John Bickley (0:00)

New daily shows from the most trusted voices in conservative media, uncensored, ad free and available an hour before you can see or hear them anywhere else. More new series that capture conviction, courage and the human story. More documentaries that challenge the culture and expose what's really happening. And when we say premium, we're proving it with the long awaited seven part epic series the Pendragon Cycle. Rise of the Merlin the Legend begins streaming January 22, 2026, exclusively on Daily Wire. All Access members get early access to episodes one and two at Christmas percent off. Black Friday is our biggest sale of the year. It only happens once a year. When it's gone, it's gone. Go to dailywire.com subscribe and join now. The news cycle can be really hard to follow these days. It can feel impossible to stay up to date every day. So that's why I decided to make things easier by bundling together this week's top five stories and releasing them every Friday. The goal of this episode is to help you catch up on what you may have missed this week. So with that, here are this week's top five stories. All right, here's a story we haven't had a chance to talk about yet. New York Post reports a Michigan man fatally shot a teen who broke into his garage and is now facing a manslaughter rap, sparking controversy of the state's stand your ground law. Sivon Wilson, 17, was with six other, mainly teenagers, when the group broke into Dayton Napton's garage in White Lake shortly after 1am on July 8. Napton, 24, got an alert from his home security system, grabbed a 9 millimeter gun, ran outside, fired two shots into the garage through a windowless door, striking Wilson, according to prosecutors. As a group fled, Napkin fired five more shots before going back into his house, reloading his gun and returning outside. Wilson's father, Sean Madden, said Savon was running away and got shot. Another teenager in the group also was shot in the leg. White Lake Township police officers responded to the scene after being notified of two victims with the bullet wounds. With bullet wounds in Commerce, Township faces up to 15 years behind bars for the top charge. But Savon's family said they want Nap and charged with murder. Doesn't make sense that it wasn't done out of malice and for them to charge him with manslaughter when everything in the report suggests there was malicious intent, said Wilson's sister, Armani Madden. And meanwhile, a defense attorney says that, as you would expect that this is all this is that he didn't do anything wrong. And that also me mentioning that there had been other break ins at Napton's house before. Okay, so just to review, a guy in Michigan, Dayton Napton, was the victim of multiple burglaries. Apparently cops didn't do anything. Nobody cared. No one's helping. And then one night about 1am Savon Wilson and his buddies break into Napton's garage. He runs out, tired of being a victim, right? Tired of having his stuff stolen. Tired of being helpless. Fires through the door of the garage, fires a few more times as the criminals are fleeing. Wilson is killed by one of the bullets. It's not clear to me from that write up if he was killed. It says he was hit through the door. And then it says he kept firing as he, as they were running away. Was, was he killed from the initial shot through the door or was he killed with another shot when he's running away? Maybe that is known, but I didn't see it in the article. Regardless, now the same judicial system that had no interest in helping this law abiding citizen who was a, the victim of property theft, you know, a number of times will instead try to throw him in prison and destroy his life. So this is happening to him. He goes to the cops and says, can you do something? They say, no, we can't really do anything. And then he says, okay, well I, I guess I have to do something or otherwise I'm just going to get stolen from. Otherwise I'm just going to be a victim every day for the rest of my life. And, and now the system comes back around and says, oh well, you weren't supposed to do that though. So guess what? Your life is ruined. And meanwhile, if, if this had, if this had gone the other way and Siobhan Wilson had killed Dayton Napton in the process of robbing his house, he would not get 15 years in prison for that. And we all know that, especially at 17. He would have been out by the time he was like 25, right? He would have gotten like seven or eight years in prison. And so there's going to be a stiffer penalty for Dayton Napton for killing a burglar than there would have been if the burglar killed him. That's the world we live in. And needless to say, I find this all to be horrendously unjust. I am entirely on Dayton Napton's side with no reservation at all. How could you not be? I mean, what kind of twisted freak would you have to be to want to put this guy away? In jail for 15 years for trying to protect his own property. Now, unfortunately, I'm afraid that he may end up with 12 of those twisted freaks on his jury. I mean, who knows? But we'll see. And I don't want to hear, oh, but he shot through the door. He. He kept firing as they ran away. Okay, so. And I don't want to hear any. Well, you know, normally, but he took it a little too far. He was. Kept firing. So I mean, he doesn't know what they're doing. They could be running to get a gun, right? They could have a gun stashed somewhere. They could be trying to run in different. Multiple people. They could be running in different directions to try to surround them. They could, they could be doing anything. He doesn't know. He has no idea. All he knows is that there are multiple criminals on his property at 1am and he knows they're criminals because they broke into his garage. So by definition, they're criminals. So that's all he knows. He knows it's one o' clock in the morning. There are multiple. There's a gang of criminals on my property. They've broken in, and that's all I know. And so I need to stop them with whatever means I have available to me. The idea that, that it's, that it's the onus, like the onus is on the homeowner to show restraint in order to preserve the lives of people who have broken into his property in the middle of the night. That is just pure madness to me. I mean, the full benefit of the doubt should go to the homeowner, the victim of the crime. Full benefit of the doubt. Now, I admit that I'm extreme when it comes to this. I admit that, like, if it were up to me, you would essentially have carte blanche to respond however you see fit to somebody who breaks into your house. If it were up to me, legally, you would. It's just like, well, okay, you handle that literally, however you want. They came into your house to take your property. They came into your house with sinister intent. And you know, if it were up to me, and I'm in charge of. And, and you know, I'm making the laws. It's like, okay, well, I'm. I don't know. I don't ask, don't tell, that's you. You handle that however you want to handle it. Now, I'm not saying that you have moral carte blanche necessarily. There are things you could do conceivably in that scenario that would be immoral. But as a matter of law, if it were up to me, the law would be simple. Break into someone's home and whatever happens to you next is your fault. We're not getting involved, okay? The law isn't intervening to protect you when you decided to break into somebody's house. So if you, you know, if you ended up like kidnapped in the basement or something, if you stumbled into a horror movie scenario, okay, if you, if you made a mistake and broke into the house of a horror movie villain, sorry about your luck. If you call, if it were up to me, you call the cops and you say, I'm trapped in this basement. There's a guy with a ski mask and a, and a, you know, it's, it's like a Stephen King. And then we would say, well, how did you get in the basement? Oh, I broke in. Okay, well, click. All right, well, better figure out your way out of that, out of that bind. Probably shouldn't have broken into the house. What are we going to do? Send the cops to rescue you? We're going to put them in harm's way because you decided to break in? Sorry, no. Some lessons you learned the hard way, son. But I'm extreme, I admit. I mean, if we're up to me, if someone broke into your house and you like enslaved them and, and made them do your laundry and wash your dishes, the law would not intervene. I mean, that would be wrong morally, don't get me wrong, like, you should not enslave burglars. I'm not, to be clear, I'm not morally defending that. I'm saying the law just would not get involved. Full on Wild west situation for people who enter your home or your property illegally. Full on Wild west is what is what if it were up to me, that's what it would be. Extreme. I'm not in charge, so the law doesn't quite work that way, I realize. And yet even under the current law, under the current law, I still think this guy should not be facing any prison time and should not have been charged at all. He was reacting in the moment, protecting his property in reasonable fear for his life. No debate about that, okay? He shouldn't even need to prove. Well, what can you prove? You're in reasonable fear. Yeah, they're on my property. It's one o' clock in the morning, okay? There's a gang of people on my property. One o' clock in the morning. I'm in fear for my life automatically. So, of course, as anybody would be. So fear for your life. Person's on your property, they don't belong there. And he's acting in defense of himself and his property in a, in a reasonable way. And, and you could say, well he should have stopped shooting, but you know, he fired three more shots than he should have. Okay, whatever. I mean, benefit of the doubt in this case. And, and don't tell me that, well, they have no choice. The law is the law. Like even if I agreed that the law in Michigan makes it so that technically, you know, like technically he violated the law in Michigan, which I'm not convinced of that. But even if I agreed with that, so what are you talking about? The court system all the time decides to go easy on people, decides to give them a second chance. Right. Is empathetic, is compassionate, says, well let's understand it from there. But yeah, they broke, they broke the law. Yeah, they carjacked, but hey, you know, they had a hard life or whatever. The court system does that all the time. So, so for once, why can't that go the other way? For once, why can't they that go, why can't that be applied to an actual law abiding person who, who you would want living in your neighborhood? That should be the test. Would anyone, if they would just let this guy off the hook, would anyone feel nervous about having this guy living next to you? I wouldn't. Why would you just like, don't, I mean, are you planning to break into his house? I mean, if you're planning on that, then I'd be nervous about it. But mind your own damn business. Stay out of the guy's house unless you were invited and you got nothing to worry about. In fact, I, I'd prefer to live next door to someone who's willing to use deadly force on burglars. I'm willing to, I, I, I'd like to have as many people in the neighborhood as possible that are, that I know are willing to do that because you know what happens next? We're, this, this neighborhood's not getting burglarized anymore. Okay? The burglars are going to go other elsewhere. They're not coming here. And so that's the way that I would look at this. And also look, people are just, people are fed up with being victims. It's as simple as that. They're just fed up with it. Okay, before we get to the cancellation, here's a, here's something, something from the entertainment industry. Lighten the mood a bit. New York Times headline, 25 Movies, Many Stars 0 Hits. Hollywood falls to new lows. And the article says some were heavily marketed, many were championed by critics, most had star power. But not One of the 25 dramas and comedies that movie companies released in North America theaters over the past three months has become a hit, certainly not in the way that Hollywood has historically kept score. Some have played to near empty auditoriums, including after the Hunt, starring Julia Roberts Christie with Sydney Sweeney, and Die My Love, featuring Jennifer Lawrence and Robert Pattinson. To succeed in theaters today, dramas and comedies must have event status. Something truly elevated and special, said Kevin Getz and author of the new book how to Score in Hollywood, which looks at film bankability and then goes on. While success at box office is always correlated to how much it costs to make a film, Hollywood has historically used $50 million in ticket sales to over an entire run as a benchmark for a widely seen drama or comedy. By that measure, after the Hunt is a catastrophe. It cost an estimated 70 million to make and collected $3.3 million. And then there's this Jennifer Lopez one that got cost 30 million and brought in 1.6 million in ticket sales over a month, which is very low. So Hollywood films are flopping all over the place. And it feels like you've heard this story before because you have. This is a trend that's been noticeable for years, but, you know, it seems to be worse now than ever. Is this the beginning of the end for Hollywood? Is this, is this the end of the end? Is it not just the beginning? Is it actually the end? Kind of, kind of seems like it. And I will say that I, I differ from, I think a lot of conservatives on this and that. That's not something that I celebrate necessarily. A lot of conservatives are happy when they see, they see articles like this. Hollywood is falling. They're happy about it. I understand why. I share the sentiment at some level. Okay, so it's like I get it, but I can't really see it as a win because I think what comes after it will be a lot worse. That's the problem. I think what comes after, once hot, once the movie business is finished, the movie business as we have known it, you know, for the past 80 or 90 years or whatever, once that's over. And I think it basically is, I mean, it all, it almost is. Whether or not that's a good thing really depends on, okay, well, what, what's. What replaces it, what comes after it. And I think that what comes after Hollywood, what comes after the entertainment industry is not anything better. It's really just an endless stream of content on your Phone. I mean, that's what actually has replaced the movie business. Your phone. Random videos and content on your phone. As we've talked about the atomized, fractured culture instead of the monoculture. So that's what comes next. And all the endless pages, all. All of the proverbial ink being spilled over, over this question of what happened to Hollywood? Why is it falling? Why is it failing? You know, it's really this. It's not. It. It. It's not the quality of the film, mainly. It's. It's not wokeness. Right. There is. That is part of the problem. I mean, that hasn't helped. But it's not really that. It's actually just the phone, right? It's like it's the box that we all carry around, and we're just looking at it all day. Like, that's really why. And I would take Hollywood over the endless scroll. I would take the movie business over, just the people sitting there doing this all day on their phones, just staring at nothing. Okay, I would take. I. I don't think that that's better. I really don't. I think it's better to watch a bunch of mindless Hollywood popcorn flicks than spend all day just drooling while you stare at whatever the algorithm feeds you. So that's one thing. And. And, you know, so we. And like I said, we've talked about the death of monoculture. Everything is consumed by phones and algorithms. And. And that's what's happening. And any analysis of this that overlooks that point is overlooking the point. I will say, though, there's another factor, one other factor. It's not the biggest, but. But not the smallest either. And if we're talking about the box office, specifically, if we're talking about theaters, there is one other thing. Killing the box office, killing movie theaters, and that is the quality of the experience. And I don't even just mean the films. I mean, the actual experience of the theater itself has declined dramatically. Anecdotally, I have the same anecdotal experience a lot of people do, which is I don't go to movies nearly as much these days as I used to. Part of that is because there's not as many movies I'm interested in. Part of that is because I'm older now and I got a bun. I got a million kids and everything going on. But also, you know, on the rare occasion when we go, sometimes you go. And the experience is just ruined. It's like it's a miserable experience. And you're thinking, like, I Should have just watched this at home. Just wait, wait, wait three weeks and it'll be out on Netflix or something. I'll watch it there. The experience has declined in the same way that the experience of flying on a plane has declined. Going out to eat. It's the same thing that killed malls. You know, everyone says the Internet killed shopping malls, but that's not entirely true. That was part of it. But what malls were all already on the way out because the experience of going to them was not. It was just not a fun experience anymore. I mean, again, I have the same anecdotal experience a lot of people do. I remember growing up, we had a. We had a mall we used to go to and it was a family, family friendly. You know, you'd go and you eat lunch there and you go to the arcade and you check out some of the shops and stuff. And it was kind of a. You'd hang out there for like hours. It was a thing people did in the back in the early 90s and before that and, and then in this case, they built a metro stop, they built a subway stop right next to the mall. And next thing you know, the mall is now, shall we say urbanized. And, and now there was this friendly, family friendly mall. And now there's drugs and there's shootings in the parking lot and it's just not a place you want to bring your kids anymore. And it was just destroyed. There's this nice thing that people like to go and do and it was fun for the community and it was just ruined. It was just ruined. And so many things like that. So I think it's a similar sort of scenario. On top of that, social etiquette in general has declined. Everyone is afraid to enforce the rules. You know, audiences are obnoxious and loud and rude. And the funny thing is that everyone says that ticket prices are too high and that's what's killing the movie theaters. And yeah, at some level I get that it is way too much. But you could also argue that the way to save the movie theaters is to go the other way now to make movies even more expensive. Like get to a price point where the only people who will buy the tickets are the ones who actually want to sit down quietly and watch the damn movie. You know, raise ticket prices another hundred percent and it'll be way too expensive. It already is. But at least then you can be pretty sure that, okay, like no one is going to take the. Is going to buy this ticket and then sit down and be on their Phone. No one is going to go in there with a whole group and be loud, obnoxious. But I'll tell you what the problem isn't, as I've already referenced, the problem is not the quality of the films. And I know that that's the standard conservative response. Well, they just don't make movies like they used to. And I agree with that. I mean, I'm the one who's talked about how the movie industry peaked in 20 years ago and I believe that that's true. So I don't think that the quality, I think that the quality has declined, but I don't think that's the reason because. And this is like the uncomfortable truth that we, I mean, that's kind of lets us off the hook as an audience if we can say, oh yeah, well, you know, we just demand better quality content. Right. Well, but we really don't. And here, here's my proof. So I saw this yesterday that this is the teaser and we're not going to play vlog. But it's like just 10 seconds just to. So the teaser for the liveaction adaptation of Moano just came out yesterday, I guess, and people are very excited, I suppose. Here's a few seconds of it. I am a girl who loves my island and the girl who loves, loves the sea, it calls me. Okay, so that's already, you know, whatever. Okay, fine. So you. So a few things about this liveaction adaptation of M. First of all, it's not live action. Almost the whole thing is animated. You know, almost the whole thing is cgi. They're like two human characters. And you can already tell if you watch the preview, it's like. But you can tell that maybe two human characters, the rest of CGI and everything now. I mean, that's how they. The, even the water and the trees. Okay, if you see a shot of, oh, they're standing on a hilltop and there's grass, even that is cgi, they don't. They're gonna CGI a hill with grass, they're gonna CGI everything. Everything. So it's a live action adaptation, but it's not live action. It's actually basically a cartoon. So. So this is a remake of a movie that came out nine years ago. They're remaking a movie that I took my 12 year old daughter to see when she was 3 in theaters. So this is very, very recent. It is so recent that there are kids who will have seen both the original and the remake in theaters before they graduate elementary school. Okay, you'll have fourth graders watching this and reminiscing about seeing the original film way back in the day when they were in preschool. You know, they'll lean over to their younger friend in the theater and say, I remember, I remember many moons ago sitting in that exact seat watching the original film all those years ago. I think it was Humphrey Bogart. Was Maui. I believe so. It's very recent is my point. And they just put out like a sequel last year. This is a remake of a nine year old movie which has never been done before as far as I know. A remake that quick. This is a shot for shot remake of an animated film that just came out. And the remake itself is also mostly animated. So this is the least inventive, least creative, most uninspired thing Hollywood has ever done. And it will make $90 billion at the box office and we all know it, okay? It will earn more than like the GDP of Nigeria at the box office on the first day. It'll be a smash hit. I wish I could say that, oh yeah, it's going to flop. It's not. I mean it's going to be huge. So we all say that the box office is failing because Hollywood puts out low effort slop. And yet, well, the low effort slop is the only thing that anyone will go see. The low effort slop earns billions of dollars. Actually the movies that are flopping for the most part are original films. Everyone says, oh, Hollywood doesn't make original films. Well, they actually still do. It's just that no one sees them. Nobody will go watch those movies. No one will go see the movie unless it's a sequel remake. Right. Franchise thing. And, and that's just, that's the truth of it. So, you know, a lot of blame to go around on this thing is, I guess what I would say if you didn't see. Discover the extraordinary fragrance Ariana Grande REM Cherry Eclipse. Delight in Black Cherry jubilee, Sugared honeysuckle, Marshmallow meringue and glowing amber. Get the perfect Fragrance, Ariana Grande's R.E.M. cherry Eclipse. Exclusively at Ulta Beauty. It's Tucker Carlson's recent segment on Thomas Crooks, the 20 year old man who nearly assassinated Donald Trump live on national television during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania last year. There are a few important revelations that you should know about. The first revelation, which is not remotely controversial, is that the FBI has clearly been hiding relevant facts about Thomas Crooks from the general public. And by itself that is a national scandal that justifies completely gutting the FBI from the Highest levels on down. Even if you. Even if you firmly believe that Thomas Crooks was a lone gunman, and even if you believe the Secret Service was merely incompetent as opposed to complicit, the fact remains our government has been withholding important details about the assassination attempts on Donald Trump's life without any justification whatsoever. Now, we should not have to rely on Tucker Carlson or any podcaster to tell us that Thomas Crooks, for example, left a lengthy trail of comments on YouTube in which he openly called for political violence for several years. These calls were so overt, so disturbing, that one user wrote in response to Crooks quote, you're on YouTube threatening to shoot government officials. I sure hope the FBI is monitoring social media for violent nut cases now. It's almost too on the nose to be real, but that comment is still available on YouTube to this day. Thomas Crooks account has been suspended and all of his comments have been hidden. They're only accessible using the Internet Archive website. But the replies are still there. And yet, more than a year after the assassination attempt in Butler, we have to rely on Tucker to tell us about any of this, which is completely, overwhelmingly, unequivocally unacceptable. It should not fall to anyone in the media to tell us what Thomas Crooks was saying online and how people were reacting to his comments. We shouldn't have to rely on podcasters to tell us that Thomas Crooks decided sometime during the COVID lockdowns to completely reverse his political views and to begin openly attacking Donald Trump and his administration on social media. And we certainly shouldn't have to rely on podcasters to tell us that Crooks was in contact with a mysterious person who remains unidentified beyond the online alias Willie Tepes, who openly encouraged crooks to commit acts of violence, which you can see there. At one point, Willie Tepes wrote to Crooks, quote, authority obviously comes from the barrel of a gun. We have more guns than they do. There is no way we can avoid a war at this point, so you better just get used to the idea. Now, in common parlance, this is known as Fed posting. Willie Tepes is almost being too obvious about it. He understands that Thomas Crooks is a radical who's prone to violence. He sees that Crooks is posting about acts of violence against political officials. And Crooks wrote at one point that even the White House could be overwhelmed if enough Americans took up arms. And Willie Tepes is aware of all this, and instead of expressing concern, he encourages Crooks to go to war. Now, is it possible that this is just Some random Internet troll. Yeah. It's also possible that Willie Tepes was working with a government agency or a terror cell, either in this country or some other country, to groom potential assassins. In fact, given how weird Willie's comments were, and to be clear, he replied to Crooks multiple times, it seems very likely that he was trying to groom Willis Thomas Crooks. So what has the FBI done to investigate this? To investigate Willie Tepes? What have they done to figure out his identity? Why is Tucker's show the first time, literally the first time, that anyone in this country has heard the name Willie Tepes? That is inexcusable for about a million different reasons. It's not the FBI's job to determine what information is worth sharing to the public or what information they deem is important. Now, when it comes to the near assassination of the leading presidential candidate, no detail is irrelevant. If Thomas Crooks went bowling every week, we should know that. If Thomas Crooks loved the film Good Will Hunting, we should know that. And certainly if he was in regular communication with an anonymous person who sounded a lot like a Fed, encouraging him to commit acts of violence, we should know that too. I mean, at the very least, we should know something about this guy. But if the Feds had their way, we wouldn't know anything at all. And that's what we knew. Nothing until this week. On top of that, beyond the transparency issues, it would obviously help the government's investigation to raise awareness about these posts. Maybe someone somewhere knows who Willie Tepes is. And as long as Willie Tepes isn't the alias for a CIA agent or something like that, then you think your government would want someone to come forward and identify him immediately. But that's not possible. If they bury his identity and all information about him, which is what they've done. Then there's the fact that crooks PayPal account, for one reason or another, uses the name of an FBI agent who worked in Pennsylvania and who investigated the Las Vegas mass shooting, the one where no motive has ever been established. What exactly is going on there? We have no idea, because again, this is the first time anyone's hearing about any of this. Our government, under both the Biden administration and Trump administration, made the conscious decision to hide all this information from us. The only reason we're hearing about it now is that a random source got in contact with Tucker Carlson's team and tipped him off to Crooks online history. And because this information remains uncontested by the FBI several days after Tucker Carlson's broadcast, we can assume that it's all true. So let's pause for a minute here and zoom out. Let's really think about what's happening. Okay, this is the official narrative. Last summer, Thomas Crook, supposedly an untrained 20 year old guy with an angry, inconsistent social media history, managed to outwit the Secret Service gain access to a roof 500ft away from Donald Trump. And he wasn't particularly subtle about it. I mean, as you can see here in the videos that we've all seen, he was clearly visible running across the rooftop as Trump spoke. But the Secret Service didn't notice him. Even though random attendees in the crowd were suspicious, they noticed it notified law enforcement. Somehow, the Secret Service didn't have anyone on the roof because it was too sloped, we were told. And somehow the Secret Service counter snipers couldn't see any of this. They only shot Thomas Crooks after he unloaded several shots at Donald Trump, including a shot that hit Trump in the head. And coincidentally enough, the rally in Butler was the first time that the Secret Service had deployed counter snipers to a Trump rally during the 2024 campaign season. So, yes, the Secret Service snipers made their debut at the Butler rally just in time to neutralize Thomas Crooks after he got his shots off. So, in a very tidy fashion, Thomas Crooks was quickly erased from the picture. Nobody could question him. Nobody could put him on trial. And then a funny thing happened. No one really investigated Thomas Crooks. No one told us anything about his social media posts, his political views, beyond the claim that he was a Trump supporter, which was false. It took more than a year for us to learn that, in fact, Thomas Crooks was openly promising to commit violence on social media and that someone was encouraging him to do that. But the story gets even more strange from here. Less than 48 hours after Tucker's reporting, out of nowhere, the New York Post published this exclusive information. Quote, thomas Crooks used they them pronouns and posted threats of political violence and violent art on his secret social media accounts before he attempted to assassinate President Trump. According to sources who shared the suspected messages with the Post, Crooks had two possible accounts on DeviantArt, a site that hosts fan art has become notorious for its community of furries, people who identify as anthropomorphized animal characters and or are sexually attracted to them. One of the DeviantArt accounts linked to Crooks shared just one post, a repost of a towering, muscular female bodybuilder and a slight man in his underwear. Separately, the Post, Miranda Devine reported that Crooks quote, had an obsession with scantily clad cartoon characters sporting muscle bound male bodies and female heads. Okay, so this seems to be clear cut case of yet another psychologically disturbed mass shooter, Someone who has been indoctrinated into the LGBT cult and then turning to violence, which is not a particularly surprising development. As I've said repeatedly, the LGBT cult is the single greatest domestic terror threat that this country faces, hands down. I mean, in just the past few years, trans identifying terrorists have shot up multiple Christian churches and schools, quote unquote non binary mass shooters have targeted high schools and bars. A leftist living with a furry trans person assassinated Charlie Kirk in front of thousands of people. And now we have this. Put simply, trans extremism, LGBT extremism is an epidemic. And the pattern of trans and quote unquote non binary violence, you know, is not at all surprising, even though the media tries to cover it up. I mean, any man who identifies as a woman or as a they them is mentally unstable and confused. By definition, it seems nearly certain that all these people were on psychiatric meds. A lot of them were probably on hormones. So there's connections there that could be drawn. There's more we could be investigating there. And there's another common theme here as well, which is that all of these violent LGBT shooters probably develop their gender identity from consuming hundreds of hours of porn. I mean, that's the other commonality that you find with these types of things. The gender stuff is the product of extreme nihilism and extreme perversion. And a steady long term diet of pornography turns anyone into a nihilist pervert. And it's not a far leap to get from that to murderer. Especially if you have mysterious people in your comments saying, hey, maybe you should rise up and go to war against the government. That's why it's not exactly shocking to hear that Thomas Crooks was also a member of the they them cult who regularly consumed various degenerate forms of media. At this point, you almost expect the investigation to uncover something like this. Thomas Crooks is yet another violent LGBT linked killer to add to a very disturbing and fast growing list. Now, there were some concerns expressed by some commentators that perhaps this revelation was an intentional diversion. Diversion? Maybe a targeted leak intended to distract us from the investigation that Tucker Carlson just published. Which does seem like something the FBI might try to do. But that's not what happened in this case. Miranda Devine has made it clear that her source is the same as Tucker's and the information did not come from the FBI. Devine also provided more information on the Willie Tepes character, who was first identified by Tucker Carlson. Here's what Devine wrote. Quote One of the people Crooks interacted with online was Willie Tepes, a member of Norwegian neo Nazi group the Nordic Resistance Movement, which has since been designated a terrorist organization by the State Department. In one comment on October 5, 2025, more than a year after Butler, Tepes commented to another user that he'd been contacted by both Russian and American intelligence. People who ask you to contact them when they just as easily could contact you are Feds. This is how they avoid entrapment. Both American and Russian intelligence does this. I have chatted to both, tepes said. So there are only two possibilities here. The first possibility is that we're seeing a monumental, unforgivable failure by the FBI, a degree of incompetence that's simply staggering. Maybe they missed all these chats, maybe they didn't think it was relevant, just never, never got around to releasing them. So they're left to respond with pathetic rapid response press releases. When Tucker Carlson and Miranda Devine published investigative reports a year later. That's the best case scenario. That is the absolute best case scenario we're dealing with. The worst case scenario is almost too dark to say out loud, but I'll try my best. The worst case scenario is that the FBI has been hiding all this information about Thomas Crooks for the same reason that the Secret Service, supposedly the most elite protective force in the entire world, failed to secure the slightly sloped roof 400ft away from Donald Trump with a direct line of sight to his head. Worst case scenario is that the leadership of our intelligence agencies wanted Donald Trump dead. And if that's the case, then there's no reason to think that they're going to stop trying to kill him now. It's not my job or your job to decide between these two scenarios. It's the job of our government, out of an abundance of transparency, to absolve itself completely of any responsibility in the attempt to murder Donald Trump. They should be telling us everything they know, even if they don't think their information is relevant. But our government hasn't done that. And for that reason, it's not insane or paranoid to assume the worst, or at least to consider it a very real possibility. For one reason or another, we are not being told the whole story, or even an incomplete story. And it's way past time for us to ask one question why you might think it's difficult to find the single worst post on social media in terms of how poorly it's aged. There have been a lot of posts, probably millions of them, that haven't withstood the test of time very well. You could find posts predicting that Bill Belichick would lead UNC to greatness, since after all, he's a great coach and definitely not rich and famous simply because he had a roster of extremely talented and expensive players. You can also find posts from esteemed experts declaring with absolute confidence the world is going to end in 12 years because of climate change. And a lot of Those posts are 12 years old now or more. You can revisit Hillary Clinton's most infamous post where she wishes herself a happy birthday and declares that she is a future president. We all remember that one. All of these posts, to varying degrees, have not held up very well. But there's one that, even given this very stiff competition, clearly stands alone. And I'm talking about the following post from a woman named Olivia Newsy who currently works as an editor for Vanity Fair. And here is the post. Before taking the job at Vanity Fair, she worked at New York Magazine and also the Daily Beast. But a long time ago, back when she was just getting started in the industry in January 2015, here's what she wrote on Twitter. Quote why does Hollywood think female reporters sleep with their sources? And this was she was reacting to, I think, House of Cards at the time, the show House of Cards. Well, at the time it seemed like a pretty safe question for a New York born, Fordham educated, up and coming liberal journalists to pose on social media. She was calling out all those lazy, cliche obsessed writers in Hollywood. The ones who don't understand the obvious fundamental truths of the 20th wave of feminism. It's an absurdity, olivia stated, to suggest that female journalists sleep with their sources. In reality, we all know that female journalists get ahead through hard work, shoe leather reporting, clever, legit, logical deductions, and, you know, crisp, highly readable prose. That's just a given. Unfortunately for her bold proclamation, Olivia went on to become a journalist. And in that capacity, she didn't simply prove the old stereotype true about how women sleep with their sources. She acted like that stereotype was one of the Ten Commandments. She went on a one woman mission like a horny Rambo, to prove that female reporters only do one thing all day, apparently, which is sleep with their sources. Now you probably remember the story that broke last year about Olivia Newsey's romantic relationship with RFK Jr. So it was a clear conflict of interest. Newsy had been assigned to cover RFK's campaign short an article that was highly critical of Joe Biden. And the whole time she was engaged in some kind of inappropriate relationship with RFK Jr. The details of it are mercifully have not been disclosed fully as far as I know. According to Newsy, she was involved in a non physical personal relationship with RFK Jr and someone else described the relationship as an emotional and digital emotional and digital in nature. Kind of like a manti teow situation. Now, whether you find that explanation believable or not, it was obviously a highly embarrassing situation for everybody involved, including Olivia's employer, New York magazine, which quickly cut her loose. Now, speaking for myself, naively, I assume that, well, after this embarrassing episode, this scandal, she's in some kind of personal relationship with someone she's supposed to be covering in politics. I thought, well, she would, you know, she's gonna, she's done in the business. She'll flee into obscurity and she'll have no choice following the revelation that she was getting intimate with RFK Jr. Someone she was assigned to cover in an objective fashion. But apparently she did not flee into obscurity, nor did she suffer any consequences at all because journalism has no standards at all and therefore she now works at Vanity Fair. And she's apparently coming out with a new book where she makes herself a hero and victim of her own scandal. And the book is called American Canto. Now, not to be outdone, her ex fiance, Ryan Lizza, just published an expose where he reveals that Olivia also had a sexual relationship with former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann, in addition to, on top of that, former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford in 2020 while she was covering his presidential campaign. So here's what Lizza wrote. I don't do many dramatic readings for romance novels or anything like that, so bear with me here. I'll just read it as it was written. Olivia had just returned from a reporting trip. At least that's what she told me it was. And her Herschel backpack, the one with the flap that never quite closed properly, was tossed beside our bed, its contents scattered on the floor. That's when I noticed the sheets of Kimpton Hotel stationery that would alter the course of our lives. As I tidied up the desk, something on the Kimpton stationery caught my eye. I started to read. If I swallowed every drop of water from the tower above your house, olivia had written, I would still thirst for you. Unfortunately, the lack of a water tower on our Georgetown's home ruled me out, as the note's intended recipient. I flipped to another page and saw a name, the first line of an unfinished love letter to him that included enough details to confirm a physical relationship and the hint of some kind of falling out. My heart stopped when I realized who he was. I looked at the date on a reported letter to Mark. March 5, 2020. Just a few days ago, I called my agent. We have a big problem, I said. Olivia is sleeping with Mark Sanford. Close quote. And his article stops there. The big M. Night Shyamalan twist ending. Because I think like when you're reading it, you're supposed to think that he's talking about RFK Jr. And then turns out that, no, it's a different. It's actually a different politician that she was sleeping with. Now, after Ryan Lizza published this article, a lot of people rediscovered this exchange on social media. From back in 2019, Olivia wrote, I spent some time in South Carolina with Mark Sanford for New York magazine. And then somebody writes, hey, he looks happy. And Olivia Newser replies, I tend to have that effect. Well, now we know what she meant by that, just in case anyone was wondering wondering about it. But Liz's tell all didn't stop there. He also wrote this section about Olivia's relationship with Keith Olbermann, which is somehow even more horrifying. Quote I was used to cleaning up Olivia's messes. Not that long ago, I had helped her untangle herself from an unusual relationship with Keith Olbermann, the former MSNBC host. She had messaged him out of the blue. They started talking, and soon after she fled her unhappy home in suburban New Jersey and started living with Keith in Manhattan. He paid for her to attend college, outfitted her and Tom ford and some $15,000 worth of Cartier jewelry. Later, he covered her rent and furnished her apartment in a doorman building in the West Village. While Keith, who was 34 years older, was generous, there were strings attached. Olivia had concealed the relationship from me and other friends. But one day she told me everything. Too much, actually, and together we hatched a plan for her escape. Now, Keith Olbermann is of course, a grotesque, angry, bloated blob of a man who lives alone with his cats and spends his days sitting in a rocking chair, screaming out the window at random passersby. What Olivia found appealing about a man who looks and sounds like a giant half sentient wart, I have no idea. All I know is that Keith and Olivia together must have combined to create the most insufferable combination of human beings ever assembled on Earth. I actually feel bad for the cats that they had to live through that. So in case it's not obvious, just to summarize, this is a classic case of nobody to root for. A lot of very terrible people are cheating and lying and getting away with it scot free. And it gets even worse when you look at the excerpts that have been posted from Olivia's new book. And here's one of them. Again, I'm not a professional audiobook reader for a dime store romance novel, so I'm going to do my best here. But this is an actual excerpt from this book that she just came out, or it's going to come out soon. This is what it says. I mean to tell you of the canyon where voices carried, the place where monsters spoke to me, where I listened, where I found that, as fortune or curse would have it, I knew the language of monsters, where with news on my tongue and tears in my eyes, the role of town crier I interpret literally. I ran back over the hill to translate for those who could not stomach the thought of standing face to face with monsters, but who required knowledge of monsters as the monsters accrued ever more power as they revealed or converted ever more monsters among men. Now, I read through that a couple times. Not exactly clear what she's talking about. What I can say for certain is that Olivia Newsey's book is clearly like self serious, pretentious, melodramatic in the extreme, and very poorly written. Okay, News on my tongue and tears in my eyes. I mean, oh my gosh. And somehow that made it past an editor. I mean, do editors exist anymore? Is everyone just using ChatGPT? Have the editors already been put out of. Put out of business? I guess. How. How are you an editor? And you let that get by you? Not to mention a sentence that uses the word monster like 12 times. News on my tongue and tears in my eyes. Now, I guess if I had to come up with a compliment, I'd say it probably wasn't written by AI because AI, for all its horrors, isn't that bad. Like, even ChatGPT could probably come up with something better. It reads like a. Like a seventh grade girl doing an impression of Taylor Swift doing an impression of Cormac McCarthy. It is. It is unreadable, annoying, and incoherent, which is to say it's modern journalism in a nutshell. And as perhaps the last man alive who has not been involved in any kind of relationship with Olivia Nuzzi, I simply can't stand for it. And that is why Olivia Nuzzi, Keith Olbermann Ryan Lizza, Everyone else who's remotely involved in this sordid and deeply depressing soap opera are today canceled. For all the this episode is brought to you by. Jack Daniels Jack Daniels and music are made for each other. They share a rhythm in the craft of making something timeless while being a part of legendary nights. From backyard jams to sold out arenas, there's a song in every toast. Please drink responsibly. Responsibility.org, jack Daniels and Old Number 7 are registered trademarks. Tennessee Whiskey 40% alcohol by volume. Jack Daniel Distillery, Lynchburg, Tennessee Time that we spend on the latest political developments in the nation's biggest population centers, for example, the election of a Muslim socialist in New York City or the attacks on immigration officers in Los Angeles. It's undeniable that some of the biggest and most important stories are happening in much smaller cities and towns across the country. It's in the smaller locales that we're seeing some of the real flashpoints emerging, even though no corporate media outlet would dare to talk about them. What we are now seeing are very disturbing images that could soon define our national politics as large scale demographic replacement begins to take hold. And whatever you make of the disasters unfolding in places like New York and California, the decline of smaller cities is even more disturbing. So consider Dearborn, Michigan, population just north of 100,000. If you were ranking American cities by population, Dearborn wouldn't even crack the top 300. But the population that Dearborn does have is highly significant. Dearborn currently has a larger portion of Muslims than any other city in the US and it certainly became it recently became the first Arab majority city in the country. Fully 55% of Dearborn's residents say they have Middle Eastern or North African ancestry, which explains why Dearborn boasts the largest mosque in the entire continent of North America. Now, Dearborn, as I've said so often on the show, is in every way an Islamic capital. At this point, it is not an American city at all, except geographically. Dearborn has been conquered, and the few remaining Americans in Dearborn are now finding themselves surrounded by mobs of Muslims chanting Allah Akbar and telling them to leave the city. So this is footage that was taken by Nick Shirley, one of the few journalists who's willing to travel to Dearborn and report honestly about what he sees there. The footage shows Shirley attempting to interview an activist named Jake Lang, who was one of the pardoned January 6th defendants. But the interview doesn't go anywhere because at this point, Dearborn basically resembles Fallujah Watch.