Untitled Document

[00:00:00] Is the transing of the children finally [00:00:02] dying in America? We'll get to some [00:00:04] breaking news that suggests that it is. [00:00:06] Plus, breaking news on the kidnapping of [00:00:08] Savannah Guthri's mom and everything [00:00:11] that is the latest from Minneapolis and [00:00:12] all the rest. First, in 2026, Daily Wire [00:00:15] Plus members are getting more than ever [00:00:16] before. In January alone, we dropped [00:00:18] more than 250 original pieces of [00:00:20] content, all adree, all uncensored, and [00:00:22] February is way busier. New episodes of [00:00:25] the seven-part fantasy series, The Pen [00:00:27] Dragon Cycle: Rise of the Merlin, are [00:00:28] coming every Thursday. Ben After Dark [00:00:30] season 2 premieres on Friday the 13th, [00:00:32] which feels sort of on brand. And [00:00:34] there's a new episode of Matt Walsh's [00:00:35] new series, Real History, hitting [00:00:37] February 23rd. And we'll be live in DC [00:00:39] for the State of the Union, plus a bunch [00:00:41] of other stuff stacked on top of that. [00:00:42] So, if you're already a member, you're [00:00:44] covered. If you're not, this is the [00:00:45] month to fix that. Head on over to [00:00:46] dailywireplus.com to join right now. [00:00:49] Well, if you go back just a few years, [00:00:51] it was dregored that every major [00:00:53] commentator, every major politician [00:00:55] would be called to say that boys were [00:00:58] girls, girls were boys, they could [00:00:59] become one another. Major medical [00:01:02] establishment organizations came out and [00:01:04] said that it was the purest form of [00:01:06] science to say that boys could become [00:01:07] girls. And in fact, the best treatment [00:01:09] for people suffering from gender [00:01:10] dysphoria was for them to have hormone [00:01:12] treatment and surgery. In fact, if you [00:01:14] go back to 2021, the American Medical [00:01:16] Association was telling governors to [00:01:18] oppose state legislation that would [00:01:20] prohibit medically necessary gender [00:01:22] transition related care for minor [00:01:23] patients, calling such efforts quote, a [00:01:25] dangerous intrusion into the practice of [00:01:27] medicine. That of course was not [00:01:29] relegated only to psychological care or [00:01:32] social transition or even to hormones. [00:01:34] That also included on many occasions [00:01:37] surgery. In fact, the AMA specifically [00:01:41] put out a letter saying, quote, [00:01:43] "Empirical evidence has demonstrated [00:01:44] that trans and non-binary gender [00:01:46] identities are normal variations of [00:01:48] human identity and expression for gender [00:01:50] diverse individuals. Standards of care [00:01:52] and accepted medically necessary [00:01:54] services that affirm gender or treat [00:01:56] gender dysphoria may include mental [00:01:57] [clears throat] health counseling, [00:01:58] non-medical social transition, gender [00:02:00] affirming hormone therapy, and or gender [00:02:03] affirming surgeries. This was the [00:02:05] standard of care according to the [00:02:06] American Medical Association. Well, as [00:02:08] it turns out, all of that was a load of [00:02:10] horse crap. And if you are wondering [00:02:12] about the sort of signal moments in the [00:02:16] last 30 years of American history where [00:02:18] people fell out of love with [00:02:20] institutions and decided that [00:02:21] institutions had betrayed their trust. [00:02:24] This would be a big one. There have been [00:02:25] many of them. Obviously, there is the [00:02:28] media betrayal of Americans trust over [00:02:30] things like Joe Biden's mental health [00:02:32] issues. There's the betrayal, the [00:02:34] fundamental betrayal of trust by our [00:02:36] nation's educational institutions with [00:02:38] regard to things like critical race [00:02:40] theory. There was the betrayal of trust [00:02:42] by our scientific organizations over co. [00:02:44] But a really, really big one, maybe the [00:02:46] biggest one in many ways, was the basic [00:02:49] lie that everyone who is above the age [00:02:51] of 1 and a half knows his lie, which is [00:02:53] that boys and girls are the same. [00:02:56] The fact that the medical establishment [00:02:57] said that boys could become girls, girls [00:02:59] could become boys. And the best [00:03:00] treatment for somebody who is struggling [00:03:02] with body dysmorphia was not to work on [00:03:05] their brain, but to work on their body [00:03:07] by cutting off healthy body parts by [00:03:10] creating fake new body parts. This was [00:03:12] insanity. It was pathological. It was [00:03:15] nuts. And it was again dregore. It was [00:03:18] the thing. Well, now it turns out that [00:03:20] all of that is coming to a screeching [00:03:22] halt. And I have to say that as a [00:03:23] company, Daily Wire, I think we've [00:03:25] played a very large role in this. Not [00:03:26] just through Matt Walsh's fantastic [00:03:28] documentary, What Is a Woman? But from [00:03:30] the fact that we as a company from day [00:03:32] one rejected this nonsense. We rejected [00:03:34] it wholesale. We are the only company I [00:03:36] am aware of in America that refused day [00:03:38] one ever to use gendered pronouns for [00:03:41] people who are not of that sex. We used [00:03:43] sex pronouns all the way through because [00:03:45] we rejected the fundamental lie that [00:03:47] boys could become girls and vice versa. [00:03:49] The fact that Democrats are still [00:03:50] struggling with this shows how out of [00:03:53] touch they are with reality. Well, what [00:03:55] finally broke the system as always in [00:03:58] America? Trial lawyers. Trial lawyers [00:03:59] broke the system. You know that things [00:04:01] are about to go haywire for your [00:04:02] political position when the trial [00:04:04] lawyers start winning big victories. [00:04:05] Well, according to the New York Times in [00:04:08] the first malpractice verdict against [00:04:09] providers of gender affirming care for [00:04:11] minors, again, the Orwellian language [00:04:12] here is insane. Gender affirming is sex [00:04:14] rejecting. That is what gender affirming [00:04:16] means in this context. We are not [00:04:18] talking about a person who had a double [00:04:20] mastctomy. A woman who had a double [00:04:21] mastctomy because she had breast cancer [00:04:23] or the BRCA gene and decided to have [00:04:26] that double mastctomy and now wants to [00:04:27] reconstruct her breasts. That would be [00:04:30] gender affirming. Gender affirming in [00:04:32] this context means sex denying. A boy [00:04:34] believes he's a girl, so they cut off [00:04:35] his penis and testicles. That is what [00:04:37] they mean. Okay, so back to the piece. [00:04:40] In the first malpractice verdict against [00:04:41] providers of gender affirming care for [00:04:43] minors, a jury in New York State has [00:04:45] awarded a woman $2 million in damages [00:04:47] for a double mastctomy she received as a [00:04:49] teenager that she said had left her [00:04:51] disfigured. I mean, obviously it left [00:04:54] her disfigured. That is just a reality. [00:04:56] When you have your breasts cut off, not [00:04:59] because you're worried that you're going [00:05:00] to get breast cancer or for any other [00:05:02] real medical reason, but because you say [00:05:04] you want to look more like a boy and [00:05:05] some plastic surgeon then chops off your [00:05:07] breasts and you're a minor. Yeah. I [00:05:09] mean, that's disfiguring. The plaintiff, [00:05:11] Fox Varian 22 of Yorktown Heights, had [00:05:13] accused her psychologist and the plastic [00:05:15] surgeon who performed the operation of [00:05:16] failing to obtain adequate consent about [00:05:18] the risks before she agreed to undergo [00:05:20] the procedure in 2019. She also claimed [00:05:22] that the providers had deviated from [00:05:24] standard practices governing gender- [00:05:25] rellated medical care. Variian was 16 at [00:05:28] the time of the surgery. She was [00:05:29] assigned female at birth, but as a [00:05:31] teenager identified as a man, again, [00:05:32] Murwellian language that the media, our [00:05:34] legacy media, continue to use here, is [00:05:36] totally psychotic. assigned female at [00:05:39] birth. It it you are not assigned [00:05:41] anything. A doctor looks at you and [00:05:43] knows you are female by looking at you [00:05:45] when you are a baby. This is silly. It [00:05:48] is ridiculous. You are not simply [00:05:49] assigned at random a sex. [00:05:53] This woman later came to regret the [00:05:54] decision to transition and now [00:05:56] identifies as a woman. An example of a [00:05:58] process known as drtransitioning or you [00:06:00] know recognition of reality. [00:06:02] The verdict was announced on Friday [00:06:04] following a three-week trial in White [00:06:05] Plains. [00:06:07] Now, very often when people cite studies [00:06:10] suggesting that people don't really [00:06:12] dransition, that is because the studies [00:06:14] do not include people who don't follow [00:06:15] up with the doctor. It turns out the [00:06:17] vast majority of people who decide that [00:06:18] they don't want to carry forward with [00:06:20] their quote unquote gender transition, [00:06:22] they just never get back in touch with [00:06:24] the people who are trying to transition [00:06:25] them in the first place. [00:06:28] And so the continued pressure tactics [00:06:30] used by people who are in this industry, [00:06:32] for example, a Kenan McKinnon who [00:06:34] studies transgender care at York [00:06:36] University in Toronto and who says that [00:06:38] a vast majority of young people who opt [00:06:39] for a medical transition say the [00:06:41] procedure resolves their gender [00:06:42] dysphoria and improves the quality of [00:06:44] their lives. Do you think they're coming [00:06:45] back to kin McKinnon to explain that [00:06:47] things went bad? That is typically not [00:06:49] the way that it works. So why do I say [00:06:51] that this means that the transing of [00:06:52] children in America is dying or dead? [00:06:54] The reason is because once plastic [00:06:57] surgeons now find themselves at risk of [00:06:59] medical liability for doing something [00:07:00] that is clearly non-medical, [00:07:03] you know, cutting off healthy body [00:07:04] parts, once that happens, doctors are [00:07:07] going to stop doing it. And that is the [00:07:08] position of the American Society of [00:07:10] Plastic Surgeons. Yesterday, they put [00:07:13] out a statement, quote, consistent with [00:07:15] ASPS's August 2024 statement that the [00:07:18] overall evidence base for gender- [00:07:19] related endocrine and surgical [00:07:20] interventions is low certainty and in [00:07:22] light of recent publications reporting [00:07:24] very low to low certainty of evidence [00:07:26] regarding mental health outcomes along [00:07:28] with emerging concerns about potential [00:07:30] long-term harms and the irreversible [00:07:32] nature of surgical interventions in a [00:07:33] developmentally vulnerable population. [00:07:36] ASPS concludes there is insufficient [00:07:38] evidence demonstrating a favorable risk [00:07:40] benefit ratio for the pathway of gender- [00:07:42] related endocrine and surgical [00:07:43] interventions in children and [00:07:44] adolescence. ASPS recommends that [00:07:47] surgeons delay gender- related breast, [00:07:48] chest, genital, and facial surgery until [00:07:50] a patient is at least 19 years old. Now, [00:07:53] what's hilarious about that is that they [00:07:55] are not making the case. They're not [00:07:58] making the case that [00:08:00] the 19 is because your brain is now [00:08:02] developed enough that you can make a [00:08:03] good decision. That is not that that is [00:08:05] not the case they're making. They're not [00:08:06] saying that there's a difference in kind [00:08:08] between these sorts of surgeries [00:08:09] performed on a 21-year-old and a surgery [00:08:11] performed on a 17-year-old. The reason [00:08:13] that they are putting out 19 years old, [00:08:15] why do you think? Why do you think? The [00:08:17] answer is very obvious. Because at 18, [00:08:19] you can legally consent. And once you [00:08:21] can legally consent, you can't be sued. [00:08:22] That's all that's happening here. The [00:08:24] liability came to the plastic surgeons [00:08:28] and now they are saying, "Okay, well, [00:08:29] you know, we still want to do these [00:08:30] surgeries cuz we got paid for them even [00:08:32] though they're really bad. We're going [00:08:34] to continue to do them, but we'll do it [00:08:35] for people above the age of 18. Now, [00:08:37] that is still bad medical practice and [00:08:38] does not solve the problem politically [00:08:40] for people who claim that men can become [00:08:43] women, women can become men, and all the [00:08:45] rest. And that is a barrier to entry for [00:08:47] Democrats. It really is. It's funny when [00:08:50] I was on Gavin Newsome's show in [00:08:51] California, this issue came up and he [00:08:53] really struggled with it. And the reason [00:08:54] he struggled with it is because he knows [00:08:56] it is not only a political loser, but [00:08:57] that in his heart he knows it is not [00:08:59] true. He knows it is not true. The vast [00:09:01] majority, pretty much everybody in the [00:09:03] United States knows it is untrue that a [00:09:05] man can become a woman. It is just that [00:09:07] there are demands, social demands to [00:09:09] mirror that nonsense. If Democrats [00:09:11] decide that they're going to follow that [00:09:12] all the way down the political rabbit [00:09:14] hole, they will not be able to get out. [00:09:17] It is a legitimately it is a barrier to [00:09:20] entry for voters. If they think that [00:09:22] you're crazy enough that you think a boy [00:09:24] can become a girl, very difficult to [00:09:26] argue that your position on marginal tax [00:09:27] rates outweighs that. Nonetheless, [00:09:30] again, Democrats have drunk deep from [00:09:32] the well here. This is presumably why, [00:09:35] for example, Kansas State Representative [00:09:36] Lindsey Vaughn is melting down over boys [00:09:39] being barred from the girls bathroom. [00:09:42] In [snorts] effect, this makes it [00:09:44] impossible for trans people to use [00:09:47] bathrooms in public spaces. Um, [00:09:51] which is just I mean it's it's it is not [00:09:55] just discrimination. It's beyond the [00:09:57] pale. It's cruel. The fact that they're [00:09:59] also including unisex bathrooms, I just [00:10:06] it's beyond words. I mean, how [00:10:09] how terrible it is. And [00:10:12] beyond that, I mean, the most atrocious [00:10:16] part is there was no hearing on this [00:10:17] language. There was no hearing on this [00:10:20] amendment [00:10:21] um that I'm calling the bathroom bill. [00:10:25] Um [clears throat] [00:10:26] and yet it got voted into the bill. So [00:10:29] now that is also part of House Bill what [00:10:32] was House Bill 2426. [00:10:36] Okay. And again it is not unique to [00:10:39] slightly crazy people in Kansas in [00:10:42] California in Gavin Newsome's own state [00:10:44] where again he says that he understands [00:10:47] the unfairness of boys playing against [00:10:48] girls in sports. And I asked him, well, [00:10:49] I mean, that seems to me a secondary [00:10:51] issue to should you surgically mutilate [00:10:54] children? And he avoided the question. [00:10:57] His attorney general in California has [00:10:58] now filed a lawsuit against Rady's [00:11:00] Children's Health, which is a hospital [00:11:02] in San Diego on Friday for shuttering [00:11:04] its gender affirming care program for [00:11:06] patients under the age of 19. [00:11:08] So you have the state of California, the [00:11:11] the legal authority in the state of [00:11:12] California suing [00:11:15] medical establishments for doing [00:11:18] medicine and failing to go along with [00:11:20] the junk science that has been promoted [00:11:22] here. Earlier in January, according to [00:11:24] NBC San Diego, the hospital stated, [00:11:26] quote, "Escalating federal actions [00:11:27] concerning gender affirming care and [00:11:29] being under investigation by the HHS are [00:11:31] what led to their decision to end those [00:11:33] services." In the lawsuit, Bonta argued [00:11:35] that Rady's decision to end care [00:11:37] violates legally binding conditions [00:11:39] placed by the attorney general himself [00:11:41] on the Radio Children's Hospital of San [00:11:42] Diego's merger with Children's Hospital [00:11:44] of Orange County and its affiliates. [00:11:46] According to the AG, quote, ready [00:11:48] flagrantly disregarded its legal [00:11:50] obligations by unilaterally deciding to [00:11:52] preemptively comply with the [00:11:53] administration's demands and cease [00:11:54] medically necessary care for roughly [00:11:56] 1,450 patients. By the way, that number [00:11:58] is astonishing. 450 patients, kids whose [00:12:03] parents are delusional enough to believe [00:12:04] that if they confirm [00:12:07] their gendered delusion that somehow [00:12:09] this makes them better. That is, by the [00:12:11] way, the charitable description of what [00:12:12] many of these parents are doing. For [00:12:13] many of these parents, this has become [00:12:15] sort of a hip thing to do, to talk about [00:12:17] your trans child because it shows how [00:12:18] caring and wonderful and empathetic you [00:12:20] are, how open-minded you are by scarring [00:12:22] your children for life. [00:12:25] So apparently California says we will [00:12:27] not allow RAID to violate its [00:12:29] obligations to its patients and the [00:12:31] state. [00:12:33] Apparently the hospital had said they [00:12:36] would continue to provide counseling, [00:12:37] mental health resources and care [00:12:38] coordination, but they would no longer [00:12:40] be doing, for example, surgeries and [00:12:42] hormone treatments. [00:12:45] Okay. Bottom line here is that if [00:12:46] Democrats keep running up against both [00:12:47] the science and legal liability, [00:12:50] Democrats are in for a continued world [00:12:51] of hurt. All righty. Coming up, we'll [00:12:53] get into the latest from the Epstein [00:12:54] Files. Yeah, there are some people who [00:12:56] actually are on the chopping block. [00:12:57] We'll get into it. First, you know what [00:12:59] holiday our sponsor, Pure Talk, [00:13:00] celebrates? President's Day. Because [00:13:02] they believe wireless service should [00:13:03] only cost you a couple of Presidents, [00:13:05] just a Jackson and a Lincoln. That's 25 [00:13:06] bucks a month for unlimited talk, text, [00:13:08] and plenty of data. Think about it. [00:13:10] That's the cost of one or two meals out [00:13:11] versus the hundreds big wireless charges [00:13:13] families every month. There's no reason [00:13:15] wireless service needs to be that [00:13:16] expensive. What makes Pure Talk [00:13:17] different goes beyond just price. [00:13:19] They're an American wireless company [00:13:20] that actively supports our veterans and [00:13:22] invests in a US-based customer service [00:13:23] team. So, when you call, you're speaking [00:13:25] with someone right here at home who can [00:13:27] actually help you. Pure Talk has the [00:13:29] same tower network as the big carriers, [00:13:31] which means coverage is excellent. So, [00:13:33] you've got a better price, you got [00:13:34] superior 5G coverage, and you have a [00:13:36] company that actually doesn't hate you. [00:13:37] Just 25 bucks a month for talk, text, [00:13:39] and plenty of data. No contract, no [00:13:40] cancellation fee. So, what exactly are [00:13:42] you waiting for? Head on over to [00:13:43] puretalk.com/shapiro. [00:13:45] You'll get 50% off your very first month [00:13:47] of coverage. which again that's [00:13:48] puretalk.com/shapiro [00:13:50] to make the switch on over to pure talk [00:13:52] puretalk.com/shapiro. [00:13:54] Also for people facing an unplanned [00:13:56] pregnancy, fear and uncertainty can feel [00:13:58] pretty overwhelming. Past decisions may [00:14:00] carry lingering grief that's hard to [00:14:01] navigate alone. And that's where our [00:14:03] sponsor Preborn steps in. These clinics [00:14:05] offer compassionate support without [00:14:06] judgment, providing honest [00:14:08] conversations, accurate information, and [00:14:09] a safe space to process difficult [00:14:11] emotions and explore real options. One [00:14:13] of the most powerful tools Preeborn [00:14:14] provides is ultrasound technology. [00:14:16] Seeing a developing baby on screen, [00:14:17] hearing a heartbeat can bring clarity in [00:14:19] moments of confusion. For many, that [00:14:21] simple appointment becomes a turning [00:14:22] point, transforming fear into hope and [00:14:24] uncertainty into confidence. The impact [00:14:25] is real. Babies are born, families are [00:14:27] formed, healing happens, and it often [00:14:29] begins with something as simple as an [00:14:31] ultrasound. One moment that can change [00:14:33] everything, and you can be a part of [00:14:34] that change with a $28 donation to cover [00:14:36] the cost for a mother in need. All [00:14:38] donations are taxdeductible. 100% of [00:14:40] your donation goes directly to saving [00:14:41] babies and building families. To donate [00:14:43] securely, dial pound 250, say keyword [00:14:46] baby. That's pound250 baby. Or go to [00:14:49] pre-born.com/ben. [00:14:50] That's pre-born.com/ben. [00:14:52] Go check them out right now. [00:14:53] pre-born.com/ben. [00:14:56] Meanwhile, in the other big news of the [00:14:58] day, the Epstein files continue to role [00:15:00] the political world. One of the things [00:15:02] that's that's sort of fascinating about [00:15:03] the Epstein files is that truth is [00:15:06] gradually dripping out about specific [00:15:07] people in ways that you wouldn't [00:15:09] necessarily expect. So, for example, [00:15:11] Jeffrey Epstein, apparently wrote a [00:15:13] letter to file, meaning he wrote an [00:15:14] email to himself or a draft email to [00:15:16] himself in which he accused Bill Gates, [00:15:20] the founder of Microsoft, of having [00:15:22] obtained an STD from a sex worker, from [00:15:26] a prostitute, and then passed it on to [00:15:29] his wife and then tried to give her [00:15:32] anti-STD drugs in order to shield her [00:15:35] from the consequences of his own [00:15:37] terrible actions. And it is well known [00:15:39] that Epstein was hanging out with Bill [00:15:41] Gates on a wide variety of occasions. [00:15:42] Well, Melinda Gates, Bill's wife, who [00:15:45] divorced him, she was asked about this. [00:15:48] And here was her answer. [00:15:52] It is not on you to have to respond to [00:15:53] the details of that alleged behavior. [00:15:57] But I I wonder what your dominant [00:16:00] emotion is when you read these news [00:16:03] articles with these details. [00:16:08] sad. Just unbelievable sadness. [00:16:12] Unbelievable sadness. Right. Um [00:16:19] and again, I'm able to take my own [00:16:20] sadness and look at those young girls [00:16:23] and say, "My god, how did they h [00:16:27] how did that happen to those girls?" [00:16:29] Right? And so for me, it's just sadness. [00:16:32] Sadness for you know, I I've left I had [00:16:35] to I left my marriage. I had to leave my [00:16:37] marriage. I wanted to leave my marriage. [00:16:38] I had to leave the I felt I needed to [00:16:41] eventually leave the foundation. So, [00:16:42] it's just sad. That's the truth, right? [00:16:45] And and it's kind of like uh at least [00:16:48] for me, I've been able to move on in [00:16:50] life. And I hope there's some justice [00:16:52] for those now women, right? We see them [00:16:54] standing up in front of microphones in [00:16:56] DC. Um what they went through is just [00:16:59] unimaginable, I think. [00:17:02] >> So, Melinda Gates does not deny it. Bill [00:17:03] Gates is denying it. It it the the the [00:17:06] denial is, shall we say, somewhat tepid. [00:17:09] And when when you have the wife not [00:17:10] denying the allegations in the email, [00:17:12] but you have Bill Gates denying the [00:17:13] allegations in the email, bottom line is [00:17:15] this. When you lie down with the world's [00:17:17] worst people, in this case, literally [00:17:19] with Jeffrey Epstein, then you are not [00:17:21] going to get up without fleas. [00:17:24] >> Yeah. I met Jeffrey in 2011. the focus [00:17:27] was always he knew a lot of very rich [00:17:29] people and he was saying he could get [00:17:31] them uh to give money to global health. [00:17:34] You know, in retrospect that was a a [00:17:37] dead end and I was foolish to spend time [00:17:39] with him. I was one of many people who [00:17:41] regret ever knowing him. [00:17:43] >> You've no doubt seen the allegations [00:17:45] including some of them from the last 24 [00:17:47] to 48 hours. Are they true? [00:17:50] >> No. The apparently Jeffrey wrote an [00:17:52] email to himself. uh that email was [00:17:56] never sent. The email is uh you know [00:17:59] false. Uh so I don't know what his [00:18:01] thinking was there. It just reminds me [00:18:03] you know every minute I spent with him I [00:18:05] I regret and I you know apologize that I [00:18:08] did that. [00:18:09] >> So so what does this say? Well it does [00:18:11] suggest that in some of these cases [00:18:13] evidence is now becoming clear about the [00:18:16] coordination between Jeffrey Epste and [00:18:18] certain political figures. And and the [00:18:19] reason that is important is because we [00:18:21] have basically been told by the the [00:18:23] folks who are retailing the broadest [00:18:25] possible narrative about Jeffrey [00:18:26] Epstein, which is that he was certainly [00:18:28] an intelligence asset that he was [00:18:30] trafficking underage girls to various [00:18:32] political powerful people in order to [00:18:34] obtain from them both money and [00:18:36] political power. And people say, well, [00:18:38] you know, just because there's no [00:18:39] evidence doesn't mean that it didn't [00:18:40] happen. Well, but here's the thing. [00:18:41] There is some evidence of this happening [00:18:43] with particular political people. And as [00:18:46] that emerges, all that means is that [00:18:48] that should be the search. The search [00:18:49] should not be for individual emails that [00:18:52] seem to kind of through a glass darkly [00:18:55] suggest that maybe your giant narrative [00:18:56] is true. What we actually should do is [00:18:58] follow the evidence wherever it leads. [00:18:59] So for example, the evidence is pretty [00:19:01] clearly leading to a scandal for the [00:19:04] UK's ambassador to the United States [00:19:06] one, Peter Mandlesen. According to the [00:19:09] Associated Press, [00:19:11] the Conservative Party is now attacking [00:19:13] Peter Mandelson because of his [00:19:16] relationship with Epstein. They said [00:19:18] that they would force a vote in [00:19:19] Parliament calling for the release of [00:19:20] emails and other messages related to [00:19:22] Mandlesson's appointment in 2024. [00:19:25] Prime Minister Kier Starmer said, "I [00:19:27] intend to make sure all of the material [00:19:29] is published." Starr said that Mandlesen [00:19:31] had lied repeatedly to officials about [00:19:32] his relationship with Epstein and had [00:19:34] betrayed our country, our parliament, [00:19:35] and my party. and he said he regretted [00:19:37] having appointed Mandelen. So [00:19:39] Mandlesson, 72, was fired in September [00:19:41] from his job as envoy in Washington [00:19:43] after emails were published showing he [00:19:45] maintained a friendship with Epstein [00:19:46] following the late financier's 2008 [00:19:48] conviction for sex offenses involving a [00:19:50] minor. Epstein died by suicide in a jail [00:19:52] in 2019. Obviously, Mandlesson resigned [00:19:54] from the House of Lords and faces a [00:19:56] police investigation for alleged [00:19:57] misconduct in public office. A trove of [00:20:00] documents released by the DOJ suggested [00:20:02] Mandlesson may have shared sensitive [00:20:04] information with Epste when he was a [00:20:05] government minister a decade and a half [00:20:07] ago. In 2009, for example, he appears to [00:20:09] have told Jeffrey Epstein he would lobby [00:20:11] other members of the government to [00:20:12] reduce attacks on bankers bonuses and [00:20:14] passed on an internal government report [00:20:16] discussing a potential sale of UK [00:20:17] government assets. The following year, [00:20:19] he appears to have tipped off Jeffrey [00:20:21] Epstein about an imminent bailout of the [00:20:22] European single currency. [00:20:25] The newly released files also suggest [00:20:27] that back in 2003 2004 Epstein sent [00:20:29] three payments totaling 75 grand to [00:20:31] accounts linked to Mandelen or his [00:20:33] partner Ronaldo Avia Dilva. [00:20:37] Misconduct in public office carries a [00:20:38] maximum sentence of life in prison. So [00:20:41] why is this important? Well, I mean [00:20:42] obviously it's important because now you [00:20:45] have emerging evidence that this person [00:20:47] was in league with Jeffrey Epstein and [00:20:49] engaged in actual violation of law. The [00:20:52] same thing seems to be true increasingly [00:20:54] of ex-prince Andrew. [00:20:56] Apparently, according to the UK son, the [00:20:58] former Duke of York is understood to [00:21:00] have been booted out earlier than [00:21:01] planned from the royal lodge after his [00:21:04] brother King Charles became increasingly [00:21:05] concerned with shocking revelations [00:21:07] about Prince Andrew. There are pictures, [00:21:08] of course, of Prince Andrew with [00:21:10] unidentified women on Epstein Island. [00:21:14] Andrew left the property on Monday with [00:21:16] work to clear out the mansion now [00:21:17] seemingly underway in the wake of his [00:21:18] departure. [00:21:20] In one email, Andrew told Jeffrey [00:21:22] Epstein he wanted to be his pet. He [00:21:24] wrote in December 2010, quote, "Kate has [00:21:26] agreed to a deal in London, "It's down [00:21:27] to you to bring Jay over the line, "God, [00:21:29] it's cold and dankare. Wish I was still [00:21:31] a pet in your family." [00:21:34] It also emerged that Sarah Ferguson [00:21:36] emailed Epstein in July 2010, claiming [00:21:38] she was being hung out to dry, and no [00:21:39] woman has ever left the royal family [00:21:40] with her head after appearing to accept [00:21:42] cash for cash for access to ex-husband [00:21:44] Andrew, 65. So again, there is evidence [00:21:48] of particular people doing particular [00:21:49] things and that's the standard, right? [00:21:51] The standard should not be narrative [00:21:52] rumor. The standard should not be [00:21:56] sort of these these gigantic accusations [00:21:58] about worldwide conspiracies. The the [00:22:00] standard should be the evidence. Again, [00:22:01] we have lots and lots of documents, tons [00:22:03] and t legitimately millions of pages of [00:22:06] documents. So the standard should now be [00:22:08] what is the evidence for each individual [00:22:11] who is named in these cases. That of [00:22:12] course is the Department of Justice's [00:22:14] standard. The the bigger narrative that [00:22:16] certainly is substantiated is that [00:22:18] Jeffrey Epste was hobnobbing with some [00:22:19] of the richest and most powerful people [00:22:21] on planet Earth. [00:22:24] And part of that was undoubtedly him [00:22:26] procuring the services of sex sex [00:22:28] workers, prostitutes for these people. [00:22:30] And not only that, many of them were [00:22:32] showing up at his island or at his [00:22:34] parties in order to engage in their [00:22:38] worst ids. [00:22:41] That's that's bad enough. I'm not sure [00:22:42] why we need, you know, the the sort of [00:22:44] broader narrative aside from the [00:22:46] conspiratorial that a small cadre of [00:22:49] people running international politics [00:22:51] were being were being involved in a in a [00:22:55] child sex trafficking ring there. [00:22:56] Therefore, he could blackmail them for [00:22:58] compromat and control world politics. [00:23:00] When that's substantiated, happy to [00:23:02] report on it. Has not yet been [00:23:03] substantiated. So, we stick to the [00:23:04] evidence here on this show. [00:23:07] But informal networks of power are very [00:23:09] real. Those definitely exist. And was [00:23:11] Jeffrey Epstein part of that informal [00:23:13] network of power? Of course. [00:23:15] According to the Wall Street Journal, [00:23:16] Casey Wasserman was in Italy for the [00:23:18] Winter Olympics, scheduled to make a [00:23:19] presentation to the International [00:23:21] Olympic Committee on the progress of the [00:23:22] 2028 Los Angeles Games. Peter Atia, the [00:23:25] longetivity doctor with cult followers [00:23:27] in a bestselling book, was ded into a [00:23:28] new role as a CBS News contributor. [00:23:30] Brett Ratner was promoting Melania, his [00:23:32] first film since 2017. All three men had [00:23:35] reached or returned to the pinnacle of [00:23:36] their industries in February 2026. and [00:23:38] all three apparently had secrets in the [00:23:40] Epstein files. Flirtatious email [00:23:42] exchanges between Wasserman and Glain [00:23:43] Maxwell from 2003 were among the files [00:23:46] released by the DOJ. Abia's name [00:23:48] appeared more than 1700 times in the [00:23:49] documents with correspondence showing he [00:23:51] maintained a relationship with Epstein [00:23:53] through 2019. 20 undated photos showed [00:23:55] Ratner hanging around with Epste at his [00:23:57] Manhattan townhouse. The two men with [00:23:59] their arms wrapped around women whose [00:24:00] identities are currently redacted. [00:24:03] These interactions have largely escaped [00:24:04] scrutiny, says the Wall Street Journal. [00:24:06] The Epstein saga has generated headlines [00:24:08] about people ranging from former [00:24:09] President Bill Clinton to Prince Andrew. [00:24:12] Clinton has now been called to testify [00:24:14] before Congress. While the files contain [00:24:16] millions of pages, many of the people in [00:24:17] them aren't former royals or former [00:24:18] presidents. Their executive doctors, [00:24:20] lawyers, dealmakers at the tops of their [00:24:22] fields. [00:24:24] They're now public messages and [00:24:25] photographs, says the Wall Street [00:24:26] Journal reveal just how intricately [00:24:28] Epstein spun his web of influence and [00:24:30] how he traded on his connections to [00:24:31] amass wealth and powerful friends. [00:24:34] The files also show some people sought [00:24:36] the counsel and companionship of [00:24:37] Epstein, sometimes even after he plead [00:24:39] guilty to soliciting a minor for [00:24:41] prostitution in 2008. [00:24:44] Wasserman and Natia said they regretted [00:24:45] their email exchanges and didn't know [00:24:47] about Epstein's crimes. Rner said the [00:24:49] photos were from 20 years ago. The woman [00:24:50] in the photos was his then fiance and he [00:24:52] didn't really know Epstein. [00:24:55] So again, the these sorts of [00:24:58] celebrity interactions with Epstein were [00:25:01] very common. Does that mean that all of [00:25:03] them were controlled by Epste? No. Does [00:25:04] it mean that all of them were were [00:25:06] trafficked to by Epstein? No. That [00:25:08] evidence is not there. Does it mean that [00:25:09] all these people were hanging out [00:25:10] together? Sure. Is that bad? Absolutely. [00:25:14] But it is important to tease out the [00:25:16] various strands if we wish to be [00:25:17] accurate about what exactly was was [00:25:19] going on. Speaking of the Clintons, Bill [00:25:22] Clinton has now been called to testify [00:25:24] before Congress. According to the New [00:25:26] York Post's Michael Goodwin, at first [00:25:28] glance, the decision by Bill and Hillary [00:25:30] Clinton to drop their long resistance [00:25:32] and agree to testify before a GOP [00:25:33] controlled House panel about Jeffrey [00:25:35] Epstein looks like a huge defeat for [00:25:36] them. And it is since the Clinton's [00:25:38] separate appearances scheduled to take [00:25:40] place in public later this month are [00:25:41] certain to turn into circus-like [00:25:43] spectacles that will keep embarrassment [00:25:45] and scorn on the former first couple. [00:25:46] Yet, it's worth noting it wasn't the [00:25:48] goodness of their hearts that led the [00:25:49] Clintons to give in to the congressional [00:25:50] demand to testify under oath about [00:25:52] Epstein. They did it only because they [00:25:54] were facing prosecution by the DOJ on [00:25:57] criminal charges of contempt of [00:25:58] Congress. [00:26:01] So they decided that they are going to [00:26:03] testify. It will indeed be a circus. [00:26:06] Representative James Comr, the Kentucky [00:26:07] Republican who chairs the House [00:26:08] oversight panel, said, quote, "No one is [00:26:10] above the law, and that includes the [00:26:11] Clintons. Once it became clear the House [00:26:13] would hold them in contempt, the [00:26:14] Clintons completely caved and will [00:26:15] appear for transcribed filmed [00:26:17] depositions this month." Okay. Now, I [00:26:19] know a lot of Republicans are very [00:26:21] excited about all of this. I guarantee [00:26:22] you nothing of merit is going to emerge [00:26:25] in those hearings. Nothing. Bill Clinton [00:26:28] is incredibly squirrely. So is Hillary. [00:26:29] The idea they're going to get up there [00:26:31] and suddenly start attesting to their [00:26:33] sexual relationships with people that [00:26:36] Epstein was trafficking to them. The [00:26:38] chances of that are zero. Not only that, [00:26:40] my guess is that the Clintons now see [00:26:42] themselves not only as quote unquote [00:26:43] wrong victims in this circumstance. My [00:26:45] guess is they are going to flip this on [00:26:47] Trump. My guess is that they will get [00:26:48] out there. Democrats are on these [00:26:50] panels, too. And Democrats will then ask [00:26:51] Bill Clinton about Donald Trump's [00:26:53] relationships with Jeffrey Epstein, [00:26:55] which I assume is why Democrats are very [00:26:58] excited about the Epstein files [00:26:59] themselves. [00:27:01] Now, President Trump, for his part, [00:27:03] again, because he traveled in these [00:27:04] circles, he knew Jeffrey Epste, he knew [00:27:07] the Clintons, he was one of the rich and [00:27:09] famous. And again, this is why we have [00:27:10] to be careful about what you accuse [00:27:12] people of. What you accuse people of [00:27:14] actually matters. I know we live in a [00:27:16] country where apparently that no longer [00:27:17] matters, but if you're going to accuse [00:27:19] people of specific relationships, [00:27:20] actions, and possibly criminal activity, [00:27:24] you should probably evidence that. So, [00:27:25] President Trump was grilled by Caitlyn [00:27:28] Collins of CNN yesterday, and he did not [00:27:31] take it kindly to it over the Epstein [00:27:32] files. [00:27:34] >> What would you say to people justice, [00:27:37] Mr. President? [00:27:37] >> Something that people care about. Yeah. [00:27:39] What What would you say? Go ahead. [00:27:40] >> What would you What would you say to the [00:27:41] survivors who [00:27:43] >> You are the worst reporter. No wonder to [00:27:45] see CNN has no ratings because of people [00:27:47] like you. You know, she's a young woman. [00:27:49] I don't think I've ever seen you smile. [00:27:51] I've known you for 10 years. I don't [00:27:54] think I've ever seen a smile on your [00:27:55] face. [00:27:56] >> You know why you know why you're not [00:27:58] smiling? Cuz you know you're not telling [00:27:59] the truth and you're you're a very [00:28:02] dishonest organization and they should [00:28:04] be ashamed of you. Okay. homosexual [00:28:08] healthare [00:28:10] >> obviously has made a lot of headlines [00:28:12] yesterday because the president saying [00:28:13] to a woman that she should probably [00:28:15] smile more and she's asking about sexual [00:28:18] abuse of women on Epstein Island not not [00:28:21] a great look what President Trump is [00:28:23] upset about and he said it in this [00:28:24] exchange a little bit earlier is that he [00:28:26] wants to talk about actual issues not [00:28:28] about the people who are chumming around [00:28:30] with Jeffrey Epste without criminal [00:28:32] charges attached or the sort of bad [00:28:34] behavior in which people are engag that [00:28:36] was noncriminal in nature. And I don't [00:28:39] think the president is is wrong about [00:28:40] that. Frankly, so many things as always [00:28:43] can be true at once. Jeffrey Epste, one [00:28:45] of the world's worst human beings, [00:28:46] deserved whatever happened to him. 100%. [00:28:50] Some of the people with whom he was [00:28:51] associating were surely involved in [00:28:54] crimes. We have to actually peg down [00:28:56] which people were involved in what [00:28:57] crime. the broader again conspiracy [00:29:00] theories that Jeffrey Epstein was the [00:29:02] great wizard at top world politics or [00:29:05] was being wizarded on behalf of foreign [00:29:07] governments that has yet to be [00:29:08] evidenced. if it is trending toward one [00:29:10] direction in terms of evidence would [00:29:11] actually trend toward Russia. But that [00:29:14] that sort of that sort of speculation is [00:29:16] just that pure speculation. [00:29:19] And I think that some of the eagerness [00:29:20] that people have around this sort of [00:29:21] stuff, some of it is obviously puran and [00:29:23] some of it is is the same interest that [00:29:24] people had around the diddy parties. Who [00:29:26] was there? What were they doing? But [00:29:29] some of it has to do with a mindset that [00:29:31] that has now spread in our political [00:29:33] discourse that basically says that you [00:29:34] are not in control of your own life. All [00:29:36] the systems are rigged and therefore [00:29:38] anything that goes wrong in life must be [00:29:39] attributable to some sort of cadre of [00:29:41] evil elites who are controlling [00:29:43] everything in your life secretly. And by [00:29:45] the way, they happen to be pedophiles. [00:29:47] You saw the similar theory play out with [00:29:49] regard to Pizzagate, for example. [00:29:52] Now again, Jeffrey Epste was a pedophile [00:29:55] and that's why he was in jail and that [00:29:57] is presumably why, according to the [00:29:59] available evidence, he hanged himself. [00:30:01] But that is not the same thing as the [00:30:03] broader conspiracy theory that some sort [00:30:05] of cadre of super elite pedophiles is [00:30:07] running America, running global [00:30:08] politics. [00:30:10] That that theory, shall we say, has yet [00:30:12] to be evidenced. And calling for [00:30:14] evidence of theories is not in fact [00:30:17] support for the people who are involved [00:30:18] in the crimes alleged. It is the [00:30:21] baseline standard for reason and logic [00:30:24] in any sort of political or legal [00:30:25] coverage. Or at least it should be [00:30:27] because doing otherwise is frankly [00:30:29] irresponsible. All right. And meanwhile, [00:30:32] the government shutdown was avoided [00:30:34] yesterday. [00:30:36] The the president was was quite happy [00:30:38] about that. He announced that the [00:30:40] government shutdown had been avoided [00:30:42] yesterday in the oval. [00:30:45] >> This bill is a great victory for the [00:30:47] American people. Instead of a bloated [00:30:50] and wasteful omnibus monstrosity full of [00:30:53] special interest handouts, we've [00:30:56] succeeded in passing a fiscally [00:30:58] responsible package that actually cuts [00:31:00] wasteful federal spending while [00:31:03] supporting critical programs for the [00:31:05] safety, security, and prosperity of the [00:31:07] American people. [00:31:10] Okay. So again, President Trump [00:31:12] pressured Republicans into into not [00:31:14] pushing forward the SAVE Act on the back [00:31:15] of the sort of government shutdown [00:31:17] threat. He was right to do so. [00:31:18] Democrats, by the way, are still talking [00:31:20] about another government shutdown. [00:31:22] According to the Washington Post, [00:31:23] Congress is staring down yet another [00:31:24] partial government shutdown in 10 days [00:31:26] unless Democrats strike a deal with [00:31:28] President Trump and Republicans over new [00:31:30] restrictions on federal immigration [00:31:31] authorities. And some key lawmakers in [00:31:33] both parties are not optimistic. [00:31:34] Democrats are demanding that Republicans [00:31:36] agree to a range of accountability [00:31:38] measures. According to the Washington [00:31:39] Post to reign in personnel from ICE and [00:31:42] other agencies, Democratic lawmakers are [00:31:44] seeking tighter rules governing the use [00:31:46] of warrants. Again, if they're asking [00:31:47] for only judicial warrants can be used [00:31:48] by ICE, that means the end of [00:31:50] immigration enforcement in the United [00:31:51] States and they know it. Independent [00:31:53] investigations of alleged misconduct, [00:31:55] which of course would violate, I assume, [00:31:56] union rules. A ban on masks for federal [00:31:58] immigration agents, again, a [00:31:59] non-starter, and a requirement for them [00:32:00] to wear body cameras, a thing that [00:32:02] Christine Nome says they are already [00:32:03] going to be doing. Senator James [00:32:05] Langford of Oklahoma has been slamming [00:32:07] Democrats for their absurd demands. [00:32:10] >> Obviously, this is a group of people [00:32:11] that just don't like President Trump, [00:32:12] period. And whatever he's for, they're [00:32:14] against, and they're trying to be able [00:32:15] to find a way to to drive a wedge. We've [00:32:17] got very radical leftist protesters that [00:32:19] are literally jumping in the way of law [00:32:21] enforcement. When they're arresting [00:32:22] someone that is a criminal alien, that [00:32:24] has had a DUI, that has had a rape, that [00:32:26] has had a murder, whatever it may be, [00:32:28] they're jumping in the way and trying to [00:32:29] be able to defend them. That's not where [00:32:31] the American people are. The American [00:32:33] people don't like the chaos. Uh they [00:32:35] want to be able to have a a national [00:32:37] security that they can actually trust on [00:32:39] it. And what Democrats are asking for is [00:32:41] a sanctuary country, not just sanctuary [00:32:43] cities. And Republicans are absolutely [00:32:45] going to have none of that. We we are [00:32:47] not going to just give up enforcement [00:32:49] across the country. Let's do it the [00:32:51] right way. [00:32:52] >> Do it professional, but actually have [00:32:54] enforcement and not just ignore the [00:32:56] obvious. [00:32:58] >> Okay. Meanwhile, Democrats are stuck [00:33:00] because of their own positioning. They [00:33:03] are now stuck in a self-perpetuating [00:33:05] spiral of radicalism. That spiral is [00:33:07] being fed by culture and it's being fed [00:33:10] by politics. So, on the cultural side, [00:33:11] obviously, you have our cultural [00:33:12] arbiters that we saw at the Grammys on [00:33:14] Sunday. People like the estimable [00:33:17] political voice, Bad Bunny, talking [00:33:19] about the evils of ICE, Caroline Levit [00:33:22] from the White House, ripped into the [00:33:24] aforementioned Bad Bunny. [00:33:28] I think it's very um ironic and frankly [00:33:32] sad to see celebrities who live in gated [00:33:35] communities with private security um [00:33:39] with millions of dollars to spend [00:33:41] protecting themselves um trying to just [00:33:44] demonize law again law enforcement uh [00:33:47] public servants who work for the United [00:33:49] States government to enforce our [00:33:50] nation's laws. Uh, and you didn't hear [00:33:53] this same type of uproar from [00:33:55] celebrities in Hollywood when the [00:33:57] previous administration allowed an [00:33:59] invasion of our nation's borders and [00:34:01] allowed innocent women and girls like [00:34:04] Joselyn Nungare and Lake and Riley uh to [00:34:07] be killed and raped and murdered at the [00:34:09] hands of people who should have never [00:34:10] been in our country in the first place. [00:34:14] >> Now, meanwhile, the NFL commissioner [00:34:16] Roger Goodell, he picked Bad Bunny to [00:34:18] perform at the Super Bowl. There was [00:34:19] talk that Bad Bunny was going to dawn a [00:34:21] gown, which of course is just wonderful. [00:34:22] That's that's what you want your [00:34:23] nine-year-old boy watching during [00:34:25] halftime is some large dude wearing a [00:34:27] dress. Perfect. Well, the NFL [00:34:29] commissioner said, "We told him he's not [00:34:30] allowed to be political. We'll see. [00:34:31] We'll see if he sticks to that." [00:34:34] >> I think everybody and one of listen, Bad [00:34:36] Benny was is and I I think that was [00:34:38] demonstrated last night, one of the [00:34:40] great artists in the world. Um, and [00:34:42] that's one of the reasons we chose him. [00:34:45] But the other reason is he understood [00:34:46] the platform he was on and that this was [00:34:49] this platform is to use to unite people [00:34:51] and to be able to bring people together [00:34:53] with their creativity with their talents [00:34:56] and to be able to use this moment to do [00:34:58] that and I think artists in the past [00:35:00] have done that. I think Bad Bunny [00:35:02] understands that and I think you'll have [00:35:04] a great performance. [00:35:07] >> So we will see if that holds true but [00:35:10] the celebrity push continues a pace. [00:35:12] Billy Isish, you'll remember, she of the [00:35:15] now normal colored hair. Actually, she [00:35:17] said at the Grammys that no one is [00:35:19] illegal on stolen land. [00:35:22] No one is illegal on stolen land. [00:35:26] [cheering] [00:35:28] [applause] [00:35:35] And [00:35:38] yeah, it's just really hard to know what [00:35:41] to say and what to do right now. [00:35:44] >> Now, apparently the Tongva tribe has now [00:35:46] confirmed that Billy Isish's home is [00:35:47] situated on stolen land on its ancestral [00:35:50] hand and that she has not yet reached [00:35:51] out to them regarding her home. The [00:35:53] tribe said, "We appreciate the [00:35:55] opportunity to provide clarity regarding [00:35:56] the recent comments made by Billy Isish. [00:35:58] As the first people of Greater Los [00:35:59] Angeles basin, we do understand that her [00:36:01] home is situated on our ancestral land. [00:36:03] Is not contacted our tribe directly [00:36:05] regarding her property." Well, that's [00:36:08] unfortunate. That's quite unfortunate. [00:36:10] It feels to me as though she is selling [00:36:12] out. What a sellout Billy Isish is. [00:36:15] Unfortunately, these cultural arbiters, [00:36:18] they do have an impact on how top [00:36:20] Democratic politicians are thinking [00:36:21] about this stuff. So do legacy media who [00:36:23] have decided to go fully radical. When [00:36:25] we talk about the legacy media radical [00:36:26] spiral, the the feeding frenzy that is [00:36:30] everything from Billy Isish to the New [00:36:32] York Times and how that impacts [00:36:33] politicians. The New York Times has a [00:36:35] big piece out today titled a winter of [00:36:36] anguish for Minnesota for Minneapolis [00:36:38] children. I mean here is my question. Is [00:36:41] it for like all Minneapolis children? If [00:36:44] so, why? So the idea here is that if you [00:36:47] are the child of an illegal immigrant, [00:36:48] then it's difficult for you in [00:36:50] Minnesota. Well, it's probably difficult [00:36:51] for you all over, particularly if you're [00:36:54] the child of a criminal illegal [00:36:55] immigrant as opposed to somebody who [00:36:57] came across the border. That was your [00:36:58] crime and you haven't committed a crime [00:37:00] since. [00:37:01] But according to the New York Times, for [00:37:03] weeks, the Minneapolis area has been a [00:37:05] landscape of intense turmoil as federal [00:37:07] immigration agents face off against [00:37:08] furious citizens. But there's a quieter [00:37:10] upheaval taking place behind closed [00:37:12] doors as the city's youngest residents [00:37:14] attempt to grasp the altering of their [00:37:15] neighborhoods, their schools, and their [00:37:16] sense of security. Regardless of what [00:37:19] they might understand about the politics [00:37:20] embedded in their surroundings, some [00:37:21] things are clear. The adults in their [00:37:23] lives are weary and overwhelmed. [00:37:25] Neighbors are scared to leave. The house [00:37:26] bomb threats have been called into [00:37:27] schools. Events have been cancelceled. [00:37:28] Friends are missing from classrooms. And [00:37:29] parents have been taken away. Now again, [00:37:31] the vast majority of children in [00:37:33] Minneapolis are not the children of [00:37:34] illegal immigrants. The vast majority of [00:37:36] children are not implicated in any of [00:37:38] this. [00:37:40] But because of the chaos that has been [00:37:41] fermented by government, [00:37:44] the Minneapolis government, the [00:37:45] Minnesota state government, because of [00:37:46] all of that, that is why things are bad [00:37:49] for kids. But the New York Times is [00:37:50] proclaiming that infor that in enforcing [00:37:52] federal immigration law is in fact the [00:37:55] problem. And now you have more states [00:37:57] that are rising to meet the moment by [00:37:59] doing exactly what Minnesota did. [00:38:01] According to the Washington Post, [00:38:03] Maryland is poised to bar local law [00:38:04] enforcement agencies from formally [00:38:06] facilitating federal immigration [00:38:07] arrests. joining several other states [00:38:09] who have sought to use their local [00:38:10] authority to curtail the Trump [00:38:12] administration's ramped up enforcement [00:38:13] effort. Eight states have already either [00:38:16] prohibited or set restrictions against [00:38:17] local police and sheriff's offices [00:38:19] entering into 287g partnerships. That [00:38:22] that that is where they actually just [00:38:24] inform ICE if they take into custody an [00:38:26] illegal immigrant for a separate crime. [00:38:29] This is being encouraged by the media, [00:38:31] by our cultural arbiters, and people [00:38:33] like Tim Walls continue to encourage it. [00:38:35] Here was the governor of Minnesota still [00:38:37] maintaining that ICE has to leave [00:38:38] Minnesota. Now again, Tom Holman said, [00:38:40] "Listen, if you cooperate with us, if [00:38:42] you ensure that when you pick up an [00:38:43] illegal immigrant for drunk driving, you [00:38:45] tell us so we can deport that person, [00:38:47] then everything's hunky dory." Walls, [00:38:49] meanwhile, just continues to posture. [00:38:52] It's been a week since I met with Tom [00:38:54] Holman. Uh expectations have not [00:38:57] changed. This force must leave [00:38:59] Minnesota. the state of Minnesota and [00:39:01] the professionals nonpartisan judiciary [00:39:03] must do the investigations into the [00:39:05] shootings and other abuses of [00:39:07] Minnesota's human rights [00:39:10] and now again Tom Hman has made clear [00:39:12] that if in fact Minnesota authorities [00:39:15] cooperate then there's no problem in [00:39:17] fact the Mugan of Fox News is reporting [00:39:19] that Tom Hman has announced that 700 [00:39:21] federal agents will be pulled out of [00:39:22] Minnesota after he says he's made [00:39:24] significant progress with local [00:39:26] officials and says there are now an [00:39:28] unprecedented number of counties he's [00:39:30] communicating with ICE. He also makes [00:39:32] clear he isn't asking sanctuary [00:39:34] jurisdictions to hold criminal aliens in [00:39:35] jail longer than they normally would be. [00:39:38] He just wants the locals to give ICE a [00:39:39] heads up. [00:39:41] So, Democrats keep programming into this [00:39:44] though. Hman is offering them an offramp [00:39:46] and they are refusing the offramp. You [00:39:48] have people like Representative Dillia [00:39:49] Ramirez from Illinois saying that DHS [00:39:51] has to be totally dismantled. [00:39:53] We must have accountability and we must [00:39:56] bring justice to every fascist in the [00:39:59] administration. And that includes [00:40:01] Chrissy Gnome. That includes Steven [00:40:03] Miller and that includes Tom Hman. ICE [00:40:08] will be abolished. VHS will be [00:40:11] dismantled. And together we will get it [00:40:15] done. [00:40:17] >> And the radicalism spiral for Democrats [00:40:19] here. They may think that this is a [00:40:20] short-term victory. It is not a [00:40:21] long-term victory by any stretch of the [00:40:23] imagination, but the agitation goes ever [00:40:25] on. Joining us online to discuss is [00:40:27] Christina Buttons. She is a City Journal [00:40:29] investigative reporter and she has been [00:40:31] all over the anti-ICE protests and [00:40:33] agitation in Minneapolis. She has a [00:40:35] great piece over at City Journal titled [00:40:38] Inside Minneapolis's ICE Watch Network. [00:40:39] Christina, thanks so much for the time. [00:40:42] >> Thanks so much for having me. [00:40:45] So, you've been spending a lot of time [00:40:47] digging into the the network of people [00:40:49] who have been harassing ICE agents. They [00:40:51] say that they're there just to film or [00:40:52] to monitor. Very often, it turns into [00:40:54] actual obstruction of law enforcement. [00:40:56] What have you been seeing in your [00:40:58] investigation? How coordinated is all of [00:40:59] this? [00:41:02] >> Extremely coordinated and extremely [00:41:05] organized. Um this is you know a group [00:41:08] of people uh who you know purport the [00:41:14] organization to be just like a [00:41:15] decentralized spontaneous community [00:41:18] effort. Um, and I found that, you know, [00:41:21] it was actually implemented by uh a [00:41:24] national group that has been working to [00:41:28] implement ice watch across the US in any [00:41:32] area where there's been an ICE presence. [00:41:37] >> So, in your report, you talk a lot about [00:41:39] the States at the core group, which [00:41:42] apparently has modeled this sort of [00:41:44] agitation and interference strategy. [00:41:46] What is States at the Core and how are [00:41:48] they funded? [00:41:50] >> Um, states at the core is a national [00:41:53] organization, activist organization. [00:41:55] They're funded by the Hopewell Fund, [00:41:59] fiscally sponsored by it. And uh, this [00:42:02] is part of the Arabella Advisors [00:42:05] Dark Money, Progressive Money Network. [00:42:09] Um [snorts] they are responsible [00:42:13] basically for turning the ice watch [00:42:17] model into uh a framework that can be [00:42:20] kind of a national strategy [00:42:25] and [00:42:26] >> and what exactly is the the ICE watch [00:42:28] model that that you mentioned? What are [00:42:29] they actually being told to do? Are they [00:42:31] being told to interfere with law [00:42:32] enforcement? What are they doing that [00:42:34] that's law violative as opposed to [00:42:36] simply annoying? [00:42:39] So, the original ICE watch model was the [00:42:42] organizers of it were very explicit that [00:42:44] their intent was to interfere uh with [00:42:47] ICE operations. Um they're a little bit [00:42:49] more careful with their language now in [00:42:51] Minneapolis, but what they're describing [00:42:54] is essentially the same thing. They want [00:42:56] to slow them down and cost them money [00:42:58] and make ice operations inefficient. And [00:43:03] um you know they described scenarios [00:43:05] where you know if if the person that [00:43:07] they got away they were questioning [00:43:10] that ICE was questioning. If they were [00:43:12] able to get away then that that's a [00:43:14] success for them. But um there's a lot [00:43:17] more going on in these trainings and in [00:43:20] the signal networks than they let on. [00:43:23] It's not just about monitoring ICE [00:43:26] activity. Um, I think the trainings in [00:43:29] particular, they are pushing people [00:43:32] towards very dangerous confrontations. [00:43:35] They're in them. They're delegitimizing [00:43:38] law enforcement. They're encouraging [00:43:40] people to take risks. They're [00:43:41] encouraging non-compliance with ICE. [00:43:45] Um, and I think, you know, that's what [00:43:48] we saw with Renee Good if she was being [00:43:51] trained by these people. And it it seems [00:43:53] that she was because I I identified a [00:43:55] signal signal account that belonged to [00:43:58] her within the defend the 612 signal [00:44:01] chat networks. Um it's really just it's [00:44:04] no surprise that you know she behaved [00:44:06] the way she did and you know what [00:44:09] happened. [00:44:11] So, do you have any idea whether the [00:44:12] Trump administration, the DOJ is looking [00:44:14] into groups like defend the 612, which [00:44:17] as you say is sort of modeled alongside [00:44:20] the the states of the court strategy? [00:44:22] Are they looking into Arabella advisers [00:44:24] for for spreading money to groups that [00:44:27] if, as you say, are are spreading [00:44:29] violation of law? [00:44:33] >> Um, I'm not aware of what their [00:44:36] investigation entails. Um I I hope that [00:44:40] they are looking into these groups and [00:44:42] that my reporting can help give them [00:44:44] some leads. Uh they've the organizers [00:44:47] that sort of set up defend the 612 [00:44:52] in Minneapolis. They have taken [00:44:56] considerable steps to conceal their [00:44:58] identities and scrub their online [00:44:59] presence. Um, and they aren't really [00:45:02] making as many public appearances as [00:45:05] they were several weeks ago when I began [00:45:07] the investigation. [00:45:11] >> So, it also appears that anti-ICE [00:45:13] activist groups according to just the [00:45:15] news are receiving over $3 million in [00:45:17] funding from Sorosback charities. So [00:45:19] again, the the assumption that has been [00:45:21] made by many on the right that this is [00:45:22] not all spontaneous, that a lot of it is [00:45:24] organized, that basically you have [00:45:26] organizations that are going in search [00:45:28] of monsters to slay and and law [00:45:30] enforcement to obstruct. It seems from [00:45:32] your reporting and other reporting that [00:45:33] that is true, which which does give the [00:45:35] lie to a lot of the media coverage that [00:45:36] suggests sort of a spontaneous uprising [00:45:39] against ICE. [00:45:41] >> Yeah. I mean there's a lot of chatter in [00:45:43] I mean there's across the signal network [00:45:46] there's just thousands of people across [00:45:47] hundreds of different groups and they [00:45:49] all different purposes for different [00:45:51] neighborhoods and in like the discussion [00:45:53] groups they they frequently make um [00:45:58] comparisons between themselves and you [00:45:59] know resistance movements and and [00:46:02] comparisons [00:46:04] uh of ICE to being Nazis and how they're [00:46:07] resisting the Nazis. um they seem to [00:46:11] think of themselves that way. [00:46:15] >> Well, that is Christina Buttons. You can [00:46:16] go check out all of her work over at [00:46:18] City Journal. This piece is a must [00:46:20] readad. Christina, thanks so much for [00:46:22] your time. Appreciate it. [00:46:24] >> Thanks so much for having me. [00:46:26] >> Joining me on the line is Lynden Blake. [00:46:28] She's a Daily Wire investigative [00:46:30] reporter and she has been all over the [00:46:31] disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, who of [00:46:33] course is the 84year-old mother of Today [00:46:35] Show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie. Lyndon, [00:46:37] thanks so much for taking the time. [00:46:38] Appreciate it. Of course, Ben, this case [00:46:41] has been disturbing. The details are [00:46:43] disturbing. And I feel like everyone can [00:46:45] relate to this because if you just sit [00:46:47] there and imagine your mother, your [00:46:49] grandmother being taken in the middle of [00:46:51] the night, someone so vulnerable as 84y [00:46:53] old Nancy Guthrie, I mean, it just sends [00:46:56] shivers down your spine. [00:46:59] >> So, for for people who have not been [00:47:00] following this case, how is it [00:47:01] initiated? What are sort of the [00:47:03] background facts of the case? [00:47:05] Okay, so the background facts of the [00:47:06] case is sometime between 9:45 Saturday [00:47:09] until 11:00 a.m. Sunday, Nancy Guthrie [00:47:11] vanished from her home. Her church [00:47:13] friends didn't see her at church on [00:47:15] Sunday morning. They called the family. [00:47:16] The family did a quick search around the [00:47:18] house, the property, and then called [00:47:20] 911. So that was Sunday. Now we're [00:47:23] sitting here on Wednesday, day four of [00:47:24] the search, and the details continue to [00:47:26] pile up. The latest in this [00:47:28] investigation, there were two ransom [00:47:30] notes that we know of so far that were [00:47:32] sent to news organizations. one, a local [00:47:34] news station in Arizona. The other news [00:47:37] outlet was TMZ. That's the big story [00:47:39] right now is verifying these ransom [00:47:41] notes. The Puma County Sheriff's Office [00:47:43] is aware. They're looking into it. And I [00:47:46] thought this was an interesting report [00:47:47] that CBS did late on Tuesday night. The [00:47:50] sheriff's office was aware of the local [00:47:53] news station receiving the ransom note [00:47:55] Monday night. They were able to give [00:47:57] that to Savannah. They were able to [00:47:58] share that note with the family. But on [00:48:01] Tuesday during the press conference with [00:48:03] Puma County Sheriff Chris Nanos, he [00:48:06] wouldn't give too many details when [00:48:08] asked about a ransom note. At the time [00:48:10] he said, "We're looking into all leads." [00:48:12] Well, shortly after that is when TMZ [00:48:14] went public with their ransom note. And [00:48:16] in that ransom note, there were details [00:48:19] detailing NY's home, an outfit that she [00:48:22] was wearing and requesting millions of [00:48:24] dollars in Bitcoin. This on top of the [00:48:28] evidence that reporters have now been [00:48:30] able to see with their own eyes at the [00:48:32] house, the blood drips on the front [00:48:33] porch, the missing security camera on [00:48:36] the front door, the ring camera, just to [00:48:38] give you an idea of what we're talking [00:48:39] about when we say missing camera [00:48:41] footage. This is all making this case [00:48:45] even more interesting. the twist and [00:48:46] turns and time is of the essence because [00:48:49] when Nancy Guthrie first went missing on [00:48:51] Sunday, authorities said she needs [00:48:53] medication within 24 hours or it could [00:48:56] be fatal. She has cardiac issues. We [00:48:58] know that from the 911 call. She had a [00:49:00] pacemaker. So, these are all [00:49:02] circumstances on top of now what we know [00:49:04] more about the scene that just lead this [00:49:06] case to be a very a very shocking [00:49:09] disturbing one. [00:49:11] >> So, you mentioned the ransom notes. [00:49:13] Obviously, does law enforcement have [00:49:14] they given ind indication that they [00:49:16] believe that the ransom notes are real? [00:49:18] Obviously, if there are details in there [00:49:19] that that lends credibility to the [00:49:21] ransom notes that it's not just some [00:49:22] rando who's picking up on the story to [00:49:24] try and grift some money out of the [00:49:25] Guthrie family. [00:49:28] >> Yeah. So, the law enforcement says they [00:49:30] are taking this seriously. This is after [00:49:32] 24 hours or so being aware of the notes. [00:49:34] They haven't said that this is authentic [00:49:36] or that this is verified. This is a [00:49:38] person that has Nancy Guthrie. They [00:49:39] haven't gone that far. But the sheriff [00:49:42] said this was a threatening note. The [00:49:44] family needed to know. They're not [00:49:46] giving every single lead to the family, [00:49:47] every single tip to the family, but this [00:49:50] was one that was given to them because [00:49:52] it was a threat and they needed to know [00:49:54] about that because it was a note to the [00:49:56] family. So that's where we stand with [00:49:58] the ransom notes. Another thing that has [00:50:01] been brought up because of the press [00:50:03] conference on Tuesday was the [00:50:04] withholding of information. And I want [00:50:06] to give some contact context to that as [00:50:09] we're sitting here on day four of this [00:50:10] search and you're wondering why don't we [00:50:12] know more about the scene. Why don't we [00:50:14] have camera footage? Why don't we have a [00:50:16] better description of what Nancy could [00:50:18] have been wearing? All this stuff is [00:50:20] being kept close to authorities chest in [00:50:23] my opinion because they have [00:50:24] information. They know more than that [00:50:26] they're letting on. They have [00:50:28] information that they want to match to a [00:50:30] person of interest to a suspect. And [00:50:32] anything that they tell the public, [00:50:33] think about this. If they say there was [00:50:35] something at the crime scene that only a [00:50:38] suspect or someone that was with this [00:50:39] suspect would know, that hurts the [00:50:42] investigation when they're trying to get [00:50:43] this person when they're trying to use [00:50:45] evidence to frame that person. So, [00:50:47] that's being withheld. The camera [00:50:49] footage, there was an issue with it. Is [00:50:51] it on a cloud? Is it on a server? Has [00:50:53] the footage already been deleted by the [00:50:55] time that authorities got a hold of it? [00:50:57] It's being sorted out with the companies [00:50:59] that are in charge of this camera, the [00:51:00] companies that manufacture the camera. [00:51:02] And that footage is being withheld in my [00:51:05] opinion because there's something [00:51:07] clearly if that they see on the video [00:51:09] that again could match someone with this [00:51:13] case, someone that took Nancy and [00:51:14] they're having to hold that back. So, in [00:51:16] these situations, when it turns from a [00:51:18] missing person into more of a crime [00:51:20] scene investigation, you're looking at [00:51:22] stuff, the public can't know everything, [00:51:24] even though we want to know so much more [00:51:26] because this is a public figure. It's [00:51:28] Savannah Guthrie who is in millions of [00:51:30] people's homes every morning. And it's [00:51:32] her mother that has been on TV, that she [00:51:35] talks about, that she loves. So, [00:51:37] everyone wants a happy ending to the [00:51:38] story, but there's something in the in [00:51:40] these criminal cases that just can't [00:51:42] can't be revealed yet. [00:51:45] So, Lynon, there have been a lot of [00:51:46] rumors that that possibly more than one [00:51:48] person was involved. I know the New York [00:51:49] Post had a report from a a so-called [00:51:51] expert suggesting that that a group was [00:51:53] involved in the kidnapping. Have you [00:51:54] heard any indications about that? [00:51:56] >> Authorities will not say if this was a [00:51:58] group, if this was a person. They won't [00:52:00] say this was targeted. They won't say if [00:52:01] this is random. Things have been really [00:52:05] limited. And I think that's the [00:52:06] frustrating part. And and I I don't mean [00:52:09] this in a necessarily negative way, but [00:52:11] the press conference by Puma County [00:52:12] Sheriff on Tuesday morning was a little [00:52:14] chaotic. Chaotic meaning they didn't [00:52:16] open up with a statement at all. They [00:52:18] opened it up directly to questions and [00:52:19] the questions are being fired at the [00:52:21] sheriff just left and right. And he he [00:52:24] didn't have answers and it when he was [00:52:27] asked targeted, random, no clue. Was [00:52:30] there one person or was there a group of [00:52:32] people? I can't tell you. Can you give [00:52:34] us a time frame of when you think Nancy [00:52:37] may have been taken? The pacemaker [00:52:39] disconnecting from the Apple Watch [00:52:41] around 2 am was brought up and the [00:52:43] sheriff was like, "Can't tell you that." [00:52:45] What I found most interesting, though, [00:52:46] too, was that the crime scene has been [00:52:49] cleared. And it was cleared, according [00:52:51] to reporters, as early as Monday night. [00:52:53] An Amazon delivery driver was able to [00:52:55] drop off a package on the front porch of [00:52:57] Nancy Guthri steps that had blood [00:52:59] splattered on it Monday night. And [00:53:02] that's interesting, too. either they [00:53:03] worked around the clock, they were able [00:53:05] to get every piece of evidence that they [00:53:06] know from that crime scene to feel [00:53:08] comfortable to shut it down or something [00:53:10] doesn't make sense there because [00:53:11] normally, as you know, it takes days to [00:53:14] process. You don't you don't necessarily [00:53:16] clear an active crime scene. And yes, [00:53:18] we're calling it a crime scene because [00:53:19] that's what the sheriff called it almost [00:53:21] immediately, but it's clear now that the [00:53:24] house has been turned back over to the [00:53:25] family. [00:53:26] >> So, Lynon, there is some breaking quasi [00:53:28] news this morning. Apparently, News [00:53:30] Nation reporter Ashley Banfield had [00:53:33] suggested that there might be some [00:53:35] rumors of familial insider [00:53:38] suspects in this particular case. What [00:53:41] are those rumors? What are we hearing? [00:53:43] >> Yeah, Ben, this is just in. She cites [00:53:46] that a law enforcement officer that has [00:53:48] great knowledge of this case told her [00:53:51] that Savannah's sister, Annie Guthrie, [00:53:53] her husband, Tomaso Cion, may be the [00:53:56] prime suspect in this case. that Annie's [00:53:58] car has been towed. It is now in [00:54:01] evidence. And this is huge news because [00:54:04] Tomaso, Nancy Guthrie's son-in-law, [00:54:06] obviously. And we have known that Annie [00:54:09] was the last person to see Nancy before [00:54:12] she went missing. The sheriff said that [00:54:15] Annie and Nancy were out to dinner on [00:54:16] Saturday night, and she is the one that [00:54:18] took Nancy back to her home before she [00:54:20] went missing. And Ashley Banfield when [00:54:23] she reported this, she did say, you [00:54:25] know, I'm I'm going to tone this down a [00:54:26] little bit and and let everybody know [00:54:28] that family is looked at first in these [00:54:30] cases. You're going to look at the [00:54:31] people that are closest. So in this [00:54:33] case, NY's immediate family. You're [00:54:34] going to question them. It is [00:54:36] interesting though that Annie's car has [00:54:38] been towed into evidence to be looked at [00:54:40] further. And again, you're going to [00:54:43] start with the family, then you're going [00:54:44] to work your way out to who has [00:54:45] familiarity with the house, who maybe [00:54:47] has worked on the house recently. But [00:54:49] this shocking news about Savannah [00:54:51] Guthy's brother-in-law now being looked [00:54:53] at as the prime suspect is something [00:54:54] that we'll continue to follow throughout [00:54:56] the day. [00:54:58] >> Lynon, really appreciate your time and [00:55:00] obviously you say we're going to be able [00:55:01] to follow it throughout the day. Where [00:55:02] should people tune in for that? [00:55:04] >> Yeah, we're going to have some updates [00:55:05] on Daily Wire's platforms. We're going [00:55:07] to have a podcast that's going to go in [00:55:08] depth in this case and again you can [00:55:10] look out at Daily Wire social media [00:55:12] platforms as well as my own at Lynen [00:55:14] Blake for updates. [00:55:16] All righty, folks. The show continues [00:55:18] for our members right now. Democrats are [00:55:19] insisting that no one needs voter ID in [00:55:21] order to vote. And it's also racist for [00:55:23] you to say that they do. Remember, in [00:55:25] order to watch, you have to be a member. [00:55:26] If you're not a member, become a member. [00:55:28] Use code Shapiro. Check out for 2 months [00:55:29] free on all annual plans. Click that [00:55:30] link in the description and join us. [00:55:35] >> What was it like, Merlin, to be alone [00:55:38] with God? [00:55:41] [screaming] [00:55:44] Is that who you think I was alone with? [00:55:50] >> Madin, [groaning] I knew your father. I [00:55:52] am yet convinced that he was not of this [00:55:54] world. [00:55:57] >> All men know of the great Talasin. [00:56:00] >> You are my father, that the gods should [00:56:03] war for my soul. [00:56:05] >> Princess Garis, savior of our people. [00:56:10] I know what the bull god offered you. [00:56:13] >> I was offered the same. [00:56:15] >> And [00:56:16] >> there is a new power at work in the [00:56:18] world. I've seen it. [00:56:21] >> A god who sacrifices what he loves for [00:56:22] us. [00:56:23] >> We are each given only one life. Singer. [00:56:26] >> No. And we're given another. [00:56:31] >> I learned of Yazu the Christ. And I have [00:56:34] become his follower. [00:56:35] >> He's waiting on a miracle. And I think [00:56:37] you can give him one. [00:56:39] >> Trust in Yu. He is the only hope for men [00:56:42] like us. [00:56:43] >> Fate of Britain [music] never rests in [00:56:44] the hands of the great light. [00:56:46] >> Great light, great darkness. Such things [00:56:49] mattered to me then. [00:56:51] >> What matters to you now, mistress of [00:56:53] lies? [00:56:55] >> You, nephew. [00:56:58] [music] [00:57:00] >> The sword of a high king. [00:57:03] >> [screaming] [00:57:04] >> How many lives must be lost before you [00:57:06] accept the power you were born to wield? [00:57:11] So cling to the promises of a god who [00:57:13] has abandoned [music] you. [00:57:14] >> I cannot take up that sword again. [00:57:18] >> You know what you must do. [00:57:21] >> Great light, forgive me. [00:57:30] The time has come to be reborn.