Ep. 113 - Leftist Jackals Prey On Parkland ft. MSD student Kyle Kashuv
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School students return to school today, two weeks after the horrific shooting. We will talk with one of them, Kyle Kashuv, not about guns, not about his thoughts on public policy, but rather about his experience of media outlets like CNN and Hollywood celebrities preying on his community. Then, we expose the real forces behind gun control efforts in Parkland and why they’re doing it. Finally, CNN analyst Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling clarifies his comments on full semi-auto weapons. We will clarify his clarification, which is really an obfuscation, because CNN belongs to its father and when it lies it speaks its native language.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School students returned to school today, two weeks after that horrific shooting.
We will talk with one of them, Kyle Kashuv, not about guns, not about his thoughts on public policy, but rather about his experience of media outlets like CNN and Hollywood celebrities and political operatives descending on and preying on his community.
Then we expose the real forces behind gun control efforts in Parkland and why they're doing it.
Finally, CNN analyst Lieutenant General Mark Hurtling clarifies his comments on full semi-automatic weapons.
We will clarify his clarification, which is really an obfuscation because CNN belongs to its father, and when it lies, it speaks its native language.
I'm Michael Knowles and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
I'm very excited to talk to Kyle as a sort of meta-conversation, a conversation about the way media have been using these students and putting them on television.
And we have to get to him in one second, but before we do that, we have to talk about hair.
We have got to keep the lights on here, and we've got to make sure that when the lights shine, they don't reflect off of my bald head.
They reflect off of my poofy-headed hair, which is why we have to talk about Keeps.
Keeps is a great sponsor of this show, and it is the easiest way to keep your hair.
Hair.
Hair loss is not just your dad's problem.
Everybody thinks it just happens when you get older.
We all think we're invincible, don't we, we youngins?
Well, it happens earlier in life than you think.
By 35, two out of three men will start losing their hair.
That's a pretty big number, by 35.
But hair loss is actually easy to prevent if you get started early.
We have to introduce Keeps, a new company offering a simple, clinically proven, affordable way to stop hair loss.
This company, it's got doctors on board.
This is proven to stop hair loss.
With Keeps, it is easier than ever for guys like you to keep your hair.
I mean, let me tell you something.
I, just speaking personally, I don't have a ton of things going for me when it comes to the ladies.
Alright, I'm willing to admit that.
It takes a big man to admit that.
I'm not exactly an Adonis of a man.
I'm not exactly a Herculean built man, you know.
I don't write any books with words in them.
Ben hasn't paid me in months.
He hasn't paid me since he gave me the Trump election check.
So, you know, luckily the one thing I've got going for me is my poofy hair.
I am, you know, it's good news.
I've got it on both sides of the family.
I'm hoping I get to keep it.
But you can't take the chance.
You have got to check out Keeps.
Keeps offers the only two hair loss products that are clinically proven to keep the hair you have.
You might hear a lot on the internet or on TV or something about all these different gizmos to keep your hair.
There are only two hair loss products that are clinically proven to keep the hair you have, and Keeps offers them.
You can sign up in less than five minutes, which is good.
I'm a millennial.
I don't do anything that takes more than five minutes.
$10 to $35 a month.
So it's $1 a day or less on average.
That's half of what you'd typically pay at the pharmacy because it cuts out the middleman.
And seriously, guys, what is having hair worth to you?
You go to a bar to pick up a chick or something like that, And how much are you going to pay at the bar just for one drink?
For a dollar a day or less, or significantly less, you can keep your hair.
It seems like the better option to me.
Getting started with keeps is so easy.
You just answer a few questions and you snap some photos.
A licensed doctor remotely reviews your information and gives you the right prescription.
So they actually have doctors on staff so that you're not just getting some generic whatever.
You'll get your prescription.
All without ever leaving your couch.
Within two to three days, a three-month supply of your treatment will arrive perfectly packaged at your door.
And I know some people are a little...
They don't want it to come to their door and they're embarrassed about this.
First of all, there's nothing to be embarrassed about.
The majority of men will start losing their hair.
The vast majority of men will start losing their hair by 35.
There's nothing to be embarrassed about.
But if you are worried, it comes in just a regular...
There's no information on it or anything.
Just says, keeps, you know, doesn't have like a balding man on the thing or anything like that.
Just very generic packaging.
If you're worried about that sort of thing, I wouldn't be because if you get this, what you're really saying is I want to make sure that I keep looking good and I'm not a big dummy who's going to let an easily preventable event happen to my hair.
I'm going to take...
When I'm young enough to do something about it.
But if you're worried about that sort of thing, you know, there's no marks on the packaging that would say, ha ha, look, this guy's losing his hair.
So Stop Hair Loss today, the easy way with Keeps, it offers customized treatment plans with only clinically proven hair loss products for about a dollar a day.
There are a lot of products on the market that say they're going to help with your hair loss.
These are only clinically proven from the comfort of your couch.
To receive your first month of treatment for free, go to keeps.com slash covefe, C-O-V-F-E-F-E. That is K-E-E-P-S dot com slash covefe.
You get a free month of treatment.
Don't say that I never did anything for you.
And when it helps you go out there and keep looking your best for years and years to come, you can look back and think of me and say, Thanks, Michael.
That was really nice.
When you've got that covfefe pulsing through your veins, you say, Oh, that's good.
I'm feeling pretty good.
Becauseofkeeps.com slash covfefe.
C-O-V-E-F-E. Keeps.
Hair today.
Hair tomorrow.
Hair today, hair tomorrow.
Okay, enough about hair.
Kyle Kashov is a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who survived the shooting in Parkland, Florida.
Unlike his classmates, Kyle has come out publicly in defense of the Second Amendment and the NRA and against that incompetent and cowardly Sheriff Scott Israel.
But I don't want to talk about any of those things with Kyle because I think it's really awful.
I think it's cheap and tawdry and awful of outlets like CNN to pimp these teenagers out who have survived a tragedy to push their anti-civil rights agenda.
And I don't want to do that even to push my own pro-civil rights agenda.
We've talked to Professor Volek about the Second Amendment.
We can keep talking about it.
What I would like to talk to Kyle about is the media, how the media and tech giants like Twitter have treated students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas.
So, Kyle, first, thank you so much for coming on.
I know that your high school reopened today.
We're praying for you here at The Daily Wire.
It's just an awful thing down there, and I'm sure it is not easy going back and settling in.
The first thing I want to talk to you about is the media.
Because this is something that you all can speak to better than anybody.
I cannot turn on CNN for the past two weeks without seeing Brian Stelter or one of his colleagues coaching your classmates who oppose the Second Amendment into saying something to advance that agenda.
In fact, the only time CNN reported on you, Kyle, it wrote, Kyle, 16, a Stoneman Douglas student, identifies as a Republican and a He said he has always been pro-guns, but looks at things differently since the shooting.
And then it moves.
Actually, to my knowledge, that isn't even true.
But then, surrounding the statement, it just talked about all of your other classmates pushing for gun bans.
How come, Kyle, CNN has not been inviting you on the air around the clock?
Well, first of all, I think that it's simply because I'm a Republican and that CNN is trying to post I push a very liberal agenda and I just don't fit their criteria.
It's very clear that most of the mainstream media is very liberal and they choose to have people who will assist in their agenda.
I think you're probably right about that.
And this brings to another aspect.
It isn't just, obviously, we know where CNN is coming from here.
We know that they're trying to push an agenda.
It is a little tawdry, I think, to use, I think it's a little tawdry to use the victims or survivors of a shooting like this to push a political agenda.
But it's even more tawdry to only bring on the ones who agree with their political point of view to talk about those politics.
Now, all of your classmates who oppose the Second Amendment have received blue Twitter checkmarks, scores of followers.
You, conspicuously, have been granted neither of those things.
Why do you think that is?
Well, I think, first of all, I've been getting so much support in the media as of right now, especially on Twitter, from Republicans.
I think as of right now, I'm up to like 60,000 or something followers on Twitter, which is really amazing.
I think that maybe Twitter has a liberal agenda, somewhat, and that they choose who to verify and who not to.
And that's saddening, but because they're a private organization, they're allowed to do so, granted in their own rights.
But still, it's quite saddening to see that a lot of my peers, who are also activists, and I'm trying...
Make a change.
Although liberal are being verified.
Yeah, they are.
Because it used to be to be verified.
It just was, you know, if people were pretending to be you or they wanted to make it clear that this was the real person.
And then starting with that white nationalist guy, Richard Spencer, they started pulling the verification as though he's no longer who he is, you know, and then it became clearly much more of an endorsement.
Somehow I still have my check mark, but that probably won't go on for long.
But I think it's somewhat of a, you know, I mean, like, it's an ego boost, you know, especially for the kids who get it and for the people who get it.
They think that they're better than everyone else simply because they have the check mark.
And it doesn't have that much...
except saying that you've been recognized by a private company.
And this is really the reason I brought you on is because I was very hesitant to talk to the people at your school just because you've had a tragedy that doesn't seem to me a good reason to say, okay, now promote my gun agenda or something on television.
But what I want to ask you is CNN, Mike Bloomberg's anti-gun group Everytown, how many other organizations, the George Soros' MoveOn.org, the Women's March, even Planned Parenthood for some reason, they have all descended on your town.
Do you think all of these political operatives Have helped your community?
They start a conversation, as they always seem to say?
Or would it have been better if the news cameras and the Twitter checkmarks and the on-TV activists and the political operatives never went anywhere near Parkland?
I think there are two parts.
I think the part one is that, first of all, it's a good story.
And it brings in the views, and sadly, it brings in the clicks.
And that's what a lot of the mainstream media wants.
They want that attention.
You see kids crying, you see mothers crying, white mothers crying.
You see people in pay, and that's sadly what attracts the everyday viewer.
That's what brings in the clicks.
The second aspect is that what I see, I see that a lot of the mainstream media, especially CNN, is doing a divide, is growing a divide between our country, between the left and the right, that truly isn't existent.
I really see that America wants to have this be a bipartisan issue, and they want to solve this collectively.
And what CNN is doing is that they're splitting between there's no middle ground, it's either you're on the left and you're against it, or you're part of the right.
And there's no middle ground.
It's quite concerning.
That is.
I mean, this is my real criticism of CNN here.
Obviously, it's a story.
People are going to cover it.
It's a big story.
It's a big tragedy.
It's a big shooting.
So people are going to cover it, and they should cover it.
But it doesn't have to be partisan.
The gun grabbers want to grab the guns like they always do, and supporters of the constitutionally protected civil right to keep and bear arms point out that no gun control law would have prevented this awful shooting.
But Americans should be able to come together and grieve at least, and clearly CNN has precluded any chance of that on the national level.
For your community itself, has Parkland itself come together, or is Parkland as divided as the rest of the country?
I think that right now, Parkland is especially, like, has come together.
But I think that CNN has put in a wedge between our community simply by allowing fame chasers.
It allows people who simply want the views and the attention to acquire that very easily.
I see people who, every day, should not be getting a lot of the media attention, who are seeking it firsthand to...
To generate their own agenda and to generate their own publicity.
Are you talking about people from Parkland or are you talking about commentators on CNN? It's clear to see that there are some students at my school who choose to further their own career.
It's interesting you say that.
I was kind of thinking, because I really don't blame the teenagers who are going on TV. Well, yeah, we're teenagers.
You can't blame a teenager.
He's a 16-year-old.
We're still children.
And that's excluded from the fact that we're kids.
You shouldn't take us seriously.
I'm actually very glad to hear you say that because I sort of think, you know, if I were a teenager and someone asked me to go on TV, I'd go on TV, even if it were some god-awful network like CNN. I still would do it.
And, you know, if I were a teenager, I'd probably go on and spout off about things that I didn't know very much about and about constitutional law and public policy.
And I'd probably do all of that because that's what teenagers do almost by definition.
But there has been so much activism and so much...
Attention paid to the gun control activists who are coming out of Parkland, gun control activist students.
And all of the activism seems to be either funded by people in Hollywood or funded by people in DC. And I really wonder how much of it is coming from Parkland itself and how much of it is just being fed by big news networks and Democrat activists.
I honestly think that there are two aspects.
The community is very supportive in that they're pushing people to speak out and their voice, their opinions.
But the second thing is I really think that a lot of this is coordinated by mainstream media, by CNN or aspects like that.
There's no way students, kids, 16-year-olds, would have been able to accomplish all that they've done.
Yeah, I do wonder, when you see about these national protests and all of these events, you think, I don't know, when I was 16 or 17, I wasn't forming national events.
I wasn't coordinating with the media.
Well, then again, well, then again...
This day and age, do we have Twitter?
We're able to massively and quickly organize.
So that is another aspect.
That's true.
And immediately attract celebrity support.
That's true.
Twitter is amazing that way, especially when you get hundreds of thousands of followers and a little blue checkmark.
In terms of your classmates, Maybe not the ones that we've seen on television constantly, but what do your classmates that you've talked to think about this media circus, this anti-Second Amendment activism, everything else?
Are they on board with it, bring on the cameras, or do they think that it detracts from what took place, that it's taking what should be a sober grieving process and making it into something else?
What do they think?
I think specifically those who have lost their best friends and those who are in the freshman building, So there are different buildings.
There was a freshman building, and you're saying those people aren't really talking out that much.
Oh, interesting.
That is quite interesting.
I didn't realize it was broken down by class.
A lot of those who suffered the most traumatic stories, like the people who were actually in the rooms that were shot into and the people that saw their best friends die in front of their eyes, I have not seen a single one put on a very big platform and speaking out.
So you're saying that the people that we're looking at on television, they weren't in the building where the shooting took place?
I think that there are many people who are now speaking out who are valued as heroes, specifically were not in the freshman building.
Me, myself, I was not in the building.
So when people call me a hero, I'm like, no, I'm not a hero.
I'm simply a teenager who's forcing his own opinion.
Who was on this campus but wasn't in the building, right?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Wow, that's interesting.
I actually did not know.
There's been so much reporting on this, and there's been so much demagoguery.
It seemed like immediately the media moved from, this awful event happened, now we have to talk about gun control.
And the stories of the event itself, I think, basically got lost in the shuffle.
I think the gun control pretty much took over all of that.
That is...
That's really incredible.
Do you have any other...
I don't mean to come off and say I don't want to hear your opinion about anything.
And I just think that the media who have pounced and said, what do you think?
Don't you think we need more gun control?
Don't you think?
I think that's really awful.
But is there anything else you'd like to say to the audience before we let you go?
Sure, I really think that the Never Again movement, I'm seeing we're doing good work.
I really think that at the end of the day, a lot of leaders currently understand that we have to issue this as a bipartisan issue.
We have to work together as a bipartisan issue and that we're using them now like the logics come into play for what's logically achievable.
And now we understand that, look, there are certain aspects that cannot be repealed.
It cannot be changed, such as, you know, banning all guns, simply not going to happen.
And that we understand what can be done.
So, you know, mental health restrictions, keep your background checks.
We're focusing on what can be done.
And what's reasonable.
And it's really gladdening to see the entire community, Parkland itself, coming together.
It's becoming a bipartisan issue, and I really think that's important, that the moderate, even though the media reports that there's no middle ground, there is a bipartisan issue.
Of course, most people in this country, I think, are sort of somewhere in that area, but all you ever see on television are these screaming celebrities who are taking some extreme position.
That really, really interesting perspective, Kyle.
Thank you very much.
Our heart's going out to you down there in Parkland as you guys go back to school, and we appreciate it.
Thank you.
Thanks for coming on.
No problem.
All right.
We are going to move on now to the March for Our Lives.
So this is another aspect of this entire event.
The March for Our Lives is the new movement that is coming out of Parkland.
Now, according to marchforourlives.com, they've scheduled this for March 24th.
That's when it's going to occur.
It's going to be this grassroots thing.
MarchForOurLives.com says, March for Our Lives is created by, inspired by, and led by students across the country who will no longer risk their lives waiting for someone else to take action to stop the epidemic of mass school shootings that has become all too familiar.
In the tragic wake of the 17 lives brutally cut short in Florida, politicians are telling us that now is not the time to talk about guns.
March for Our Lives believes the time is now.
Turns out all of that origin story that they've just told you is a lie.
That isn't true.
As with all of these lefty groups, this is not a grassroots effort.
This is a This is not coming from students.
This is not a grassroots effort.
There are rich, famous, powerful pockets that are organizing everything from behind the scenes.
And you see this all the time.
Do you remember the pussy hats that came out?
Donald Trump wins the election, and then five seconds later, there are 100,000 of these specific pink hats around the country.
Didn't anybody think like, huh, I wonder where all those hats came from?
Isn't that weird?
Do you think it's just grassroots?
Everybody just knitted their own hat one day?
Of course not.
This was organized by Democrat operatives.
This was organized by Democrat funders.
And the same thing is happening with March for Our Lives.
On marchforourlives.com, they say, this is not a political issue.
They always say that.
Democrats always say, this is not a political issue.
We just want to take all your guns.
It's not a political issue.
It's not a constitutional issue.
We're just going to deprive you of your civil rights.
This is what MarchForOurLives.com says, quote, School safety is not a political issue.
There cannot be two sides to doing everything in our power to ensure the lives and futures of children who are at risk of dying when they should be learning, playing, and growing.
The mission and focus of March For Our Lives is to demand that a comprehensive and effective bill Be immediately brought before Congress to address these gun issues.
No special interest group, no political agenda is more critical than timely passage of legislation to effectively address the gun violence issues that are rampant in our country.
First of all, they're not rampant.
Gun violence has been declining for decades.
So have mass shootings.
So have school shootings.
But to hear, there aren't two sides.
To hear things like, this isn't a political issue.
This is fascistic language.
This is language that says, there is no debate here.
There is no other point of view.
This is the point of view.
And it's trying to convince you that we need to look past the debate.
We need to just accept their premises.
And they'll say, how many of our year guns should we take?
Ten or twenty?
That's basically their starting point.
It isn't, should we take your guns?
Is that constitutional for us to take your guns and your civil rights?
Will it actually reduce gun violence?
Is there increasing gun violence?
They skip all of that.
They know that the facts are not on their side.
So they have to skip all of that and demagogue and talk about children playing and having fun and all of that.
Now, do we have to sign off of Facebook and YouTube, or can I get this last bit in?
Last bit.
I can get this last bit.
All right, good.
Because this is...
Unbelievable.
We have now learned that March for Our Lives is being run by Hollywood celebrities and major political operatives.
This is from TMZ. You know that great news outlet, TMZ. TMZ reports that 22,000 March for Our Lives shirts have been ordered.
March for Our Lives, right?
And it's just like the pussy hats all over again.
22,000.
I wonder where that order came from.
TMZ called because TMZ wanted to learn more about who was running this thing.
And they were directed to a woman who's running the March for Our Lives fundraising campaign.
The woman they were directed to is not a local mother in Parkland.
It was not a staff member of the school where the shooting took place.
It was not anyone from anywhere near Florida.
The woman they were directed to is an employee of Hollywood talent manager Scooter Braun.
That's Justin Bieber's talent manager.
I think it's Kanye's manager.
Scooter Braun.
Hmm, that's weird.
What's that guy doing?
Braun is at the center of the organizing and fundraising here, but he didn't want it to come out that he was, so he used his employees for cover.
They do this all the time.
We see this happen all the time.
Also helping to run the show from Hollywood is George Clooney.
George Clooney donated half a million dollars and he is calling the shots from behind the scenes as well.
It actually was Clooney who recruited Scooter Braun to run the thing.
So Clooney was involved first.
Then actually another major funder of this March for Our Lives is the future dystopian president, Oprah Winfrey.
She matched George Clooney's donation of half a million dollars.
And then Clooney, after kind of running the show from behind, recruited Scooter Braun to run the operations through the veil of his employees.
When he was asked about this, when George Clooney was asked, he said, Amal and I support the students of Marjory Stoneman Douglas.
We've donated money to help pay for their march.
But the march and all of the activities surrounding this movement belong to the young people across the country.
To suggest anything else would not only be completely inaccurate, but also undercut the courage and determination of these incredible kids.
They make me proud to be an American.
Okay, well it might undercut all of that, but what if it's true?
What if it's true?
What if we do suggest that this is a directed campaign from major Democrat operatives and Democrat funders such as yourself, George Clooney, that is using and exploiting this tragedy and these kids to push an agenda that they've had for 100 years?
What if we said that?
Would that be true?
They make me proud to be an American.
That's very nice, George Clooney, but how's the reality?
Who else is behind the March for Our Lives?
How about this guy?
I think what the students of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School are doing is unbelievable.
They're speaking out with more guts, passion, conviction, and common sense than most adults.
They're high school students.
It's beyond impressive.
That strength that they have, it's inspiring.
They are angry and they're doing something about it and creating change.
This is a real revolution.
And they have organized a peaceful march on Saturday, March 24th, in Washington, D.C., to demand action to prevent gun violence.
I just want to say I stand behind you guys, and I will be marching alongside you with my wife and two children in D.C. to show our support.
So to everyone...
Jimmy Fallon can't let Jimmy Kimmel have all the fun, can he?
Can't let Jimmy Kimmel have all the virtue signaling and all that.
We're going to have to get a few more of these tumblers, by the way, because I think Jimmy's about to make a ratings play.
So Fallon will not be only exploiting the children in Florida.
He'll be exploiting his own children as well while he marches in this gun control parade.
Why are celebrities all joining this thing?
It's because they love gun control, but there is another reason.
There is another major reason, but you guys, you are true sadists.
You know that?
I can't tell you what that reason is until you go to dailywire.com.
If you're watching right now on Facebook or YouTube, haha.
If you're watching on Facebook, you'll have to go to dailywire.com.
I'm sorry, but this does explain a lot of what's going on here.
Plus, we've also got to get to the full semi-autos again.
We've got to get a little bit more into the gun technicality because CNN clarified.
There they clarified.
Clarified they're full semi-autos.
But you can't get that unless you go to dailywire.com.
If you go, you get me.
You get the Andrew Klavan show.
You get the Ben Shapiro show.
You get the conversation, which Ben, the big boss, is doing himself this coming month.
So you can ask him questions.
If you're a member, everybody can watch.
Only a few people can ask questions.
Many are called.
Few are chosen.
But none of that matters right now because what really matters is this leftist here's Tumblr.
Because I have a sneaking suspicion that we're going to be allowed to keep our civil rights for another day.
We're going to be allowed to keep our civil liberties for another day.
Nothing so infuriates a Democrat as when an American gets to keep his civil rights.
Nothing so infuriates them.
And when they get angry, they don't, like, start doing cool, like, macho stuff.
They just start crying like little girls, you know?
So when that happens, you're going to need to make sure you have the only FDA-approved vessel for leftist tears in the entire country.
They can be served hot or cold.
They are always salty and delicious.
But protect yourself.
Protect your family.
Get the Leftist Tears Tumblr at dailywire.com.
We'll be right back.
So why are celebrities all joining this thing?
Why do they join the March 4-Hour Lives?
Think of the children.
Think of the children.
Well, one, it's because they love gun control.
They obviously love gun control.
The only time they like guns is when they use them every three seconds in every movie that they've ever made and when they pay people to stand around them with guns to protect them.
The only time they don't like guns is when ordinary Americans get to have them to protect themselves from threats and from tyranny.
But they do love gun control as a rule because it won't affect them.
They're cronies, so they get to keep all the guns they want on screen and in real life, too.
The real reason that celebrities and major Democrat funders are behind this March for Our Lives is that it's a huge middle finger to the pro-life movement.
That's, mark my words, this is no conspiracy theory.
It's why they got the name.
They named it March for Our Lives.
This is to counteract the March for Life, March for Our Lives, March for Life, which is the longest continual protest in U.S. history.
Now, if they didn't want it to counter the March for Life, what could they have called it?
The March for School Safety, the March to Protect Our Children, the March to...
For gun control.
The march to take your guns away.
The march to ban fully semi-automatic weapons, or whatever they think weapons are now.
But they didn't.
It's a march for our lives.
As if to say, the march for life doesn't really protect life.
This is our lives that we're talking about.
They're trying to have their own March for Life because the March for Life is the longest continual protest in U.S. history.
It's grown in size every single year, except for there are a couple of weather events where still they got 20,000 people to show up, even in a blizzard.
President Trump this year became the first U.S. president to address the crowd via live stream.
In 1974, when the March for Life began, it drew 20,000 demonstrators.
That was just after Roe v. Wade.
40 years later, the demonstration drew 650,000 demonstrators.
That is a massive upsurge in order of magnitude and many multiples then.
There's also been a major sway in public opinion.
There's also been a major sway in public opinion.
Public opinion in support of abortion was at a pretty significant high during the decision of Roe v. Wade.
Public opinion in support of abortion was at a pretty significant high during the decision of Roe v. Wade.
It's gone down ever since.
It's gone down ever since.
Right now, the country's split about 50-50.
Right now the country's split about 50-50.
Women are split about 50-50.
Women are split about 50-50.
And actually when you get beyond the labels of pro-life and pro-choice and you get down to should abortion be allowed here, should abortion be allowed here, should abortion be allowed here, a Marist poll shows that the vast, vast majority of women think that abortion should be illegal in most cases.
And actually, when you get beyond the labels of pro-life and pro-choice, and you get down to should abortion be allowed here, should abortion be allowed here, should abortion be allowed here, a Marist poll shows that the vast, vast majority of women think that abortion should be illegal in most cases.
And actually the majority of women believe that abortion should be illegal in all cases except for rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother.
The majority of women think that.
Abortion levels this past year fell to the lowest level since Roe v. Wade.
Now don't get too excited.
That's still a million per year.
But they have been going down.
March for Life has been working and public opinion has been turning about against Democrats' sacramental view of abortion.
Planned Parenthood alone killed 300,000 babies in the womb this past year.
If you're concerned about marching for our lives, if you're concerned about marching for the lives for children, why not oppose Planned Parenthood?
Planned Parenthood, by the way, which still gets a matching donation charitable deal from United Airlines.
United Airlines pulling any relationship with the NRA, which doesn't kill anybody and just protects civil rights, but United Airlines still matches contributions to Planned Parenthood, which slaughters a third of a million babies per year.
Canada right now is trying to legalize the state killing of mentally retarded and mentally ill children.
They passed a euthanasia, is the euphemism that's used.
I don't even use the term.
They legalized assisted suicide in 2016, but only for those who are at least 18 years old.
Now they're trying to extend that practice to mature minors.
You know, mature minors.
It's another jumbo shrimp, right?
You're a mature minor.
They want to draw a moral equivalence.
These guys who now have the, look, March for Life is hugely successful, has a moral and political high ground.
The left wants their own, and so they want to draw moral equivalence between opposing civil rights and defending babies from being killed in the womb.
They always try to draw moral equivalence.
They do this all the time.
They do it with terrorists.
They say that we're the same as terrorists.
They say, oh, you know, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
They compare Christian bakers who don't want to have to participate in a gay wedding to Muslim terrorists.
Who's to say?
Who's to say who's better, who's worse?
It's all sort of the same, right?
There's no moral equivalence here.
They need to draw moral equivalence because their views are morally repulsive and they're morally idiotic, but they can't do it.
So, enough on the gun.
I think now the school has reopened.
I think we've talked about this gun issue enough.
I think there is really no reason to pay any attention to the mainstream media, to the Democrat operatives, to the Hollywood celebrities who are exploiting this for a gun control push.
I think we've answered all of their arguments.
I don't think they have any credibility whatsoever.
I'm glad we could put a fine point on that.
But we haven't.
We have to clarify one last bit about the fully semis that that general on CNN was talking about.
Can we play the clip?
Now, those are single shots.
If I wanted to fire this on full semi-automatic, all I do is keep firing.
Now, I won't probably hit the target when I do this, when we look at the target later on, but I'm going to fire about five shots.
Okay.
First of all, now he's clarifying this.
He's trying to walk back his comments.
First of all, why wouldn't you hit the target?
You said, I'm going to pull my finger faster, so I'm probably not going to hit the target.
First of all, they're shooting at 25 yards, so you can even see it in that sign there.
He's not shooting down a football field.
This is a pretty small gun range.
I am not a good shot.
I'm actually not very good.
Not a very good marksman.
I'll hit the target if you pull it fast.
You're a general.
What are you doing?
I wonder if he was doing a lot of paperwork or something.
That is not hard to hit a target if you just pull a little faster.
On to the point itself.
He's now clarifying.
He's saying, for all those critiquing my phrase, full semi-automatic, you are correct.
I was attempting to inform the crew that I was going from single shot to continuous trigger and rapid trigger pull using the semi-automatic capability.
Did anyone get that?
Me neither.
My apologies, but perhaps you're missing the point.
So you just used a lot of words, right?
Respectfully, perhaps you are obscuring the point, General, because what you're trying to do is elide two phrases.
Fully automatic, which means you pull the trigger once, and then you have continuous fire.
And semi-automatic, where you pull the trigger once, and one bullet comes out.
A full semi is what Muslim terrorists drive down the streets of New York and Nice.
It does not refer to any type of gun.
Might refer to a truck.
It does not refer to a gun.
He's trying to cover up now, and he's doing that same thing that the left always does when they get called out on their nonsense.
First of all, I don't believe that a lieutenant general doesn't know the difference between fully automatic and semi-automatic.
I think he is working for CNN. He's a CNN analyst.
He's pushing their ridiculous opinion.
Let's not forget, people on the left, Democrats occasionally go to the military, too.
This might be one of these occasions where you have a guy who's basically carrying water for gun control.
I don't think he doesn't know the difference.
I think he's trying to blur the distinction.
And you know he's blurring the distinction because look at the words that he uses.
He says, I was going from single shot.
No, you're always on single shot.
The gun is a single shot gun.
That's all it is.
I was going from single shot to continuous trigger and rapid trigger pull.
Continuous trigger pull, that means you just keep pulling it, right?
I'm on continuous sipping.
That's continuous sipping.
I go up and down and up and I keep taking sips, right?
It's just one sip each time.
And then he says using the semi-automatic capability.
There's one capability on that gun that you're shooting, General.
The one capability is semi-automatic.
You just used four There are different phrases to refer to the same thing, and you're doing that to blur the distinction between fully automatic and semi-automatic.
Ain't gonna work.
Thanks for your service.
I respect your position, but what you're saying is total nonsense, and CNN, obviously, you're carrying water for CNN's gun control.
It's really sad, and it ain't going to work, Buster.
You've got to pay attention to language.
Our great president, the great man, President Covfefe, he always says, use only the best words, folks.
Use the best words, folks.
Come on.
I'll be doing a Prager video, I think, on this topic.
Stay tuned for that.
Only use the best words, folks.
And when these guys are so slick with their words, make sure you pay attention when they do it.
Okay, that's our show for today.
Get your mailbag questions in.
We're doing the mailbag tomorrow so I can answer all of the questions in a very moderately satisfactory way.
So do that.
Tune in then.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
I'll see you tomorrow.
The Michael Knowles Show is a daily wire forward publishing production. publishing production.
