Ep. 1840 - Separation Of Church And State Is A Left-Wing Myth. Now They're Admitting It.

Matt Walsh (0:00)

Now, we've all heard the radio ads about owing the IRS money. They try to scare you and frighten you in the calling. Well, tax relief advocates is different. If you owe the IRS 5,000, 50,000 or 500,000, TRA has a solution to resolve your tax problem. Don't lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe. Their passion is taxes and helping regular people and businesses fix their IRS mess. They have over 1,000 five-star Google reviews and an A plus with the Better Business Bureau. You don't have to be afraid of the IRS anymore. Real tax relief programs are available that can give you a fresh start. So don't wait. Go to tra.com. It's tra.com or call 800-575-1753.

Again, that's 800-575-1753.

Tax relief advocates, real solutions for real people. Well, it's been a while since we've checked in on New York City, which has now been ruled by a Muslim socialist from Uganda for a little over eight months by my account. So we're going to begin with footage that was shot just a few days ago by a journalist named Nate Friedman, who's working on a documentary about the Islamic takeover of New York. He's also covered the Islamic domination of several other US cities, particularly Michigan. This footage is footage that illustrates the current state of the largest city in the country, which is no longer American in any meaningful sense.

SPEAKER_2 (1:26)

Watch.

Nate Friedman (1:28)

I is not going to the mosque, this guy in the black car, and he's getting a ticket, but none of these taxis are getting a ticket. You got to be kidding me. How's it going, sir? Quick question for you. I noticed you're giving a ticket to this car, right? Yes. Okay. And what about all the taxis that are double parked?

Zoran Mamdani (1:41)

They're allowed in the time of Salat.

Nate Friedman (1:45)

Please say that again to the camera. Go ahead.

SPEAKER_5 (1:49)

They're permitted in the time of Salat in the city.

Nate Friedman (1:52)

They're permitted double parked in the time of prayer. How do you know they're Muslim? Why is he not allowed to? How do you know he's not praying?

No, we're...

SPEAKER_6 (2:02)

This is only the time of the prayer.

Nate Friedman (2:05)

How do you know that that car is not going to pray? How do you know that the guy that drives that car is not going to pray? This is not the question. Only the question is the time of prayer they can park.

Zoran Mamdani (2:16)

We are not justify and police justify that's a matter of course.

Matt Walsh (2:20)

Thank you.

It's legal to double park if you're Muslim in the eyes of the presumably Muslim traffic cop. But if you're not Muslim, then you get a ticket. And he admits all this on camera multiple times. We now have religious based law enforcement in the United States right out in the open. Think about all the Fox News segments from 20 years ago about Sharia law arriving in the country and how everyone made fun of the boomers for being paranoid. And now realize where we are just 25 years after 9-11. This kind of preferential treatment, this overt discrimination does not simply apply to parking tickets in New York. It applies to the legal system, to welfare, to employment, to university admissions and everything else. Foreigners have captured New York and now they're redistributing the spoils amongst themselves. And as you just saw, the government is explicitly rewarding Muslims while punishing everybody else. That's what's happening. Now you'd think that would be a violation of the First Amendment and the separation of church and state that we hear so much about, but no one seems to care, at least on the left. And as insane as this is, there's actually a very clear explanation for what's happening here. This takeover didn't happen by accident. It was actually set in motion decades ago. It began with indoctrination, which all of us have been subjected to, about the meaning of the words separation of church and state and how they relate or don't relate to our Constitution. Now pretty much every American has been told at one point or another, at many points, about the so-called separation of church and state. It's one of those phrases that's drilled into our heads in school. You're told that it's a fundamental tenet of American government, the critical guardrail that prevents us from descending into theocratic fascism. You're led to believe that since the dawn of this country, students have learned about the separation of church and state, just as students have supposedly always learned about the Trail of Tears, for example. But that's not true at all. Just like the Trail of Tears, the concept of the separation of church and state, as we know it today, was actually an invention of the mid-20th century. For the vast majority of our country's history, if you mention the separation of church and state to the average American, they have no idea what you're talking about. The words appear nowhere in the Constitution, and the phrase conveys the impression that religion should have no impact on government, which most people wouldn't agree with. Of course, people were familiar with the First Amendment and the idea that the federal government should not establish a state religion, as opposed to, say, the Church of England. But the notion that religion should be totally distinct from governance in every way, as implied by the phrase separation of church and state, would have seemed very strange to most people. But everything began to change in the mid 20th century. This was the period in American history when leftists went rummaging through the history books and began redefining our past so that we could indoctrinate generations of school children and bring about radical, transformative change to our country. And maybe their most urgent objective, which continues to this day, of course, was eradicating Christianity from American society. This is the goal of leftists everywhere. It's why Canada had the whole mass graves hoax, which led very deliberately to a wave of church burnings. Christianity is incompatible with communism because under communism, government is the highest authority. When people believe in God, they become much harder to control. Now, as part of this effort, the First Amendment needed to be redefined, and to that end, a progressive Supreme Court justice named Hugo Black wrote an opinion in 1947 that cited a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 And in that letter, which he sent to a Baptist Association in Connecticut, the Danbury Baptist, as a courtesy, Jefferson wrote, quote, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people, which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.