Jan 6th Defendant Sentenced to Prison for Spreading “Misinformation”





Daniel Goodwin, a January 6 defendant, received a 60-day federal prison sentence for spreading “misinformation” on Tucker Carlson’s show. Liz argues that labeling speech as violent “misinformation” is a Marxist tactic violating the First Amendment, and sets a dangerous precedent.

Next, Liz discusses security footage from inside the Capitol on January 6th that challenges the Left’s narrative of protesters breaching the building.

The footage shows a door to the Upper West Terrace being opened and protesters being escorted inside by officers, challenging the Capitol Police’s report of a breach. Liz criticizes the Left’s accusations of insurrection as an effort to silence opposing views and criminalize political thought and behavior.

In other news, former intelligence official David Charles Grusch claims the U.S. government has retrieved unidentified aerial objects and evidence of extraterrestrial life. Liz expresses skepticism toward this claim, saying there is currently no conclusive proof linking these objects or spacecraft to alien life.

Finally, Liz addresses New York City’s installment of vending machines stocked with Narcan, crack pipes, condoms, and “safer smoking kits” around the city. Liz condemns the use of tax dollars to subsidize the drug habits of individuals. Furthermore, she argues the Left is using these vending machines to virtue signal and foster dependency on the government.

Show Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain typos, mistakes, and/or incomplete information.

Welcome back to The Liz Wheeler Show. If you haven’t signed up for my email newsletter, please do so. Go to LizWheeler.com/email, drop your email address so that you can get the latest news, all the information that maybe Big Tech doesn’t want you to know about. Go to LizWheeler.com/email. This is one of the most egregious stories that we continue to follow on this show. I always get a ton of flack for talking about this topic, even from people on the right. And I gotta tell you, I don’t fully understand why people are scared of talking about this. I understand that people shy away from discussing January 6th because the mainstream media has rather successfully vilified everyone who attended any kind of protest or rally on January 6th. What I don’t understand is why this has cowed Republicans and conservatives. I understand why people in the middle, maybe, or squishes or people on the Left who buy into mainstream media narratives about what happened at the Capitol and what President Trump said or didn’t say, and what words actually mean and the definition of violence. 

I understand why people that are kind of gullible and stupid and ideologically on the Left buy into that and refuse to talk about the reality of what happened on January 6th. But I do not understand why whenever we talk about the latest developments on this show, why there’s criticism from the right. My question to those who think we shouldn’t talk about this anymore is what should we talk about? What is it? What, what is important to this nation? What, what will this nation be? What will we have left of the country that we love if we don’t fight the battles that can sometimes be uncomfortable? A defendant, the January 6th defendant, by the name of Daniel Goodwyn, was sentenced this week to 60 days in federal prison. Now, this might not sound like a terrible amount of time. This isn’t 18 years like Stewart Rhoads was, was sentenced to after his conviction, 60 days in federal prison for walking into the Capitol. 

And that is all. He did not commit any violence. He did not commit any vandalism. He did not assault any police officer. He did not harm anyone. He walked into the capitol, and that is all. Now, you might be thinking, well, this is, this doesn’t make sense. This is incongruent that someone who walked into the capitol gets 60 days, and someone who didn’t walk into the Capitol but sent a text message with some unsavory words in them was sentenced to 18 years. And you’d be right. And if you’re, if you’re thinking this, there’s something very, very fraudulent at foot. This is why we have to talk about this, because what the federal government is doing, and the federal government is not some vague entity. This is, they’re not, they don’t have sentience. They’re not a human being. The federal government is staffed by both bureaucrats and the Biden administration. 

This is the strategy that they’re using to stifle our dissent. This is what they’re using to eventually come after anything that you say. Anything that I say that contradicts the narratives. So, yes, we’re going to talk about this because the reason the judge gave Daniel Goodwyn prison time will blow your mind. It’s not because the judge called him an insurrectionist. It’s not because the judge said that he was going to commit violence or that he did commit violence. The judge sentenced him because he went on Tucker Carlson’s show. That’s what we’re going to talk about today. So let’s get to it. 

Okay? We’re also, by the way, a little bit later in the show, gonna talk about aliens and the number one reason why aliens do not walk among us. So stick around from that for that. But first, we, we need to talk about this new ruling from this judge. Daniel Goodwyn was sentenced. He’s a, he’s a January 6th defendant. He attended the January 6th rally. He attended the January 6th protest. He entered the capitol on January 6th, and he was sentenced to 60 days in federal prison. He’s being credited with 21 days served, and you might be thinking, okay, well, how did he get 21 days in prison already served, and then now he’s sentenced to 60 days. So he presumably has what, 39 days left to serve. Listen to what happened. When Daniel Goodwyn was originally arrested and incarcerated, he was offered the opportunity to make bail. He was offered the opportunity to pay money and be let out until let out of his pretrial detention, until the trial until, or an if he was convicted. 

But just to give you an idea of the type of judge that was presiding over this case, this young man, Daniel Goodwyn, during his his his pretrial hearings, did not want to comply with the mask mandate of the court. He did not want to wear a face mask. He refused to do so. And on that grounds, the fact that Daniel Goodwyn declined to wear a face mask, the judge threatened to put him back in prison. This is the kind of judge presiding over this trial, a judge that wants to throw an American citizen in prison for not wearing a face mask. This is just setting the stage for what we’re dealing with. So whenever there, there’s a segment of the Republican Party, as I mentioned before, that doesn’t want me to talk about this, that doesn’t like when I talk about this, that always sends me angry emails when I talk about this. 

Liz, let’s move on here, Liz. This doesn’t make you look good, Liz. This is a conspiracy theory. Well, it’s a conspiracy theory if you, it’s a conspiracy, all right? It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s a conspiracy against people like you and me. And if you sit here with your blinders on because it’s an uncomfortable topic to talk about, then you may be next. You may be targeted just like these January 6th defendants are targeting. And how would you feel if you were in their position and nobody spoke out In your defense, how would you feel if the federal government was weaponized against and your fellow conservatives and Republicans were too worried about being labeled conspiracy theorists by the mainstream media, the same mainstream media that propagated Russiagate? How would you feel if no one used their voice when your voice was being stifled? I am not going to stop talking about this. 

This is a critically important topic that we talk about, and I, for those I I know most of you listening to this show understand, a few of you don’t. A few of the vocal minority don’t want me to talk about this, but let me tell you this. The judge’s name is Reggie Walton. Reggie Walton in sentencing Daniel Goodwyn when this is obviously is obviously some time after Walton, judge Walton threatened to put Daniel Goodwyn back in prison if he didn’t comply with a mask mandate. By the way, Goodwyn’s lawyer at the time said that the reason Goodwyn didn’t want to wear a mask is because he has autism and it makes him uncomfortable to wear a mask because of his autism. This is what we did to the American people. This is what public health officials and politicians did to the American people, including people who have learning disabilities, who have social anxieties, who have conditions like autism. 

This is what we did. Judge Reggie Walton after the conviction when he sentenced Daniel Goodwyn didn’t just cite his behavior from January 6th. He didn’t just say, well, listen, it’s against the, it’s against the law to go into a restricted zone to enter the capitol the way that you did. And I’m sentencing you with a misdemeanor because of that. No, no. That is not what troubled Judge Reggie Walton. What tru, what troubled Judge Reggie Walton was the fact that two months after Daniel Goodwyn was, was arrested, and after he made bail, he made a television appearance on Tucker Carlson’s show. And during his television appearance on Tucker Carlson’s show, Daniel Goodwyn fundraised for the defense funds for January 6th, defendants who many of whom were in pretrial detention, had no opportunity to pay for a defense attorney that’s not just given to them by the same government that’s prosecuting them. 

And because of that, judge Reggie Walton cited in his sentence, he claimed that Daniel Goodwyn’s wrongdoing included spreading quote unquote misinformation that continues to be disseminated. So now you understand why we have to talk about this, because the two things that happened to Daniel Goodwyn after, after he was arrested, once he was, once this court proceeding happened, the two things that happened is this judge threatened to throw Daniel Goodwyn in prison if he didn’t comply with a mask mandate. And then during his sentence, he cited the words that Daniel Goodwyn spoke, his participation in the free press, and he used the word misinformation, which is a Marxist word, attempting to redefine words and label them instead of just speech and label them as violence. This is a Marxist tactic that they, that they’re using, and they’re aiming this at us in, in so many different ways. 

But the purpose of this is that when I say something that they don’t like, and when you say something that they don’t like, if we go to Washington, DC to protest, if we, if we talk about topics on this show, they want to be able to look at this and not just say, well, that’s her opinion. That is, that is what she’s allowed to say. That’s protected free speech. That’s dissent, that’s political participation. They want to be able to look at what I’m saying and say, no, that’s violence. She’s inciting violence. And because that’s violence, we as a government, that’s our role. We’re allowed to stop violence. That’s our responsibility. They’ll say to stop violence. And so they’re engaging in this offensive against us trying to use the legal system and the court system to set a precedent that’s essentially a direct violation of the First Amendment, but a precedent of labeling words as violence. And that’s exactly what Judge Walton did. He looked at Daniel Goodwyn’s words, and he looked at his participation in the free press, and he said, that’s spreading misinformation and that that continues to be disseminated. And for that, you will be punished for that. You will be sentenced for that. You will serve 60 days in federal prison. 

It’s so unjust. And if it can happen, if it can happen to Daniel Goodwyn, it can happen to anyone. It doesn’t matter whether you were at the Capitol that day, whether you were in the Capitol. It doesn’t matter if you did something wrong or not. This is building a legal precedent that will be weaponized against all of us. Just for our words, mark my words just for our words. At the same time, we’ve recently been able to get access to more footage from inside the Capitol on January 6th. Speaker McCarthy gave videotapes from inside the capitol to John Solomon at just the news and to our friend on this show, Julie Kelly, and some of the video footage that we have seen thus far. And perhaps this will come as no surprise to those of us who that have been paying attention, who’ve been paying attention to this, this video footage further debunks the January 6th narrative that we have all been fed. 

Okay, so this security footage is from inside the Senate on January 6th. This footage ha was actually released. This is, this is a, this is the second iteration of release. And what I mean by that is this footage was dropped in a Dropbox. You’re probably familiar with this website with this website and with this app, you can transfer files. So a lot of this January 6th footage, the government, in order to pretend that they were being transparent, but in reality, to hide information from the American people, they dumped enormous files of video footage into Dropbox which left most of the American people with no capacity, no high powered computing system to actually go through this footage and see what we wanted to see. It was basically an unusable file that the government wanted to pretend that, oh, yeah, we gave it to you. 

We released it. It’s out there. It’s in the public. We’re not hiding anything. But really, of course, they were hiding information because this was nearly impossible for us to see. Well, fast forward to now when Speaker McCarthy gave access to John Solomon and Julie Kelly gave access to the video footage on January 6th, and this particular piece of video has resurfaced. So what you’re going to see here is you’re going to see a senate, this, a senate door, a side entrance of entrance of the Senate that the door was open, the door was open. And this contradicts, of course, the narrative that the Left has told us about January 6th, that this was breached, because this is how it was reported by the Capitol Police, that this entrance was breached. But in reality, if you look at this video, and you can tell me, after we watch this together, you can tell me whether these protestors breached this door or whether it looks like they were just invited inside. Take a look. 

The following footage was obtained from the United States Department of Justice. It contains surveillance video of the Upper West Terrace, doors of the United States Capitol on January 6th, 2021. Just after 2:33 PM police officers allow five individuals to exit the Capitol through the Upper West Terrace doors. At 2:44 PM a police officer in the bottom of the screen can be seen speaking to the officers in front of them and pulling them away, indicating to the crowd that they’re allowed to enter. The officers then turn their backs to the crowd, which indicate that they did not possess fear of the protestors. The officers then escort the crowd into the interior of the Capitol. 

So I ask you, you can make a judgment call yourself on this. Does this look like the Upper West Harris doors were breached as the Capitol Police reported, or does this look like police officers greeted protestors at the door, inferring or insinuating that they were welcome inside? Keep in mind, many of the protestors that surrounded the capitol on January 6th were unsure of where the restricted boundaries were. It wasn’t perfectly clear from some of the barriers. Some of the barriers had been moved, some of the doors were unlocked. This is the United States Congress is after all the People’s House, the general public is allowed into to go into the United States Congress. Sometimes there’s restrictions on when sometimes there’s restrictions on where, but it’s not a, it’s not a building where the rule is that people, everyday American citizens are not allowed to enter. And so I ask you, what did it look like in that video? 

Did it look like police officers greeted protestors, or did it look like those protestors breached that door? This is incredibly important because of, because of the narrative that the Left is painted, the narrative that starts with a premise that this was an insurrection, that these people were attempting to overthrow the United States Congress or impede the United States Congress in order to overthrow the United States government. There is simply no evidence of that. All the evidence contradicts that the evidence shows exactly the opposite. The evidence shows that yes, some protestors got too wild, some protestors committed acts of vandalism in the Capitol, and that’s wrong. Some protestors pushed through windows, and they shouldn’t have done that, and they should be held accountable for it. But even that, admitting that something is wrong or acknowledging that something is wrong is not the same as saying, okay, breaking the window at the capitol means that you intended to overthrow the US government. 

Those aren’t, those aren’t the same things at all. And these protestors didn’t even commit acts of vandalism. These protestors didn’t even violently push their way through the door. There was no breach that happened. This was the police officers in the building welcomed them. How are these protestors supposed to know that they’re not allowed in the building if police officers welcomed them into the building? But this is all part of the narrative, the insurrectionist narrative. You’re an insurrectionist. You wanna overthrow the US government. And the reason that you are, that you are concerned is not because it’s not because there was shenanigans in the 2020 election. You can’t talk about that. You’re a conspiracy theorist. It’s because Donald Trump and his ilk, the oath keepers, and the proud boys, they, their words incited people to this kind of violence. And without those words, well, these protestors wouldn’t have been so agitated. 

These protestors wouldn’t have cared. They wouldn’t have showed up. This entire operation is an effort by the Marxists on the Left to prohibit debate, to squash debate, to silence us, to criminalize our thoughts and our behavior, our private conversations, and our political views. If we dare to contradict the radical left, it’s incredibly dangerous. So I got chickens this weekend. Let me rephrase that. My husband got chickens this weekend, and I say we simply because he allowed me to name them. I don’t, I don’t, I I’m not exactly what you would call a farm girl. So let’s just say they are going to be his chickens, but I thought you might wanna take a look at them. We can show, we can show this this video of our seven chickens. They’re Bard rock chickens in their new home. 

These are our new chickens. Yeah. Aren’t they cute? We have noodle. Oh, I guess I narrated this video. Rolling Rotisserie pot pie. Oh, there’s a chicken fight. 

As you can see, they were establishing the proverbial pecking order, but the names I settled on were noodle, rotisserie, dumpling, pot pie, omelet, drumstick, and casserole. I appreciate everyone’s contributions. I know I asked last week for everyone to submit names and No, it’s not morbid, by the way. Some people were like, that’s not funny. That’s gallow’s humor. No, it isn’t. We’re not gonna eat these chickens. They’re laying chickens and they’re hens. And we are going to gather the eggs from these chickens. I think they’re supposed to start laying in a couple months, so I’ll keep you updated. There was a report from an intelligence official who calls himself a whistleblower. He claims that there are aliens among us. He says that the US government has hidden evidence. I’m gonna bring this article up. This was from the debrief, and this is what it says. Intelligence officials say the US has retrieved craft of non-human origin. This was the original report. A former intelligence official turned whistleblower 

Has given Congress and the intelligence Community Inspector general extensive classified information about deeply covert programs that he says, possess, retrieved intact and partially intact craft of non-human origin. Ooh, it sounds like a good story already. This is the information he says has been illegally withheld from Congress, and he filed a complaint alleging that he suffered illegal retaliation for his confidential disclosures reported here for the first time, other intelligence officials, both active and retired with knowledge of these programs through their works. And various agencies have independently provided similar corroborating information, both on and off the record. The whistleblower’s name is David Charles Grusch. He’s 36 years old. A decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan is a veteran of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. That’s the NGA and the National Reconnaissance Office, the NRO. He’s served as the reconnaissance offices representative to the United Aerial Phenomenon Task Force from 2019 to 2021, from late 2021 to July of 2022, who was the NGAs co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force. 

Don’t you just love how the Intel community is so littered with these acronyms, these, these b c agencies that you can’t even keep track of which one is which and who is doing what? He goes on to say the task force. Oh, he said, Grush said that the recoveries of partial fragments through and up to intact vehicles have been made for decades through the present day by the government. Its allies and defense contractors analysis has determined that the objects retrieved are of exotic origin, non-human intelligence, whether extraterrestrial or unknown origin, based on vehicle morphologies and material science testing and the possession of unique atomic arrangements and radiological signatures. He said, okay. So this is of course, sparked the great alien debate. The great alien debate happens probably, I’d say once every six months in this country, once or twice a year, maybe once or twice a year, everyone gets all in a tizzy because someone claims that they have proof of alien life, like alien, like extraterrestrial, like in there flying, saucer coming from Mars, little green Martians type of stuff. 

And it’s not that I don’t believe that aliens are real, it’s that I don’t believe that aliens are real. Hear me out here. The first thing that I think of when I hear this, a report like this, it’s not that I think that this man is necessarily lying. There might be programs or pieces of equipment that he doesn’t know what it is or where it’s from. That’s, that’s possible. Remember, at the highest levels of intelligence in the United States military, in the United States intelligence communities, you are simply read in to a project on a need to know basis. They try to compartmentalize information, highly classified information, so that if something, if a piece of information is leaked, then it’s not the whole story. It’s without context. It’s easier to protect information. The more separated the information is from from other pieces that contextualize it. 

So it’s not outside of the realm of possibility at all for this man to find out or to claim that he found out about equipment that he’s not familiar with, equipment that he doesn’t recognize equipment that everyone claims they don’t know anything about. In fact, I would suspect this is incredibly typical at the highest levels of the military in the defense contracting world, and in the intelligence community, that’s the first thing. So the most likely explanation is most often true. The most likely explanation is that he simply wasn’t read into some kind of military technology advancement research. That’s the most likely scenario. The second most likely scenario is that the whole thing is a military or a government cyop, that the whole thing is a distraction. That the American people, for some odd reason, are so fascinated by the idea of extraterrestrials. Do we have a flying saucer that they forget about what they actually should be looking at? 

And instead start gossiping about whistleblowers like this. Or there was a documentary on Netflix like a year or two ago that got everybody’s, that got everybody in a tizzy. And the second most likely explanation, besides it being military research, is that it’s distraction. Now, you might be saying, but Liz, but Liz, the possibility of aliens exist. It’s, it’s almost narcissistic to think that we are the only life forms in our galaxy or in other galaxies. And here’s what I will say. There could be life other places. It’s actually compatible with both Christian teaching and Catholic teaching to say that it’s possibility, it’s a possibility that there’s life elsewhere. God can do anything. He created life on earth. He could create life somewhere else. But remember, when we’re talking about alien spacecraft, when we’re thinking of little green martians, when we’re thinking of flying saucers, those are a figment of someone’s imagination. 

Those are nothing more than science fiction. We have no indication that even if there was extraterrestrial life, even if there were alien life forms, that they would look or act, anything like that. That the fact that we still talk about spacecraft, that we still talk about these, these vehicles in the wathe science fiction writer’s imagination invented, it shows us that as human beings, we’re kind of gullible as human beings. Even something pretend or imaginary becomes part of our reality if we so desperately want it to be part of our reality. So, yeah, it’s possible. It’s not impossible, but up to now, we have zero proof, zero proof that anything related to unknown aerial objects or spacecraft that have a radiological footprint or whatever he called it that he didn’t recognize have anything to do with alien life, it’s an unfalsifiable proposition that people propagating the alien narrative and they feel just as strongly as on their side, as I feel on my side, by the way. 

 it’s an unfalsifiable proposition. They say, well, you can’t prove that it’s not. Yes, but you can’t prove that it’s an unfalsifiable proposition. You can’t prove that you, that a raccoon didn’t come in and steal your keys. But the most likely scenario is that you put ’em through the wash, right? That you left ’em in your pocket just cuz you can’t prove it wasn’t A raccoon doesn’t make it the most likely scenario. Here. Here’s, here, here’s what I would say. Here’s what I say is perhaps even more likely than these three practical things that I’ve offered. The most likely scenario is that these aircraft are something of non-human origin. And that there are some kind of at least spirit forms that drive them and that have crashed them. And the most likely scenarios that they’re demons. That they’re demons. I mean, think about this from imaginative perspective. 

If we think about the little green martians, what, what does a little green martian look like? It looks like a demonn. It looks like a demonn. It’s fascinating to me that the people who immediately jumped to the conclusion that, oh, this must be aliens, becau even though we have, it’s a figment of human imagination. Aliens are this, this is not something that’s true or that’s real, that we have proof of. It’s fascinating to me that those same people don’t ever entertain the idea that this could be demons. That this is part of a supernatural battle that rages around us. That we aren’t actually the only beings that occupy earth. That there are things visible and there are things invisible. And sometimes demons can be both. Sometimes that is actually the supernatural aspect of it. Not that it’s an alien, but that it’s a demonn. 

That it’s a demonn. Even Elon Musk, by the way, I’m gonna bring this tweet up and show you on the screen here. Even Elon Musk understands the unfalsifiable proposition that we’re facing when people say, oh, I bet it’s aliens just because I don’t know what it is. He said, I have seen zero evidence of aliens. For what it’s worth, oh, if you’ve lost Elon Musk, I don’t know what to tell you. I don’t know what to tell you. I know this, this show first January 6th, and then aliens, the email inbox is gonna be full. But if you are going to send me an email, you better sign out for my email newsletter too. So go to LizWheeler.com/email and drop me your email. So Cornell West, Cornell West has declared that running for president Cornell West is a really strange, but kind of entertaining in the Marxist way. Like he’s a Marxist. He’s not a good dude. He fancies himself to be an intellectual, and he’s announced that he’s like the Ivy League sort, right? The Ivy League intellectual sort that fancies himself to be a political philosopher. He’s declared that he is running for president. And I think this is an absolutely wonderful development, even though this guy is a Marxist, and I’m gonna tell you why. But first, take a look at his announcement. 

In these bleak times, I have decided to run for Truth and justice, which takes the form of running for President of the United States as a candidate for the People’s Party. I enter into quest for truth. I enter into quest for justice, and the presidency is just one vehicle to pursue that truth and justice. What I’ve been trying to do all of my life, 

I come from a tradition where I care about you. I care about the quality of your life. I care about whether you have access to a job or a living wage. Decent housing, women having control over their bodies, healthcare for all, deescalating the destruction of the planet, the destruction of American democracy. Democracy creates disruption. It creates an eruption. It creates an interruption wide from below. The energies of everyday people is manifest. And I know there are precious people in your life who you care for. That’s why it’s important for you to be involved, important for you to participate. We’re not talking about hating anybody. We’re talking about loving. We’re talking about affirming. We’re talking about empowering those who have been pushed to the margins because neither political party wants to tell the truth about Wall Street, about Ukraine, about the Pentagon, about big tech, neo fascists like Brother Trump or milk toast, neoliberals like Brother Biden. Wow, I’m so happy to make a world shaking decision. You know what I mean? Well, I know gangsters when I see you. And gangsters not a subjective expression. It’s an objective condition. Do we have what it takes? We shall see, but some of us are going to go down fighting, go down, swinging with style and a smile, accenting the best in you and trying tease out the best in me. Let’s do it together. 

Okay? You have to admit that the guy might be a Marxist. He might be a Bernie bro, endorsing socialism and really destructive policies. He was preaching abortion as a good thing. He was preaching, he was surrounded in the video by a transgender activist talking about affirming, which we know refers to gender affirming healthcare. But you gotta admit, he’s kind of entertaining. You gotta, I, when I was watching this video, I was trying to pick which part to show you, and I couldn’t pick because it was, it was pretty entertaining, start to finish. I cannot wait for Cornell West to run for president. I’m delighted that he has entered the race, even though I cannot think of one issue that I agree with him on. In fact, I think he’s wrong on everything that he’s ever said. He drew his academic his academic, his academic work is drawn from Marxism, which is a satanic ideology. 

I think that’s totally evil. I’m delighted that he’s running for president because here’s why. If this man can get on the ballot and it’s not easy to get on the ballot. Some people run for president and or claim they run for president, and they don’t actually get on the ballot. People don’t actually cast votes for them. It’s just a publicity stunt, if you will. If Cornell well can get, Cornell West can get on the ballot, if he can get even 1%, 2% of say the black vote or the Democrat vote in swing states like North Carolina and Georgia and Wisconsin, if he can take just the tiniest little bit out of the Democratic vote in those states, then he will be a spoiler in 2024, a spoiler for the Democrats that will lead to a Republican victory. One or 2% Republicans get behind Cornell West. 

Get this man on the ballot in these swing states. Remember, in 2016, think about Michigan in 2016, Michigan in 2016 was decided by 10,000 votes. If we can support Cornell West, if we can convince Democrats to support Cornell West in these swing states than Republicans stand a better chance of winning in 2024. That’s as good a reason as any that I can think of to support a Marxist socialist who loves abortion and transgenderism and Bernie Sanders. I wish Cornell West the best of luck. He’s not only entertaining, he will do a true service to our country for perhaps the first time in his life if he spoils the 2024 Democratic Presidential chances in these swing states like Georgia, like North Carolina, and like Wisconsin. Again, Mr. West, I wish you the best of luck. You’re invited on the show anytime. I don’t agree with you, but I find you fascinating and entertaining, and I would love to have a discussion about your presidential run and how we can help you get on the ballots in these various states. 

So in New York City right now, the city has announced that they will be placing vending machines. Now, vending machines might actually not be the proper description for what this is, because New York City is going to place these vending machines that you don’t have to pay for. So it’s not something that you go up to and you put a dollar in and you get, you know, a bottle of water out. These vending machines are free. You don’t have to pay for them, you just have to take the stuff out of them. And the vending machines will be stocked with Narcan, which is a drug antidote, as you know, with crack pipes and with condoms. A proud day for New Yorkers, a proud day to be a citizen of the big apple of the city that never sleeps, to be giving away free condoms on the street corner and drug paraphernalia to drug addicts for free in their neighborhoods. 

They’re called safer smoking kits. Safer smoking kits. It seems like it’s an iteration of the safe injection sites that have been discussed, particularly in California, the safe injection sites, which are invite drug addicts that do intravenous drugs to come into a government sponsored a government funded facility to do the illegal drugs that are against the law to do. The government says, well, if you’re gonna do it well, you might as well do it under taxpayer dime. This seems to be like a very small a very small iteration of the safe injection site, the safer smoking kit. They’re actually giving crack pipes for free. Imagine being a citizen of New York and knowing that your taxpayer dollars are buying a crack pipe, probably for like Hunter Biden, a crack pipe, a mouthpiece and lip balm. Also give lip balm to those smoking crack and crystal meth. 

This has all been reported by the New York Post. you also can find drug tests strips in these, in these vending machines. So you can detect if you have fentanyl in your system. And here, here’s just a little, a little, a little tip. If you don’t do drugs, you won’t need to test to see if you have fentanyl in your, in your system. So maybe, maybe the government of the city of of New York should think about that first. Maybe they should actually enforce the laws that are on their books. Maybe they should reject the Soros funded prosecutors, these so-called progressive prosecutors that don’t want to fight back against crime, particularly violent crime or crime that is deadly crime. Maybe, maybe just, maybe there’s a reason why we have these laws on the books against drugs and maybe just maybe if government officials actually enforce these laws, then we wouldn’t have the horrible number of deaths. 

Again, if you are a resident of New York City, you are paying for these so-called vending machines. They’re not really vending machines because it’s not a vendor selling his goods and services in the marketplace. These people who are going to be taking advantage of these machines are not purchasing anything. Each machine costs the city $11,000. Think about what you could do with $11,000. Think about if the government had not taken this money from you and had not exp appropriated the right to spend your money, the power, not the right, the power to spend your money better than you. $11,000. Now the Health Commissioner of New York City is a doctor named Dr. Ashwin Vasan, and Dr. Ashwin Vasan clarifies and says, now these first vending machines that the city of New York is going to place around the city, they don’t include syringes for intravenous drug users. You know, heroin, you, you inject into yourself. 

I’m told these first vending machines don’t include the needles for that, the syringes for that. But that may be coming though. The words of health commissioner, Dr. Ashwin Vasan said, other machines may include syringes at a certain point. So, riddle me this, it is both a federal crime to do a drug like heroin or to do a drug like meth. And yet the city government of New York is going to sponsor this. Something is very, very wrong. And here’s the thing. The Democrats claim that this is going to that this is going to serve minority communities. They’re going to place these in urban neighborhoods where drug usage has led to a horrible, tragic number of deaths. It’s simply awful. There were 1,370 fatal overdoses in New York City in the first half of 2022 alone. Think about how many people that is. In 2021, there were 2,668 overdose overdose deaths in New York City. 

That’s a lot of people. That’s a lot of humanity that has been snuffed out by drugs and the Left places, these vending machines in the city pretending that this is going to serve the inner city community. But lemme tell you, who’s gonna be using this kind of vending machine? It’s gonna be people like Hunter Biden. It’s gonna be upper middle class wealthy trust fund babies who think maybe they did a little bit too much cocaine at their poker party, and they’re gonna be the ones taking advantage of this. So your tax dollars, if you live in New York City, is going to subsidize the drug habits of malcontents like Hunter Biden. He’s a perfect example of the type of person who’s going to use this and your tax dollars are going to be funding this. Now, if only we had a way, if only there was some policy that we could put in place that would stop the flow of fentanyl into our country. 

If only we had the capacity to build a wall at our southern border. If only we had the capacity, the right, the responsibility to secure our nation. If only we had the power to control the flow of goods and services across our border, if only we had the strongest economy in the world, and we could leverage that against China for sending Fentanyl to Mexico in order to be trafficked up here. If only we could threaten China with something. What do they rely on us for? Oh, everything. If only there were policies that we could put into place that would actually stop this. So make no mistake, the city government officials of New York City are doing this just to virtue signal. They’re doing this just to give a free tidbit to the people so that the people come back for more. So that the people become more dependent on government, they become more entitled. 

They ask for more and more and more until the government morphs this into first socialized healthcare and then free housing. And soon the people are voluntarily opting in for what’s essentially socialism. These vending machines are not only stupid, they’re not only destructive, they’re not only you would think illegal. They’re the carrot being dangled by a government that wants you to be on their doll. It’s disgusting. If you haven’t already signed up for my email newsletter, please do so. Go to LizWheeler.com/email to get all of the latest news, all of the latest data research from my show, delivered right to your inbox, LizWheeler.com/email. Thank you for watching today. Thank you for listening. I’m Liz Wheeler. This is The Liz Wheeler Show. 


Read More


Trending stories, leading insights, & top analysis delivered directly to your inbox.

Related Stories

Related Episodes

Scroll to Top