, urging viewers to act quickly to take advantage of the services offered.

Walsh then transitions to his "daily cancellation" segment, where he discusses an incident involving Trump at Arlington Cemetery. Trump attended a private ceremony marking the third anniversary of the 2021 Kabul airport attack, which killed 13 U.S. service members. Walsh describes the ceremony as respectful and solemn, noting that Trump was invited by the families of the fallen soldiers and that the event was well-conducted without any political grandstanding.

Walsh criticizes the corporate media's response to Trump's attendance, noting that outlets like MSNBC, The Daily Beast, and NPR accused Trump of staging a disrespectful photo op. He points out that these accusations are likely driven by a desire to deflect attention from the Biden administration's mishandling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, which led to the tragedy at Abbey Gate. Walsh argues that the media is attempting to smear Trump for political reasons, especially in an election year.

Walsh highlights the hypocrisy in the media's coverage, noting that Democrats, including Biden, have used Arlington Cemetery in campaign advertisements without any backlash. He plays a clip from a Memorial Day ad by Biden in 2020, where Biden speaks about the sacrifices made by service members and their families. Walsh contrasts this with the media's criticism of Trump, pointing out the double standard.

Walsh argues that it is entirely appropriate for political figures to pay their respects at Arlington Cemetery, especially when invited by the families of fallen soldiers. He criticizes the media for suddenly finding this inappropriate only when it involves Trump, suggesting that this outrage is a manufactured scandal aimed at distracting from the Biden administration's failures.

Walsh discusses another aspect of the controversy, where an Arlington Cemetery staffer reportedly objected to the actions of Trump and the families of the fallen soldiers, leading to a minor physical altercation. The Army issued a statement condemning the incident and reported it to the police, although no charges were filed. Walsh finds this reaction to be hysterical and disproportionate, particularly given the lack of accountability shown by the Pentagon in response to the Kabul airport attack.

Walsh concludes by criticizing the Pentagon's focus on defending its staffer's professionalism while ignoring the far more significant failures in the Afghanistan withdrawal. He suggests that the intense reaction to the Arlington incident is driven by a desire to deflect attention from the Biden administration's disastrous handling of the situation in Afghanistan.

Walsh accuses the media and the Pentagon of being more concerned with attacking Trump and protecting their image than with addressing the real issues surrounding the Kabul airport attack. He argues that they are willing to badger the families of fallen service members and create distractions to avoid discussing the failures that led to the deaths of 13 U.S. military personnel. Walsh declares that NBC News and other outlets that smeared Trump for participating in the Arlington Cemetery memorial are "canceled."

Walsh wraps up the show, wishing his audience a great weekend and signing off. The video ends with a preview of an upcoming movie titled "Am I Racist?" which appears to be a satirical exploration of race and identity in America, featuring Walsh as he navigates various situations and conversations related to racism and diversity. The movie is set to release in theaters on September 13th and is rated PG-13.