Fireside Chat Ep. 183 — The Derek Chauvin Trial: Key Takeaways | Fireside Chat

Hi everyone, I'm Dennis Prager. This is the Fireside Chat, every week, and it's number 1983, 1983rd consecutive Fireside Chat. 183? Yes. We're not up to 190. 183rd. Great to be with you. This is Otto, of course. Otto, I want you to know, I think I've mentioned this, Otto actually gets into a position when he sees the tripod and camera come into the room. It's a very touching thing. He knows he's on, he knows he has a responsible position in the Fireside Chat, and takes it. Yeah. Good to be with you, my friends. So a few thoughts on the Derek Chauvin verdict in the George Floyd death in Minneapolis. It's so sensitive but yet important an issue that I actually have some notes, which is very rare for me. I almost never use notes. Not that there's anything wrong with it. I don't have any objection to people using notes at all, as a general rule. I just don't usually do so, neither on the radio nor in the Fireside Chat. But in this case, I thought it was so important to hit certain points, I jotted them down. First, have you noticed, unless I missed something in the trial, and it could be I did, and if so I'm just wrong, but I don't think I missed this. I don't think there was any mention of racism in the charges brought against the police officer. But isn't that the entire reason that the country has been fixated on this issue? So maybe the whole thing was a lie. I mean, it's all about oppression of blacks by police. But it wasn't even mentioned, to the best of my knowledge, in the entire weeks of the trial. Am I not being clear that there's a certain cognitive dissonance going on here? Certain contradiction? Wouldn't that have been front and center? Members of the jury, we have a racist police officer who, seeing a black suspect, had no regard for his life. But that wasn't raised. Why not? Maybe there's a good reason, but it would seem to me that given that the riots and protests, there were both protests and riots, almost all of 2020, or certainly after the event, was it May, I believe, of 2020, and then through the year? They were all because of police racism, alleged police racism, but it wasn't even mentioned. And why wouldn't it be mentioned? And the answer is because it probably wasn't existent. That's why. Do you know how many unarmed blacks were killed by police officers, according to the Washington Post, taken from government data, in 2019, the last year we have for this? Take a guess. Ami Horowitz made a video on this, asking people how many blacks were killed by police. They said thousands. Watch the video. It's up at PragerU by Ami Horowitz. He was in Minneapolis this week, just interviewing blacks who were prepared to protest if the verdict didn't go the way they believed it should go. And thousands, thousands. Well, so the number of unarmed blacks who were killed by the police in 2019 is 13. Thirteen. And in nearly every case, they were attacking a policeman. Like in the case, this wasn't 2019, but the most famous case, Ferguson, Missouri, where Michael Brown attacked the officer and tried to get his gun. The officer begged him not to approach him. That's why he was exonerated completely, even by the Obama Justice Department. How many people know that? And yet Obama himself said Ferguson as a, as a, as an example of police racism. So we're living, look, we're living in an age of make believe. It's with regards to just about everything, but I won't get sidetracked here, but this is a big one. This massive amount of oppression and killing of blacks. If you watch the Ami Horowitz video, it is about as scary a video. No horror movie is as scary to me as the few minute video of Ami Horowitz that he made in Minneapolis, where black after black, almost all young, is saying that they are the object of genocide, genocide. The people who were objects of genocide in history, they should, these people should ask them for forgiveness. Genocide in America, blacks. Even in the age of slavery, there wasn't black genocide, not in the United States. We really do live in the age of lie because truth is not a left wing value. It never was. And isn't, it just isn't. It's a liberal value. It's a conservative value, but it's not a left wing value. I say that almost every day on my radio show, because there's always an example for it. Barry Weiss is accumulating all the lies, or many of the lies of the New York Times. She actually quit the Times because they lie so much. You should read her page, she's still a liberal, which is fine with me. I don't have a problem with liberals, I have a problem with leftists. So that's one factor here that is rather important. Next was the verdict right? I have no idea. I truly don't. For example, I would like to know, here's a question, maybe it was answered during the trial, but I would like to know how many Minneapolis Police Department officers ever put their knee on a suspect's neck, on the side of the neck. He never put it in the front of the neck, that's where you breathe, you don't breathe on the side of your neck. And how many of them ever died? Now for argument's sake, let's say that this was done 250 times to 250 different suspects. And they were, in other words, people that resisted arrest and were quite violent, which is the case of George Floyd. You could see the video of him resisting arrest and not even going into the police car. All they wanted him to do was go in the police car. But he had a record and he didn't want to be taken to the police headquarters, or the police station, I should say. So I'd just like to know, let's say there were 250 times Minneapolis police officers put their knee on the side of the neck of a suspect. How many of them died as a result, or during that time? Now if the answer is zero, which I suspect it is, then does that move you in any direction to thinking, well, maybe that isn't the cause of George Floyd's death? Maybe having three times the amount of fentanyl that can kill you, and already a pre-existing heart condition and terrible breathing, all of that prior to the knee on the side of the neck, maybe that contributed? I don't know. But I think that that's a pretty valid question to ask, including how many other officers have put a knee on the side of the neck in Minneapolis. I read their manual. It is allowed for. So I'm not saying he's innocent. I frankly don't understand why he kept his knee on there when he saw that there was almost no breathing. I think that there are very legitimate questions to ask about the officer's conduct. My point is not a defense of the officer. My point is a defense of the truth. Did it kill him is not the same as why didn't he stop him from dying. They're not the same questions. But they are important questions. Next, I got a call on my radio show from a police officer in Albany, New York. And he said, Dennis, you were exactly right. What is going to happen is fewer and fewer police will do anything with regard to apprehending black suspects. They have everything to lose and nothing to gain except protecting black communities and others from black suspects. But if you were a police officer, wouldn't you do everything now possible to avoid any confrontation with a black suspect? But if that happens, what happens? I'll tell you what happens. Far more blacks die because that's who most black criminals are hurting. Blacks. However, I will say something that sounds dramatic. It is dramatic, to be honest. But I believe completely the left doesn't care about black lives. They care about using blacks to gain power. Just as communists used workers to gain power. That is the oldest left-wing tactic. They speak on behalf of a community that they don't give a damn about in order to gain power. Have they done anything for blacks? Are all the cities run by Democrats, by people on the left? Have they helped blacks at all in the last half century? OK, it's a rhetorical question. We all know the answer. But if I were a policeman, and I thought of my kids and my wife and my life and my livelihood and my name and my reputation, would I do what is right, or would I do everything possible to avoid confrontation with a black suspect? Does this matter? Yes, it does matter. These riots and the intimidation of the left-wing mob in front of the courthouse in Minneapolis have had an effect on police. It's already had an effect just in the last year. Violent crime, that is murder, has increased dramatically in virtually every major metropolitan area in the United States. Why? Because the police are pulling back. Remember, everything the left touches, it ruins. There is no exception, whether it's police or colleges or high schools or elementary schools or Major League Baseball or the NBA or late-night comedy or music or art or Christianity or Judaism, everything the left touches, it ruins. There is no exception. And I've spent my life studying the left. There is no exception. It's an amazing thing. Not true about liberals. Liberals have done a lot of good. The left has only done damage. And now this is another example. People are dying because of the left and the riots and the acceptance of the riots by left-wing mayors and governors. Let's see, what else would we... Yeah, I think that that's, those are the points that I wanted to make. Oh, one more big macro point. The very fact that this is the central news item in America and has been for nearly a year shows you the ability of the media to make an issue out of whatever they want to make an issue. Right? How come we don't even know the name of the officer who shot to death the white woman entering the Capitol? She was unarmed. Not only are there no charges brought against that officer, we don't even know the officer's name. Why is that? Because she was white and she was on the right. Her life really doesn't mean anything. America is preoccupied with what the left wants it to be preoccupied with. That is the way it works. Okay, let's go to your video question. See if I press the right... Okay, look what happened. Let me see if I can do it. I did it. And now... Hi, my name is Olivia. I'm 23 years old and I am from Los Angeles, California. I have a question for Dennis regarding climate change. So with this progressive distortion of what conservatives are, especially in regards to climate change, we are painted as haters of the environment. I'm wondering, because the left is choosing alarmist tactics and failing to consider evidence and facts at all costs. How will we ever go about having a balanced conversation about climate change and what are good ways to move forward? All right. That, Olivia, is the, what they used to call the $64,000 question. I have wanted to have dialogue with people on the left all of my radio career. And 99% of those invited never come on the show, even though every time anyone on the left ever invited me or any conservative, we run to go on their shows. They are afraid to come on our shows. Tell me one black leader on the left who is prepared to debate Larry Elder on race. Maybe there's one. I don't know if there is even one. Maybe there is. And tell me one Jewish leftist who would debate me. Would Tom Friedman or Paul Krugman at the New York Times? I've offered $10,000 to their favorite medical charity just to have a public forum. And we don't even get responses. They don't debate for good reason. They lose. They always lose. And they always lose for a lot of reasons. Not because they're not bright. Some of them are very bright. They lose because we know all of their arguments and they know none of ours. Remember, we, who are not on the left, we read those on the left. We watch them on TV. We watch them in movies. We listen to them when they teach us. We have studied under them. They're all over the place. You can't avoid them. You'd have to live in an Amish town and be Amish, perhaps, to avoid them. We know what they think. But they don't know what we think. So they don't know our arguments. I debated, it was a rare time, I debated a guy on the left at a San Francisco synagogue a number of years ago. And it's on YouTube, I think. I think. You'd have to check. And I'm very, very mellow in debate. I don't try to humiliate my opponent or insult in any way. And even so, it was clear that I won that debate. And I do believe, somebody did tell me, I think YouTube did pull it down. Because a guy on the left lost the debate. I really have to check if it's still up. So, Olivia, they don't want to debate you. All they want to do is smear you. And please, all of you know, that is the only tactic of the left. You're anti-science if you don't agree with them that the world is coming to an end in 12 years. You know how many 12-year periods I've already lived through where the world was supposed to come to an end? It began with Al Gore in 1990. So we had until 2002. The world didn't come to an end. It didn't even come close. We had another 12 years. 2014. Now we have another 12 years. 2026. And they just keep doing it. It reminds me, I made up a joke. Very rare that I've made up a joke. Here's a joke. Actually, it's one of two riddles I've made up. So, what do you call a religious person who says the earth is coming to an end? Call him a religious fanatic. Right? What do you call a secular person who says the earth is coming to an end? An environmentalist. How's that? Yeah, it's one of the two riddles I made up. You want to know the other one? What do you call a happy American black? Answer, a Republican. It's a good one, because it's true. It's true for almost anybody. I mean, just, but I thought it was particularly fitting there. So, they don't debate. They smear. You're anti-science if you don't agree with them. You're always anti-something. Or you're anti-woman if you don't, you're misogynist if you don't agree on abortion. Or you're, let's see, what else? Of course, you're racist if you don't agree with them on almost anything. Right? That's what they do, Olivia. They don't debate. They smear. Did you want to show me something? Oh, yes. So, this is something we have up at PragerU. Oh, yes. So, we put up, oh, yeah. PragerU sent out a tweet. Or a Facebook post. A Facebook post, actually. Okay. So, Facebook post. Over the past 2,000 years, the globe has seen the Roman warm period, the cooler dark ages, the medieval warm period, the little ice age, and a gradual 300-year warming. Of course, the climate is changing. It always has. It always will. Okay. Not exactly a radical post, I must say. And Facebook sent PragerU a notice, partly false. Well, if it's partly false, it's partly true. Right. They ought to put partly true. Their answer, fact check from science feedback. Current climate warming is rapid and occurring on a gradual scale, excuse me, on a global scale, unlike past periods of regional climate fluctuations. So, therefore, we were warned by Facebook. Did we have to take it down, or just warned? We're warned if we have too many of these. Too many of these, yeah. In other words, if you differ, listen. Hey, listen to this. Steve Cortez, who did a PragerU video on the Charlottesville lie, he's a great reporter. He was with CNN until they let him go. And Steve Cortez put up a tweet that, oh, this is mind-blowing, an NIH study, National Institutes of Health study, from the U.S. Government, National Institutes of Health, that masks are largely useless against virus. Because virus molecules or whatever, particles, are smaller than the mask blocks. And he was taken down. His tweet was taken down. And he was shut out of Twitter for 24 hours or whatever. But all he did is cite a government study? How's that? That's for you, too, Olivia. That's an example. We cite studies, and they don't debate us. All right, let's see. Linda55, Pittsburgh. What are your thoughts on Bill Gates, specifically as it relates to his massive ownership of farmlands, GMO seeding market, and his desire to switch to synthetic beef in the name of climate change? I am horrified when I watch him present his mathematical equation that requires the need for population reduction via vaccines and reproductive health management. His words, not mine. OK, so in a nutshell, my take on this gentleman, not gentleman, on this man is that the billions have gone to his head. He thinks he is not only capable of making money, but that he is wise. And that's a very big problem with many super wealthy people who don't understand that in the vast majority of cases, their intelligence is restricted to making money, which is great for making money, just like there are people who are restricted to playing quarterback or playing the oboe. That's not uncommon, that people are brilliant in one area and not brilliant or even stupid in other areas. That's not uncommon at all. But the very wealthy, not always, but often, have this delusion that they're wise. And it's worse in his case. He not only thinks he's wise, he thinks he could save the world. And people who think they could save the world are usually dangerous, if they have any power. Courtney, 21, Sacramento, California. Mr. Prager and Otto, hello. At what point do you still have a free country if justice is determined by violence, threats and physical and peer pressure? Related to the Chauvin verdict, please pass on a belly rub and treat to Otto. Thank you and God bless. I do, I belly rub him plenty. Though I will admit, the other dog, the Basset Hen, whom you rarely see, is much more into getting rubbed. Otto, what does Otto live for? Not a rub. Snoopy lives for being rubbed. If Otto lives for food, then that's very exciting to Otto. Is that alright with you, little fella? Good boy. He's a great guy. He really is. A lot of fun to be with. So, that's a big problem, the intimidation. Defense witness had pig's blood smeared on, I think, the front of their house in Minneapolis. There is a lot of terrible intimidation that comes from the left and it's affecting, obviously, a lot of the society. Second question. Should young conservatives give up on their radical leftist home states and move to red states? Is it worth staying in blue states? So, if I were a young non-leftist who loved liberty, which is what it amounts to, and intellectual honesty, which is also what it amounts to, I would say all things being equal. My first consideration is, where are my friends? That's why I stay in California, because so many of my friends are here. So, that's number one. Where are the people you are closest to? And it might be family, not just friends. But beyond that, yes, I think living in a freer state. California is not a free state. The crushing of businesses for the utterly irrational belief that they had to be closed to combat COVID. And Florida being open and having such a great record. With all of its elderly people, has the second greatest percentage of old people in the country, Florida, and still did so well while staying open. Okay, Yael 30, Houston, Texas. Dear Mr. Prager, I'm a liberal who's recently discovered your podcast, and frankly, my mind was blown by how much sense you make. This, let me comment on that before I continue with this. So, I remember the airport, Philadelphia airport, about two, three years ago. And I'm stopped frequently, and this was one of those occasions, by, and this will sound funny for me to say, because I'm a heterosexual guy, but I notice a very handsome man. If you're a very good looking guy, and there aren't many, most guys are in the middle. There are a lot of beautiful women, but there aren't many beautiful men, quote unquote. But he was a very strikingly good looking guy, very tall as well. And anyway, he stops me, he's about 28 years old. And, oh, I love your stuff, and I live in Norway, I'm Norwegian. And I go, wow, that's great. And I said, so are you a conservative? Because how many Norwegian conservatives are you going to meet, let alone in Philadelphia? I mean, I'm not in Oslo here. And he goes, I don't know if I'm conservative, I just know, I just know what's logical. I said, okay, then you're conservative. All of our positions, like this Yael is saying, it's all common sense. If you follow common sense, you are conservative. As you move left, you don't follow common sense, you follow doctrine. Just like medieval religion, common sense is irrelevant, doctrine is everything. All right, I'm questioning long-held beliefs that I absorbed without truly thinking them through. Congratulations, and I mean that sincerely. That's very impressive. Your musings about character, values, and courage have inspired me tremendously, thank you. But even though I am inspired by your thoughts about bravery, I'm having trouble applying them in my own life. I'm in a field where wokeness is the norm, and any dissent can result in total career destruction. Keeping quiet about these things is starting to affect my self-respect. How can I be brave when being so could completely ruin the career I've worked so hard to build? Okay, look, I have said very many times, I am not in a position, having a job, I am not in a position to tell people, go and lose your jobs. I just feel morally wrong in doing so. However, I can say this. The longer one stays in the closet, the more it eats you up. Gays stayed in the closet for until, you know, I'd say 40 years ago or so, and it's a pretty bad place to be. The only people in the closet now are conservatives. Certainly not gays, and certainly not any other group. Certainly just conservatives. And they can, just like with gays, but even worse, gays wouldn't lose their job necessarily, but in this case you could lose your job. You have to determine what price are you prepared to pay to keep the job. By the way, you may not lose the job, you don't know that. And it depends how you come out of the closet. If you come out like a raging bull, there's one thing, if you come out very sophisticatedly, and calmly, that might help too. I don't know, I just don't know. But, I for one, I could not stay in the closet. It would eat me up. I think it would affect your health. I do, I believe it affects your health ultimately. And I know doing, I've written a book on happiness and doing a happiness hour every week on the radio since 1999. I know that it eats away at one's happiness. I have friends who have come, people I know, not Dutch friends, people I know. I know a lot of people because I'm a public figure. And they have come out of the closet. And they have not lost their jobs. They have lost friends. Not all their friends, but they have lost friends. That's correct. But, probably a good thing that they lost these friends. They didn't realize until now how little they share about most important issues. So, I would say you should come out of the closet. But, if there's no question you will lose your livelihood and not be able to make money elsewhere, it's not for me to tell you to make such a sacrifice. But, less than that, I think it's worth it. You will like yourself more. You will respect yourself more. You will sleep better. Those are not little things. You'll also meet kindred spirits. Which is the biggest reward of all. Because when you come out of the closet, not only the people who hate your guts see you, but people who share your value see you. That's a big reward. We're good? That's an important thing to end on. Okay, everybody. Share these fireside chats. There's a lot of important stuff, I think, that's said in them. Thank you for being with me. And, Otto and I will see you next week.