--:-- [Theme music fades out]
--:-- John Bickley: The NFL is back, and FanDuel's got everything you need to play your game. From same-game parlays to live betting. Right now, new customers bet $5 and get $300 in bonus bets if you win. 21-plus in president select states. 18-plus in Kentucky and Wyoming. Must be first online real money waging. $5 deposit required. Bonus issued is non-withdrawable bonus bets that expire seven days after receipt. Restrictions apply. See full terms at FanDuel.com slash sportsbook. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER.
--:-- Georgia Howe: Just a week after Elon Musk's Twitter takeover, the newly appointed Chief Twit is moving ahead with a number of new policies and planning to cut a lot of employees. What's changing and how are both sides of the political spectrum reacting? I'm Daily Wire editor-in-chief John Bickley with Georgia Howe. It's Friday, November 4th, and this is Morning Wire.
--:-- John Bickley: In a primetime speech Wednesday night, President Biden claimed that MAGA Republicans pose a unique threat to democracy. They've been bold in violence and intimidation of voters and election officials. We discussed the political fallout. And a new report reveals nightmarish conditions in L.A. County's juvenile detention centers. Why do guards say it's only a matter of time before someone is killed on the job? Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire. Stay tuned. We have the news you need to know. value totally free. You don't want to miss this offer. Go to GoodRanchers.com slash wire and use promo code wire at checkout. Good Ranchers, American meat delivered.
--:-- Georgia Howe: It's only been a week since Elon Musk took over Twitter, but he's already made some major changes. The world's richest man has already dissolved the corporate board and sent in Tesla engineers to review the famously secret Twitter algorithm. He also announced plans to cut 50% of the staff. Here to tell us what new policies Musk is rolling out, and what may come next is Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham.
--:-- Megan Basham: So Megan, there's such a flurry of ever-shifting information surrounding the Musk Twitter drama. Are there any hard developments that we can be sure of right now?
--:-- Megan Basham: Yeah, you know, and a lot of the conversation about Twitter does amount to little more than people trying to read Musk's sometimes cryptic tweets, like they're tea leaves or something. And we also know from experience that he likes to throw out ideas and gauge reactions. That doesn't mean that he's going to implement them. But what is clear is that his plans for monetization are going forward. And to give you one example, we know that he's going to revamp that verified blue check system. So since 2009, Twitter has given blue checks to people who are public figures in some capacity. Authors, actors, media figures, politicians, people like that. But over the years, critics have complained that Twitter gatekeepers tend to verify more users on the left than on the right. And that gives the impression that left-wing views are more legitimate. So what he plans to do now is have users pay for blue checks. Different numbers have been floated, but this week he laid out an $8 a month plan. And that will come with some other perks, he said, like boosting the user's content to reach more eyeballs. And what kind of response is he getting for that?
--:-- Megan Basham: Well, a lot of the current blue checks aren't fans. I give you one example Horror novelist Stephen King said Twitter should pay him for being a blue check on the platform And if Musk institutes the change he said he I quote gone like Enron So a lot of legacy media users said they'll leave too. But non-blue check folks seem to really like the idea. But that's not Musk's only proposal for making Twitter profitable, something it has always struggled with. He also proposed curating some news articles to let users bypass the outlet's paywalls for a premium. So sort of something like Apple News. But some of the other ways that Twitter is reportedly looking at making money via paywalls are a lot more controversial. So we've talked here in the past about a Twitter task force that was looking at the feasibility of monetizing pornography. Well, Musk is reportedly considering a new charge for some video content viewing. Now, already about 13% of Twitter's content is pornography, and it's one of the only social media sites that allows it. So if users are unable to put up paywalled videos that Twitter would take a cut of, critics are saying that's going to lead to more porn on the platform, even if that isn't the purpose of the proposal. Now, the whole purpose, allegedly, for Musk buying Twitter was to protect free speech. Is there any indication of how he plans to do that?
--:-- Megan Basham: Well, for those who are wondering if and when former President Donald Trump might be allowed back on the platform, Musk is now saying that that is not going to be anytime soon. It'll be at least a few weeks once the company has established some clear processes for bringing back banned accounts. So Musk has said that he's forming a content moderation and election integrity council that will include representatives with widely divergent views. And he's also said he's talked to representatives from the NAACP and the Anti-Defamation League. That set off a lot of alarm bells for conservatives who say that these are the kind of left-wing groups that Twitter was already listening to. But on the other hand, this week, we saw twice that Twitter fact-check both President Biden and the official White House account. So conservatives celebrated that move, which they saw as something of a new approach for Twitter. And Musk replied, quote, the system is working. OK, so maybe warrant for some cautious optimism for conservatives there.
--:-- Georgia Howe: Megan, thanks for reporting.
--:-- Megan Basham: Yeah, anytime.
--:-- John Bickley: That was Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham. Coming up, the political response to President Biden's election denier speech. Is joint discomfort keeping you from being as active as you once were? For fast, powerful joint relief, try Instaflex Advanced. Instaflex Advanced targets the root cause of joint discomfort with one little pill per day. Get a complimentary two-week sample of Instaflex Advanced when you text WIRE to 42424. Plus, get a free gift of Instaflex Advanced Pain Cream for fast-acting relief from arthritis pain, back aches, and sore muscles. Text WIRE to 42424. That's WIRE to 42424.
--:-- Georgia Howe: President Biden took to the primetime airwaves on Wednesday to deliver a speech to America on what he calls the ongoing threat to democracy. The remarks echoed those that he gave in September in his fiery speech in Philadelphia came just six days before Election Day and less than a week after an attack on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband, Paul, in their San Francisco home. Here to discuss the political fallout to the speech is columnist David Marcus.
--:-- David Marcus: So Dave, we covered the speech yesterday, but now we're starting to see the political response to it. What was the president trying to achieve in this speech?
--:-- David Marcus: This was an interesting speech in many ways. It was originally announced that it would be given at the Capitol but wound up taking place across the street at Union Station which allowed it to be a campaign not an official presidential speech But in style and substance it felt more like an official address For example there was notably no applause during his remarks. This was no doubt meant to establish an air of solemnity and gravity. He used the Pelosi attack as a hook at the beginning and then launched into his familiar line arguing that Republicans are a unique threat to democracy. It wasn't as aggressive or shall we say dark and red as the Philly speech, but was a pitch to voters that the future of democracy is on the ballot. So, you know, ultimately it was a political speech intended to get out the vote for Democrat candidates. Now, we noted yesterday the president's attempt to conflate the attack on Paul Pelosi by a man who was illegally in the country and who appears to be mentally unstable with the January 6th riots. So that's one individual, but did Biden offer any other names of specific threats?
--:-- David Marcus: No, not really. Once again, he pointed to many Republican candidates across the country who Democrats claim are election deniers, saying they're an estimated 300. But he didn't name names. Instead, he hearkened back to January 6th, which is probably why the speech was given so close to the Capitol. And in one slight twist, he called out mega MAGA Republicans, which I guess is the new ultra MAGA if you're keeping track. but specifically called them a minority in the GOP, but while also saying that they are the driving force. Not surprisingly, the president did not mention Democrats like Stacey Abrams running for governor of Georgia or his own press secretary who have questioned election results in the past. Biden also failed to mention specific instances of politically motivated violence from the left, as we saw with the failed assassination attempt on Brett Kavanaugh over the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the attack on a Marco Rubio campaign canvasser. Biden made the point that a majority of Americans, something on the order of 70%, do think there's a threat to American democracy. But you and I recently discussed the polling on that threat to democracy issue, and it's more complicated than that, right?
--:-- David Marcus: That's right. Biden is correct about that 70% number, but when you dig into it, you see that about a third of the country sees Republicans as the threat, but a third say it's Democrats. As we've pointed out here, a bipartisan majority sees the mainstream media as the biggest threat to democracy. So this felt much more like a play to his base, an attempt to juice turnout in a few vital House and Senate seats. And the more relaxed tone was likely meant to avoid turning off independent voters who did not react particularly well to the heated rhetoric of his previous efforts.
--:-- David Marcus: Right. There's a lot of backlash to that speech. So now the political response. Republicans were quick to attack the speech, not just on the merits or the question of threats to democracy, but because it didn't mention inflation, the economy, crime or even abortion, which are the issues voters say are most important to them. Was that a mistake from Biden?
--:-- David Marcus: I guess that depends on whether he or the Democrats in general have anything to say about those issues, especially the economy and crime that can help them win. He's given daytime campaign speeches where he's tried to talk up low unemployment and argue that the economy is fundamentally strong. But that's just not what voters are seeing or saying. Is focusing on the somewhat esoteric, quote, threat to democracy, unquote, out of touch when people are struggling to buy groceries? Republicans say yes. But the president's other tactic telling them that everything's fine with the economy is maybe worse. So pick your poison, I guess.
--:-- David Marcus: Right. This comes in the final days of the election when former Democrat presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton have both been out on the trail. Are they actually eclipsing the sitting president? And what's this national speech in attempt to tamp that notion down? A lot of Republicans are making just that point It no secret that many Democrat candidates have been avoiding Biden Ohio Senate candidate Tim Ryan who locked in a battle with J Vance has gone so far as to say Biden shouldn't run again. Meanwhile, Obama and to a lesser extent, Clinton are being sent to some of these battleground states. Look, Biden obviously doesn't want to be ignored, and he has a lot of skin in this midterm. If it's a big red wave, calls for him not to run in 2024 will increase. So maybe this speech was a Hail Mary pass worth throwing, even though we know those rarely result in touchdowns.
--:-- Georgia Howe: Well, Dave, thanks for joining us, and we'll see you on election night, if not sooner.
--:-- David Marcus: Thanks for having me.
--:-- John Bickley: That was Daily Wire contributor David Marcus. A new report details the shocking conditions in L.A.'s juvenile detention centers. According to the report, Violent young inmates run the juvenile jails in Los Angeles. Daily Wire investigative reporter Maraida Lordi is here with the details for us.
--:-- Maraida Lordi: So, Maraida, what's going on in these jails?
--:-- Maraida Lordi: Hi, Georgia. So it looks like violence inside L.A.'s juvenile jails is now out of control. A new investigation by the Washington Examiner took a look at how far things have spiraled. Prison guards at Los Angeles County Juvenile Hall live in fear for their lives as they try to keep killers, carjackers, and gang members in line, according to the report. One official said LA's juvenile halls are, quote, on the verge of collapse. That official believes someone is going to get killed at some point. So how did this happen? How'd the situation get to this point?
--:-- Maraida Lordi: Well, part of the reason that these detention centers are so dangerous is that a juvenile has to be extremely violent to end up in one of these facilities. So the population is the worst of the worst. These are the most violent and behaviorally disturbed juvenile offenders who have committed the worst crimes all locked up together. Meanwhile, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has banned jail guards from using things like pepper spray or tasers on inmates because they are juveniles. Because the guards don't have much leverage to discipline the inmates, many have resorted to smuggling in drugs, laptops, and cell phones to ingratiate themselves with the inmates as a means of keeping the peace. According to some probation officials, officers regularly suffer serious injuries but get no support from L.A. County lawmakers, most of whom are in favor of a softer, progressive approach for younger offenders. Keep in mind, these inmates are often 18 or 19-year-old kids, and the guards are in their 40s or 50s. On top of that already dangerous situation, the board has also frozen hiring, which has caused a staff shortage at the jails.
--:-- Maraida Lordi: How many juvenile offenders are actually in the jail at this point?
--:-- Maraida Lordi: Currently, L.A. County has about 600 inmates in juvenile jails, but just four years ago, that number was three times as high. In 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill closing California's four state juvenile prisons, which had about 750 inmates ages 15 to 25, most of them convicted of violent felonies like murder and robbery. The idea behind closing the prisons was to house young offenders closer to their families and to focus on rehabilitating them, but it also means that extremely violent offenders are kept in a lower security environment or released. And another thing, Newsom actually signed another bill that bans prosecutors from charging juveniles with another violent felony if they commit it while jailed. So these young offenders know that in many cases, violence against guards or other inmates can't be prosecuted. That's terrifying for everyone involved.
--:-- Georgia Howe: Maraid, thanks for reporting.
--:-- Maraida Lordi: That was Daily Wire investigative reporter Maraida Lordi.
--:-- John Bickley: Another story we're tracking this week. In a joint effort Thursday, the U.S. and South Korea warned North Korea that any use of nuclear weapons would result in the end of Kim Jong-un's regime. That's all the time we've got this morning. Thanks for waking up with us. We'll be back this afternoon with more news you need to know.
