Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Dec. 12, 2018 - The Michael Knowles Show

50:03

Ep. 267 - The Left Makes Trump Look Polite

A rough day for Trump as his longtime personal lawyer goes to the clink for 3 years! What does it mean for the Trump presidency. Then, Ann Coulter gets in trouble for telling the truth, Google helps Democrats, and the government might shut down! Date: 12-12-2018 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	A rough day for President Trump as his longtime personal lawyer goes to the clink for three years.
	What does this mean for the Trump presidency?
	Then, Ann Coulter gets in trouble for telling the truth, as she usually does, Google helps Democrats win elections, and the government might shut down.
	I sure hope so.
	I'm Michael Knowles, and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
	We've also got to get to the new politically correct version of Baby It's Cold Outside.
	We'll get to that at the end.
	It is my favorite thing going around the internet.
	But first, let's make a little bit of money, honey.
	Let's talk about ProTalus with over 1 million happy, pain-free customers and a 97% success rate.
	Talis insoles have changed the footwear industry and created a new level of expectation never seen before for comfortable all-day shoes.
	ProTalis has helped over a million people experience relief.
	It's a unique technology.
	It's proven incredibly effective.
	There's an unconditional 90-day love them or your money back guarantee.
	You will not want your money back.
	They are absolutely great.
	I didn't realize this myself, but a lot of knee issues, hip issues, back issues, even upper body muscle tightness can stem from improper alignment, and that all begins at the foot.
	In fact, this is true for 80% of people.
	It might have been true for me.
	I love these insoles.
	Most footwear, even very expensive quality shoes, offer at most minimal support where the foot needs it most.
	These are different.
	What makes Protalis unique and different from anything else is they are engineered with the focus on biomechanics of your body.
	So it is engineered to support your body based on very basic body mechanics.
	Over 100,000 five-star reviews.
	Positive reviews.
	This holiday season only, my listeners can save $20 per pair on any ProTalus insole at ProTalus.com when you enter PODCAST20 at checkout.
	That's one of the lowest prices of the year, exclusively for our loyal listeners.
	Shipping is free.
	If you buy two or more pairs, they will upgrade you to free expedited shipping.
	90-day money-back guarantee, but you won't want it.
	Nothing to lose except for pain.
	ProTalus.com, promo code PODCAST20 to save $20 per pair on any ProTalus insole.
	Where I want to begin today, I don't want to begin with Michael Cohen going to the clink for three years.
	I don't want to begin with Ann Coulter being right even.
	I don't even want to begin with the new politically correct version of Baby It's Cold Outside.
	I want to begin with a ridiculous canard that we keep hearing in the mainstream media, which is that Donald Trump...
	This is the reason why our political discourse is rude.
	Donald Trump is destroying our discourse.
	He's destroying the norms of our discourse.
	Other politicians would never speak the way Trump does.
	Other politicians would never pick the fights that Trump does.
	Other media figures would never BS.
	This started way before Donald Trump.
	And even the fights that we're seeing now are being picked by the left and Trump is responding.
	And then when Trump responds, he gets yelled at and the country's angry with him for starting the fight.
	He didn't start it.
	He's just responding.
	Case in point is Nancy Pelosi.
	You You saw that wonderful Oval Office meeting yesterday where it was Chuck and Nancy and then President Trump and Mike Pence just shaking his head in pure misery thinking, how did I get here?
	What did I do wrong in my life that I'm sitting in this office right now?
	And so they had their little fight.
	So Nancy Pelosi comes out of that meeting and this is what CNN reports she said.
	According to an aide in the room, Pelosi told colleagues behind closed doors that, quote, it's like a manhood thing for him, as if manhood could ever be associated with him.
	This wall thing.
	Ah, discourse in this country is at such a wonderful level, isn't it?
	I share her sorrow that discourse has fallen to that level.
	But it's Nancy Pelosi who did it.
	It's Nancy Pelosi who's saying that Donald Trump only wants to build the wall because he's insecure about his manhood.
	Not because there are 3,000 illegal aliens pouring over our border every day.
	Not because we have record high levels of illegal immigration into this country.
	Not because illegal aliens access our welfare system.
	At a much higher rate than native-born Americans, and we have a massive welfare system right now, and we have over $20 trillion in debt.
	We have a high debt-to-GDP ratio, not because in certain areas illegal aliens commit a disproportionate share of violent crime.
	Not any of that.
	It's because of his manhood.
	Because Trump isn't a man, you see?
	And it's not just her.
	It's not just her who did it.
	You'll remember during the 2016 presidential primaries, Donald Trump brought up, he made a penis joke at a presidential debate.
	Except he didn't.
	He's not the guy to bring it up.
	The first guy to make a penis joke at a presidential debate was Marco Rubio.
	Who was making it about Trump?
	Do you remember he said, Donald Trump has small hands, and you know what they say about small hands?
	And then Donald Trump responded to that, and he said, I'm doing just fine.
	Thank you.
	My body's looking just fine.
	But it was Rubio who brought it up.
	It was not Donald Trump.
	Who started the bickering in the Oval Office yesterday?
	We played the clip.
	Trump was being very nice.
	He was playing relatively friendly in that Oval Office meeting.
	It was Nancy Pelosi who said, we don't want a government shutdown.
	We don't want a Trump shutdown.
	And he said, what was that?
	Come again?
	The Trump shutdown?
	And then she went after him.
	She's the one who broke that cordial meeting up.
	She's the one who tried to get her little line in.
	And who made the comment afterward?
	Nancy Pelosi.
	She's who did.
	So I just don't want to hear it anymore.
	It's true that Donald Trump is better at doing insults than the left is.
	It's true that he's funnier at it and he gets more play.
	And obviously he's the president, so he just has more of a bully pulpit.
	But he's not the one who's starting this.
	This has been true throughout Trump's career.
	He gets critiqued for being mean or being brash or whatever.
	But...
	He is always responding.
	Even with his big major fight against Rosie O'Donnell.
	Rosie O'Donnell went on television and said Donald Trump is bankrupt.
	He goes bankrupt all the time.
	And after she said that, Donald Trump unleashed the furies of hell on her for months at a time and called her fat and ugly and stupid and all of these awful things.
	But it was her who started it, and that's the same thing that's going on here.
	There's another irony, too, by the way, which is that Nate Silver, he's the pollster guy whose entire career is based on predicting that Barack Obama would win elections, and he tweeted out yesterday and said, the only reason that Republicans don't like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is her gender and her race.
	Which I guess makes us anti-Semites, because now she's a Jew.
	She's a trans Jew.
	I don't know.
	I think she's about as Jewish as Elizabeth Warren is Cherokee.
	But he's saying the only reason that Republicans don't like her is because of bigotry.
	I thought it was Alexandria's blithe ignorance, but apparently it's some sort of bigotry.
	And he also said what they don't understand is that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez talks like a New Yorker.
	She doesn't talk like D.C. people or Middle America people.
	Okay, now do that for Trump.
	Now do the same exact thing for Trump.
	Because Donald Trump actually does talk like a New Yorker.
	And unlike Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who pretends to be Jenny from the block even though she grew up in an affluent Westchester suburb, one town over from where I grew up.
	Actually, she grew up in a nicer town than where I grew up.
	Donald Trump actually was raised in Queens.
	He actually does talk like a guy from Queens.
	But of course, Nate Silver wouldn't do that.
	The left won't do that.
	It is a hideous double standard.
	And just the last point I want to make about Nancy Pelosi's comment is I'm very confused now.
	Is manhood a good thing or a bad thing?
	Because she's insulting Trump and saying manhood could never be associated with Donald Trump.
	But I thought manhood was toxic.
	Is manhood good or bad?
	Is it a virtue or is it toxic?
	Which one is it?
	Is Trump manly or he's too manly, he's a masculine machismo chauvinist, or he's unmanly?
	Which one is it?
	I'm not quite sure.
	I'm not sure they're quite sure either.
	It isn't just bias, though, by the way, among these politicians.
	It has reached a fever pitch in the mainstream media when they go after not only President Trump, but after members of his administration.
	Here was MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski, Joe Scarborough's most recent future wife, talking about the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia, and specifically how Mike Pompeo is managing this very delicate relationship that is, what would you expect her to say?
	She'd say, well, he's got to balance this because the new crown prince of Saudi Arabia is a reformer, and he's being kinder toward the West and kinder toward Israel, and he's balancing out the trouble and the grave nuclear threat of Iran in the Middle East.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	She didn't say any of that.
	She called him a butt boy.
	Here's Mika.
	So, Joe, I just, I have to ask because I don't think there, I... I can't think of anyone here who could put it more clearly than you.
	I understand that Donald Trump doesn't care.
	Heilman makes a good point.
	He doesn't care.
	But why doesn't Mike Pompeo care right now?
	Are the pathetic deflections that we just heard when he appeared on Fox and Friends, is that a patriot speaking?
	Or a wannabe dictator's butt boy?
	I'm dead serious.
	I'm asking, are these the words of a patriot?
	He's debased himself.
	He once again has undercut the conclusions of our intel community.
	So, if you were just listening, you might have assumed that was an SNL skit of the Morning Joe show.
	It's not.
	That was the real thing.
	She really said it.
	And if you heard that little skip in the audio, that wasn't on our end.
	It's because MSNBC tried to catch that word, but they missed it.
	It was too late.
	She goes, he looks like a butt boy.
	Beep.
	Like, guys, maybe a little faster.
	Maybe hire a producer who's got a faster trigger finger.
	But look what was included in that.
	She questioned his patriotism.
	Whenever a conservative questions a Democrat's patriotism, what do we hear?
	Oh, how awful.
	Democrats are protesting the American flag.
	Remember, Michelle Obama said she was never proud of her country.
	Barack Obama said he doesn't believe in American exceptionalism.
	He said it's no different than any other country's exceptionalism because he doesn't even understand what that term means.
	And so when we question their patriotism, that's how dare you?
	How dare you?
	But then when you have the Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, Who is just trying to manage a very delicate situation and not blow up the whole Middle East.
	She says he's not patriotic and he's a butt boy, which raises another question.
	We were asked the question about Nancy Pelosi and Donald Trump's manhood.
	What is it?
	Is it good to be gay or is it...
	Is it bad to be gay?
	Is it ridiculous to be gay?
	Is it worthy of derision to be gay?
	Because when you use a term like butt boy, you're referring to gay sex.
	That's what she's referring to.
	So on the one hand, we're told that we're living in a culture that affirms homosexuality.
	It's okay to be gay.
	It's great to be gay.
	Paint the White House in rainbow colors.
	On the other hand, it's the left who is using gay slurs to make fun of their opponents.
	That's fine.
	I'm all for telling jokes about every group of people.
	That's just fine.
	But which one is it?
	Which is it?
	They can't give an answer to that.
	And it goes so much further.
	It goes to CNN. It goes to the heights of left-wing commentary and left-wing news.
	But first, before we can...
	Before we get to Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper, we have to make a little money and thank our advertiser at Brownells.
	Brownells is a big proponent and supporter of the Second Amendment.
	They have been for 80 years.
	What you should know about Brownells is they're online and buying guns, ammo, accessories online is convenient.
	It's totally legal.
	A lot of new people are coming into the fold of firearm ownership.
	Young people, women, urbanites, they're taking an interest in firearms and self-protection.
	And I'll tell you, one thing I noticed in California, whenever I have an impulse to get a new gun or to get some new accessory, it's whenever they make it illegal.
	Whenever they say, in two months it's going to be illegal, then all of us firearm enthusiasts rush out and we go buy it because you want to get grandfathered in.
	And a great way to do this is Brownells.
	It's the world's leading supplier of firearms, ammunition, firearm accessories, reloading components, and more.
	They offer an industry-exclusive, guaranteed forever warranty on all parts and accessories.
	They offer nearly 120,000 items from new guns and ammo to nearly any gun part manageable.
	They have more than 5,500 partner FFL around the country to make your online gun purchase go smoothly.
	It's family-owned, veteran-owned, has been doing business in the country's heartland for 80 years.
	Don't forget about the gun guy or gal on your Christmas list, namely me.
	Send me great Brownells gift cards for Christmas.
	They make great stocking stuffers.
	Go to brownells.com.
	Put some freedom in your loved one's Christmas.
	Give the gift of freedom.
	Oh, I can't wait.
	When I wake up on Christmas, I go to my stocking and I see a Brownells gift card.
	Have I made this clear that I want you to send me Brownells gift cards?
	All right.
	I think I've driven the point home.
	It's not just Mika Brzezinski.
	This goes all the way to CNN. Some people lament.
	The exposure of media bias.
	They say, I wish we had this objective media like they imagine that we used to have.
	We never had it.
	They just hid it before.
	Now they're not hiding it.
	And here is Don Lemon on CNN thanking God for Nancy Pelosi.
	I say that today because as I was laying, you know, taking the Theraflu night time this morning as I was laying in bed this afternoon and I saw this on television and just objectively speaking, I was like, oh my gosh.
	Nancy Pelosi is a boss.
	I mean, she handles herself amazingly.
	A lot of people don't like Nancy Pelosi.
	I'm sure Democrats are going all across the country tonight.
	Thank God for Nancy Pelosi.
	He's sure, because he's a Democrat who said that last night, because she's amazing and she's a boss, just objectively speaking.
	We're not talking subjectively, we're just saying objectively.
	I like that he's coming out and saying this.
	I actually get kind of a kick out of Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, because they're both total partisan Democrats.
	And, you know, Don Lemon is way out there.
	I believe he was the guy at CNN speculating that the Malaysia airline that went missing was abducted by aliens.
	That's sort of the caliber of political analysis at CNN. And he goes out there and he says, yeah, I love Nancy Pelosi.
	She's amazing.
	She's a boss.
	Democrats are thanking God for Nancy Pelosi.
	I go on Fox and Friends about once a week, once or twice a week, and Fox and Friends gets dragged through the mud.
	All of Fox News gets dragged through the mud because they say, oh, it's Trump's Pravda.
	They're just cheerleaders for Donald Trump.
	They have a relationship with Donald Trump.
	First of all, that isn't true.
	Shepard Smith, one of their main news guys, is a liberal Democrat.
	Chris Wallace, who's there on Sundays on Fox, is a Democrat, I believe.
	They have a number of Democrat commentators who are peppered throughout their shows.
	They have a wide variety of political thought.
	In the commentary, they lean right, obviously, but in the news, they don't.
	What's CNN's excuse?
	That was supposed to be a news program that we were watching, and they are actually cheering on Nancy Pelosi, thanking God for Nancy Pelosi, calling her objectively a boss and amazing.
	I don't begrudge them, but they're pretending to be something that they're not.
	If you want to talk about Fox and Friends being Donald Trump's breakfast companion, okay, that's fine.
	But they bring different perspectives on that show.
	What is CNN's excuse?
	I never hear the left lamenting how CNN is nothing but a communication shop for Democrats.
	And it's not that this is a new thing.
	Again, it's not that Donald Trump started all of this.
	This has been going on for years.
	If you don't remember, back in those days before Donald Trump, when the news was objective and our political discourse was so elevated, here's CNN's Anderson Cooper putting that myth to rest.
	This happens to a minority party after it's lost a couple of bad elections, but they're searching for their voice.
	It's hard to talk when you're teabagging.
	David Gergen, appreciate it very much.
	Ellie Velshi as well, thanks very much.
	Hard to talk when you're teabagging.
	So that's Anderson Cooper, who is gay, talking about teabagging, which if you don't know what it is, don't Google it.
	You don't need to Google it, but it refers to gay sex.
	And this was years ago.
	This was long before Donald Trump.
	This was during the height of the Tea Party.
	You've got Mika Brzezinski talking about butt boys.
	And so it's also a selective outrage.
	Kevin Hart doesn't get to host the Oscars because he told a gay joke during a stand-up set 10 years ago.
	But ostensibly objective news presenters make gay comments regularly on CNN.
	Nobody says a thing.
	Imagine if a conservative said butt boy on Fox News or on the Daily Wire or on any other conservative outlet.
	Imagine what would happen.
	Certainly they'd be kicked off Twitter.
	They'd probably be kicked off YouTube.
	They'd be kicked off of all of these platforms.
	But there's a double standard now.
	There's a double standard and we only blame conservatives.
	We pretend that conservatives started.
	We pretend that Donald Trump starts the fights.
	He doesn't.
	He answers the fights.
	He doesn't start them.
	We pretend that right-wing political commentators start the fights.
	They don't.
	This has been going on for years and years, and we are simply answering back, and we should make no apologies for it.
	If the left wants to fix political discourse, be my guest.
	You started it, you're leading, you can fix it.
	But we're not going to unilaterally disarm.
	No chance, Buster.
	And one of the people who best exemplifies this in the media is my friend, my imagined...
	Romantic, you know, ex-girlfriend, if you listened to the show when Ann Coulter was on my program.
	Ann Coulter was on Fox News.
	She is trending on Twitter.
	She was getting dragged through the mud because of accurately describing leftist intersectional ideology.
	She puts it succinctly, and now they're accusing her of every this-ism and racism and that-ism and everything else.
	I think we're going to be seeing a lot of these disputes in the Democratic Party base because they all hate one another.
	I mean, you have the Muslims and the Jews and the various exotic sexual groups and the black church ladies with the college queers.
	The only thing that keeps this The Democratic base together is for them to keep focusing on, no, white men are the ones keeping you down.
	You must hate white men.
	It's the one thing they all have in common.
	Show me the lie.
	Show me the lie.
	What the left is trying to do is, as they always do, they're trying to twist what she said and make it fit their agenda.
	So they're saying, Ann Coulter just said that the Democrats are full of Jews and Muslims and queers.
	But that isn't what she said.
	She's making the point that the Democrat coalition, because of intersectional ideology and the politics of identity, is now made up of groups of people who actually disagree with one another and have longstanding animosities toward one another.
	And the only thing that is unifying them is their...
	The disdain for white men, particularly straight white men, particularly straight white men who think that they are men, because in this ideology, at the apex of the oppression hierarchy sits the straight white man who thinks that he's a man, and therefore, if there are other groups who have long-standing ideological and historical animosities for one another, they can all work together to fight the bad guy who is...
	The straight white guy, who is the straight white guy who knows that he's a guy.
	And this is absolutely right.
	So she points out that you have Jews and Muslims within the coalition.
	Jews and Muslims in the history of international politics tend to have some harsh disagreements with one another, but they sit together.
	You have the black church ladies, and you have the college queers.
	Now, some people are deriding her use of the term queer.
	Queer is now the term.
	This is LGBTQ. There's a Q for queer.
	There are a couple Qs, actually, in the acronym.
	But queer is a term that has been embraced by people of, as she says, exotic sexualities.
	And so she's using the term that they themselves are using.
	And it is true.
	It doesn't make any sense that the black church lady, somebody who embraces at least a great deal of traditional Christian moral teaching, would ally with people who want to tear down traditional Christian moral teaching and who disagree with traditional...
	Christian moral teaching, but they lie together because they are fed a lie that they are victims, that they are oppressed by this awful, evil, fantastical person called the straight white guy who thinks that he's a guy.
	This is true across the board and it's why intersectional politics, identity politics, has been so successful.
	I mean, the left has always done this to some degree.
	They create class conflict or racial conflict or they try to create gender conflict.
	They try to start a gender war, but that never works.
	There will never be a gender war because in the gender war, everybody is sleeping with the enemy or almost everybody is sleeping with the enemy, so that's not going to last.
	But everyone else...
	They sow this division, and the best way that they can do it is to isolate a very specific person, the straight white guy who thinks he's a guy, and say that he's harming everybody, no evidence of that, of course, and everyone has to band up against him.
	This is why during Occupy Wall Street, they had their language of the 99% versus the 1%.
	It's very politically useful to get an entire lynch mob to mob up on a very small minority.
	I'm sure if they had thought of it, they would have made it the 99.9% against the 0.1%.
	That 0.1% doesn't stand a chance when you just look at the plain numbers.
	And so this is the point that Ann Coulter is making.
	She's observing it.
	And I hope that certain left-wing Democrats or people who have been taken in by intersectionality might listen to what she's saying because what she's pointing out is They're being tricked.
	They're being used.
	They're having their rage ginned up by people who don't want to address the actual issues that these groups care about.
	What they want to do is rile them up so much that they stop thinking and they blindly follow the left wing and the Democratic Party because they are being fed a lie that they have an enemy in the oppressor and the patriarchy and the straight white guy who thinks that he's a guy.
	Nobody's problems comes from the straight white guy who thinks that he's a guy.
	Might come from an individual straight white guy who thinks he's a guy, but nobody's problems comes from that class of people.
	It just does not happen.
	They're fed that lie.
	They're brought along blindly.
	I hope that that Ann Coulter clip goes viral because maybe for at least some group of people, they'll be able to listen to what that really means and reconsider and say, huh.
	Maybe if my main concern is advocating a traditional Christian morality, maybe I won't ally with people who want to redefine the definition of marriage.
	If my main concern is the state of Israel, maybe I want to lie with people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the map, who want to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel.
	Maybe that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
	Speaking of our interests, Google today, the CEO of Google, Sundar Pichai, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, and this is being totally misunderstood.
	Ostensibly, the reason why Pichai is testifying is because There's been a major data breach at Google.
	Google is shutting down its social media platform, Google+.
	I know!
	However will we be able to communicate without Google +, add me to your circles, please.
	This is a useless social media platform that nobody uses, but there was a data breach, and so...
	Ostensibly, this hearing was about the data collection on the part of Google.
	What data they have, where it's going, who can see it, who can access it.
	That isn't the point.
	People don't care about that at all.
	What people care about is censorship and Google using its vast resources to tip elections in favor of the Democratic Party against the Republican Party.
	That's what they care about.
	They care about political bias and censorship.
	They don't care about data.
	We all assume If you live in the modern world, you assume that you have no privacy.
	I've got the Alexa in my home.
	I've got my iPhone.
	Probably my refrigerator is listening to me.
	I think we probably bugged the Leftist Tears Tumblr.
	At this point, I don't know.
	It's so cheap.
	At least China's bugging the thing.
	They're putting little spyware in all of our other hardware in the United States.
	They've probably put it into this desk, into these note cards.
	We don't expect privacy.
	This is a concern that I think politicians and commentators think people care about.
	They don't.
	What they actually care about is censorship and political bias, and at least Republican Representative Jim Jordan was able to zero in on this.
	This is a totally telling exchange between the Google CEO and Jim Jordan.
	She said she paid for rides to the polls, and they configured their features in such a way as to get out the Latino vote.
	And look, I actually think that's all okay.
	But then there's three words at the end of each sentence that do cause me real concern.
	And those three words are, we pushed to get out the Latino vote with our features in key states.
	Now suddenly it gets political.
	We supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states.
	Now that makes everything different.
	So I got really just one question for you.
	Why?
	Why?
	Why did Google configure its features and pay for rides to the polls to get out the Latino vote only in key states?
	Congressman, we found no evidence to substantiate those claims.
	Listen, what a remarkable answer.
	So, as Jim Jordan lays out, we have the woman, who's the head of multicultural marketing, admit that she did this, admit that she used Google's vast resources, some of the I've got the head of multicultural marketing, whatever that is.
	Admitting this.
	You then have her referring to Sundar Pichai, the CEO, right there, praising her efforts.
	And he's asked about this, and he can't quite deny it.
	He doesn't want to lie before the entire country and before the House Judiciary Committee.
	So what he says is, well, we found no evidence.
	We found no evidence.
	Okay, how hard did you look?
	Because I found evidence just in what Jim Jordan read.
	There's the evidence.
	The head of multicultural marketing admits it, and you bragged about it.
	That's the evidence.
	We found no evidence.
	Okay.
	I found no evidence that President JFK was assassinated.
	I have no evidence of that.
	I mean, obviously, I've seen Ted Cruz's father, so I suppose there's a little evidence there.
	But I have no evidence that that happened.
	I haven't looked into it.
	I don't know.
	I haven't seen John Kennedy in a long time, but I've got no evidence of it.
	It's totally obtuse.
	He's trying to hide what he's really behind.
	But it goes further than that.
	Jim Jordan, to his great credit, presses on, and Pichai doesn't get any better.
	He's just as opaque and untransparent as his company is toward its political practices.
	Your head of multicultural marketing, who you praised her work in this email, gave her a shout-out, was lying when she said you were trying to get out the Latino vote in key states?
	We today, in the U.S., around elections, we make it, and this is what users look to us for, where to register to vote, where to find your nearest polling place, what are the hours they are open, and we do those things effectively.
	I appreciate that, Mr.
	Pichai.
	I already said that's being a good corporate citizen.
	What I'm asking is, why did you only do it in key states?
	We didn't do any such activity as Google on any of these key states.
	We didn't do any such activity as Google.
	Well, what's the parent company of Google is called Alphabet.
	Did you do it as Alphabet?
	You didn't do it as Google.
	Did you do it as the Google office of multicultural marketing?
	Did you do it as YouTube?
	Google is one of the biggest companies in the history of the world.
	Who cares how they did it?
	You've got the head of this major department and the CEO of the freaking company saying that it happened.
	And now you are looking me in the eye and telling me that it didn't happen, that there's no evidence of it, that you're not sure.
	Give me a break.
	I love that Jordan Press is on.
	The way that you know that Pichai is guilty as sin here is that he answers a different question.
	He says, why did you get out the vote in key states?
	He said, well...
	We love busing people to the polls to do our civic duty.
	He said, right, yeah, I didn't ask that.
	I said, why'd you do it in key states?
	And he gives another answer.
	He tries to divert.
	This is what people care about.
	This is what people care about.
	They care about the political bias because if Google is getting out the vote in key states...
	Fill in the blank.
	Key states for Democrats.
	Then Google is making an in-kind contribution to Democrats.
	A massive in-kind contribution to Democrats.
	This certainly would be in violation of election laws.
	And we just saw the president's long-time personal lawyer sent to the clink for three years.
	They're going to try to use this to impeach Donald Trump on the basis of a very minor campaign contribution.
	$130,000.
	Very minor compared to what kind of money Google is laying out.
	Very minor compared to the money that Barack Obama was caught illegally contributing to his campaign.
	$2 million in that case.
	1.8 million, but they're throwing Trump's lawyer to the clink.
	This is a very important point.
	This is what people care about.
	And they care about the bias when it relates to them personally.
	Am I going to be kicked off YouTube like Gavin McGinnis was?
	Why was Gavin McGinnis kicked off YouTube?
	He's a funny conservative comedian.
	Did he tell a joke?
	Oh, heaven forfend.
	They kick him off.
	That's what we care about.
	Because if Google comes out and says, we're going to kick all conservatives off our platform, okay, I guess.
	At least you're being transparent.
	At least we can all see you for what you are, which is partisan hacks.
	We'll go try to find another place that won't kick us off because they're so upset that a Republican won an election.
	But they won't do that.
	So we've got to just keep pressing hard on this.
	We've got to keep focusing and not lose sight and get mixed into Google's civic responsibility, into Google's data collection.
	That's not what we're concerned about.
	We're concerned about what it means for politics.
	And we will get into Michael Cohen's sentencing because it does say a lot about where this special counsel investigation is going to be going, especially once Democrats take the House with regard to Donald Trump.
	Will Trump be impeached?
	Will we have a government shutdown before Nancy Pelosi takes over?
	And why are millennial men so embarrassing?
	We will examine the new baby, it's cold outside.
	But first, if you are on dailywire.com, thank you very much.
	You keep the lights on.
	You keep covfefe in my cup.
	If you are not, go over there.
	It's nothing.
	Come on.
	The Trump economy has been great.
	You're saving a lot of money on your taxes.
	$10 a month, $100 for an annual membership.
	You get me.
	You get the Andrew Klavan show.
	You get the Ben Shapiro show.
	You get to ask questions in the mailbag.
	That's coming up on Thursday, so get your questions in.
	You get to ask questions in the conversation.
	You get to ask questions in the backstage.
	You get another kingdom.
	You get everything.
	I can't believe we do all of this.
	We're the hardest working people in show business.
	Go to dailywire.com because none of that matters.
	What really matters is the Leftist Tears Tumblr and you're going to need it this holiday season because snow is thicker than just rainwater.
	So when the weather gets cold outside, those Leftist Tears are going to poof up and you could drown in an avalanche of them.
	Don't be caught.
	Use the only FDA-approved vessel to carry them.
	The Leftist Tears Tumblr.
	We'll be right back.
	So Cohen goes to the clink for three years.
	Longtime lawyer to Donald Trump.
	Nancy Pelosi is threatening all of these investigations once she takes over control of the House of Representatives, which is going to be happening in just a month.
	It's really close.
	It's right around the corner.
	The question is, when are we going to get the wall?
	Donald Trump won the Republican presidential primary on the promise of building the wall.
	He won the general election on the promise of building the wall.
	He had the government for two years, the United Government.
	Where is the wall?
	Where is the money for the wall?
	Ann Coulter, we talked about her earlier.
	She said the wall is not being built.
	If anyone thinks the wall is being built, they're suckers.
	Where is the wall?
	This is the showdown fight.
	And we'll know next Friday if the government is going to be shut down to get funding for the border wall.
	I think that President Trump is bluffing.
	Senator John Kennedy, Republican, thinks that he is not bluffing.
	Here's Kennedy on CNN. The issue here is, well, let me put it another way.
	I think we're going to have a shutdown.
	You do?
	I do.
	And I think we're going to have a shutdown for two reasons.
	Number one, President Trump does not look to me like he was bluffing or is bluffing.
	And number two, I don't think Speaker Pelosi is going to agree to anything because she's worried about her speakership.
	And are you comfortable if there's a shutdown next Friday over this border wall funding?
	No, absolutely not.
	I mean, I think the American people look to us up here to try to make things work.
	And who gets blamed if there's a shutdown?
	Do you think that it's the president or Congress?
	As far as I'm concerned, if it's shut down, it's a pox on all of our houses.
	I don't know politically who's going to win or lose this.
	Who gets blamed?
	Who gets the credit?
	I'd love to.
	Can I take credit for it?
	Can I take responsibility?
	Shut it down.
	I would love to be the guy who shut down the government over the border wall.
	President Trump yesterday in that back-and-forth chess match with Chuck Schumer, he finally arrived at that position, which is the correct position.
	Own it.
	Take responsibility.
	It doesn't matter.
	The conventional wisdom is that people get blamed and it's going to hurt them at the elections if they shut down the government.
	No way.
	Shut it down.
	Shut it down.
	Do you remember, oh no, do you remember when Republicans got blown out in the 2014 elections because they shut the government down in 2013?
	Oh no, I don't either.
	They took the Senate in 2014.
	Doesn't matter at all.
	People don't, it doesn't matter for a few reasons.
	One, we're very angry that we don't have the wall.
	We're very angry that 3,000 people a day are pouring over our border illegally.
	Unvetted people, people that we can't track.
	We don't know many of them are criminals.
	And this is true, not just It's true among conservatives, but it's true among independents and left-wingers too, even among Democrats.
	We don't like illegal immigration.
	This is a totally winning issue.
	And John Kennedy says that he's not bluffing and that we're going to shut the government down.
	I think he's bluffing.
	I think President Trump is bluffing, I'm sorry to say.
	He threatened to shut the government down over this exact issue in February.
	What happened?
	Didn't happen.
	He threatened to shut down the government over this exact issue in July.
	What happened?
	Didn't happen.
	I think he's bluffing.
	And I think he sent John Kennedy on TV to say he's super serious this time about shutting it down.
	And I think he's not going to shut it down.
	I hope he does shut it down.
	I hope someone in the White House is watching this show that this is the last chance.
	And voters...
	Look, voters have short memories.
	They give you a lot of leeway.
	This administration has been terrific on so many issues.
	But now, when it matters most, you're looking at...
	A House of Representatives controlled by Democrats in just one month.
	And we're probably not going to get that house back.
	And we're not going to be able to push through legislation.
	And what is President Trump focusing on now?
	Criminal justice reform?
	He's focusing on the First Step Act?
	He's focusing on letting prisoners out of prison?
	Instead of building the wall?
	Does anybody think Donald Trump won the election in 2016 because he said, I'm going to let prisoners out of prison early?
	Does he think that Republicans want criminal justice reform, which is to be read as letting people out of the clink?
	No, of course not.
	We don't want that.
	Why on earth?
	The gamble that the White House is making on criminal justice reform, quote unquote, is that it's easy to get through because Democrats want it.
	People don't realize that the criminal justice system exists to punish criminals for crime.
	It is punitive.
	It is retributive.
	It is not primarily therapeutic.
	It's not primarily about rehabilitating people and making people hug each other and having a nice time.
	It is primarily about punishing people for crime.
	And they're also betting that people are going to think that we've got zillions of people in America in jail for nonviolent minor drug offenses.
	When in reality, the people, even who are listed for that, very often have just pled it down from selling drugs, from dealing drugs, from getting people hooked on poison, and from carrying guns, from...
	from violent crimes, from bad associations.
	They're focusing on that.
	The White House wants to pass the first step act, criminal justice reform, and they're going to let this wall issue just go away.
	And it is a huge, huge mistake.
	They will get no credit for it in the elections.
	And it's just bad for the country.
	You have the record high illegal immigration pouring over the border.
	Build the wall.
	Shut it down.
	You won't get blamed politically if you shut it down.
	And you'll get a huge reward.
	Either if you do get the funding and you're able to build it, or you call attention to this issue and Democrats get dinged for it because they want open borders and they want to abolish law enforcement.
	Shut it down.
	If that means tabling criminal justice reform, all the better.
	Good.
	I hope they do that.
	This is the last chance.
	This is do or die.
	I hope John Kennedy is right.
	I hope President Trump isn't bluffing.
	If President Trump, if you think that you are bluffing, don't bluff.
	Do it.
	You will be rewarded for it.
	It will be a good thing for the country.
	We've got to get to these judicial rulings, by the way.
	I mean, this is big news.
	President Trump's longtime lawyer, Michael Cohen, is being sent to prison for three years for a campaign finance violation, which means they are using this as the warning shot to go after President Trump.
	All the more reason to shut down the government and build the wall.
	The walls, the proverbial walls are closing in around the president right now.
	All of the forces who were very upset about the 2016 election and want to undo it by anti-constitutional, anti-democratic means of endless investigations and trying to get him on trumped up charges, pun very much intended.
	They are closing in on him.
	So, what's the ruling?
	We know that Michael Cohen is getting three years.
	He's the first member of the Trump inner circle to be sentenced and jailed over a special counsel office inquiry.
	He was behaving like a woman.
	I mean, I don't mean woman like womanly, like, you know...
	When women behave as women, I mean when men behave as women, woman-ish, sort of inappropriate to his position, inappropriate to how he should be behaving.
	He was crying, apparently, in court.
	He said that his weakness was his loyalty to Donald Trump.
	He felt his duty to cover up Donald Trump's dirty deeds.
	He's giving the Office of the Special Counsel whatever they want.
	He's singing their tunes now.
	And he now knows he has no chance of getting a presidential pardon.
	So he's weeping in court.
	Oh gosh, why did I ever do it?
	This is the man who, actually to use another gendered term on this, he had this ridiculous machismo, this fake manliness, two years ago when he said, I would take a bullet for Trump.
	I'm not a rat.
	I would never sing on Trump.
	And then what does he do?
	He cries in court.
	As he gives away everything and blames Trump for all of his own problems.
	So he's going to jail for three years.
	He'll probably get out early, though.
	He's going to jail over a $130,000 campaign contribution.
	Maybe campaign contribution.
	Might have not even been an in-kind campaign contribution because President Trump regularly paid off women.
	Barack Obama's campaign in 2008 had $1.8 million in illegal donations.
	Opaque, untransparent, fake signatures, fake donors.
	Who went to jail for that?
	Who went to jail for three years for that?
	Nobody.
	Nobody did.
	$300,000 fine was put on them for $2 million in illegal contributions.
	How about when Dinesh D'Souza donated $30,000 to his friend Wendy Long?
	He donated a little bit too much money to his friend Wendy Long.
	Went to a halfway house, threw him in the clink.
	This is what this ruling means.
	They're going to try to go after Trump.
	But ironically, they probably can't really get him on this.
	One, it's going to be really, really hard to say that he made an illegal campaign contribution.
	He's the candidate.
	He can donate what he wants to.
	If he didn't disclose it, it's going to be really hard to get him.
	Even ex-Senator John Edwards got off on this in 2012.
	It's going to be really hard to get the sitting president.
	Also, they can't get him on this until he's out of office.
	And if he wins re-election, it actually is past the time of the statute of limitations for this.
	So it's going to be a very interesting legal question to see what happens to him if he wins re-election, how they can go after him.
	It's just a way to scare Trump.
	It's just a way to politically damage him.
	I don't think that any of these sentences mean that they're going to legally damage him.
	I think they're going to politically damage him, try to ruin his chances at re-election, which is what this whole Russia investigation was really about.
	Why on earth He's the special counsel of the Russia investigation.
	Why is he sending Cohen to jail for campaign finance?
	What does that have to do with Russian interference in the election?
	Nothing is what it has to do with it.
	But there was a great ruling that came out today as well.
	Stormy Daniels owes Donald Trump 300 grand.
	And she owes it to him for a lawsuit that Michael Avenatti, her creepy porn lawyer, as Tucker Carlson calls him, apparently filed without her consent at all.
	So she now owes him 300 grand.
	It's 75% of Trump's legal bill in this country.
	To use the terms of the judge, meritless defamation lawsuit against Donald Trump.
	Avenatti still insists that they will win $1.5 million from Donald Trump on a case regarding that non-disclosure agreement that Stormy Daniels signed.
	Likely, they will not.
	It's a very shaky case.
	So really tough day for Michael Avenatti and Stormy Daniels, but good.
	Make them pay up.
	It's outrageous that people get off the hook for these frivolous lawsuits, for these frivolous claims against Republican figures and conservative figures.
	So take them to the cleaners.
	And I hope Avenatti's got to pay it, too.
	The popular take here is that, you know, wouldn't it be better if we didn't have all these lawsuits swirling around?
	Wouldn't it be better if we had an unimpeachable candidate?
	You know, a Mike Pence or somebody in office instead of Donald Trump.
	And we wouldn't have to deal with all of these lawsuit threats, legal threats.
	Wouldn't it be better?
	Come on, admit it would be better.
	No, it wouldn't be better.
	It would not be better.
	Democrats and the left would treat any candidate exactly the way that they're treating Donald Trump.
	They did it to Brett Kavanaugh.
	Brett Kavanaugh is as milquetoast as they get.
	They tried to paint him to be a gang rapist.
	Federal judge for a dozen years.
	No one has ever suggested he's got a poor character.
	They did it to him.
	They did it to Mitt Romney.
	They said Mitt Romney was a gay-bashing dog abuser.
	Mitt Romney is like the squeaky cleanest guy in America.
	It wouldn't matter.
	It wouldn't matter.
	It's a huge mistake for conservatives to say, well, Trump brought it on himself.
	Yeah, maybe he did, but they'd go after a guy who didn't bring it on himself, too.
	It's exactly the same.
	Those are the judicial rulings.
	Before we go, we've got to talk about Baby It's Cold Outside.
	There is a new Baby It's Cold Outside.
	This is from songwriters Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemansky.
	And they quote...
	Revised the lyrics to emphasize the importance of consent in sexual relationships.
	When I heard this, I thought it was a parody.
	I thought it was pretty funny.
	It was a parody of PC feminist culture.
	Come to find out, it's not.
	They really did it to make the song more culturally acceptable.
	If you haven't heard it, here it is.
	I really can't stay Baby I'm fine with that I've got to go away Baby I'm cool with that This evening has been so very nice.
	I'm glad you had a real good time.
	My mother will start to worry.
	Call her so she knows that you're coming.
	And father will be pacing the floor.
	So really I'd better scurry.
	Take your time.
	Should I use the front or back door?
	Which one are you pulling towards for?
	The neighbors might think that you're a real nice girl.
	Say, what is this drink?
	Pomegranate LaCroix.
	I wish I knew how to break this spell.
	I don't know what you're talking about.
	I ought to say no, no, no, sir.
	You reserve the right to say no.
	At least I'm gonna say that I tried.
	You reserve the right to say no.
	Not exactly Giacomo Casanova over there talking about pomegranate LaCroix and how she should text her mother and just go.
	The argument that the left is making is that the first song is about rape.
	But it's obviously not about rape.
	The woman wants to stay just as much as the man.
	She says many times that she can have another half a drink, or she can have another cigarette more.
	She is looking for excuses to get around the social mores that say that she should have modesty and virtue and not stick around with the guy and canoodle on the first date.
	But they both want to canoodle just as much.
	This has been twisted by the left.
	And so the answer right now is this awful clinical issue.
	It's this awful clinical relationship between men and women where the man doesn't pursue the woman.
	It is now considered a rape culture for a man to pursue a woman.
	There should never be any pursuance.
	If you try to kiss a woman, that can be called sexual assault under certain broad definitions of this.
	Is any woman rather attracted to that guy?
	Of course not.
	Not a single...
	I don't care how feminist you pretend to be, how left-wing, how I'm with her, whatever.
	Nobody is attracted to that guy.
	That guy is profoundly repulsive.
	It's not because being effeminate is repulsive.
	Just like earlier I said Michael Cohen cried like a woman.
	The only reason that that is an insult is because Michael Cohen isn't a woman.
	He's a man.
	He's supposed to behave like a man, but that guy won't behave like a man.
	Compare that version to the Betty Carter, Ray Charles version of that song.
	And listen, just listen if you can hear any difference at all.
	I really can't stay Betty, it's cold outside I've got to go away Betty, it's cold out there This evening has been Been hoping that you drop in So bad I'll hold your hand, but they're just like ice.
	My mother will start to worry.
	What's your heart?
	And father will be pacing the Lord Listen to that fireplace roar So really I'd better scurry Beautiful, please don't hurry Well, maybe just to have a dream Why don't you put some records on while I pour Listen to that fireplace roar, it's so...
	It's getting so hot in here.
	That is a song that is seductive, and you hear it in both of their voices.
	It's this game.
	The woman is teasing the man.
	She says, I really should go.
	What are you going to do?
	What's that going to make you say?
	Oh, you should stay.
	No, well, I don't know.
	I really should go.
	No, don't you think?
	This is a beautiful thing.
	This is a beautiful dance.
	The image that you have when you listen to this is the dance of men and women in a game of seduction and teasing and romance.
	What you hear in the first left-wing version are two apathetic, bored, depressed millennials who are so socially awkward they have no idea how men and women are supposed to interact with each other.
	If the woman did stick around because it's cold outside, the guy would have no idea what to do.
	He's rushing her out the door because he has no idea what to do.
	He has no idea what romance is.
	Which world do you want to live in?
	Do you want to live in the world of pomegranate, lacroix, and sad millennials?
	Or do you want to live in the world of Betty Carter and Ray Charles?
	Ooh, I know what I want.
	I want that fireplace to roar!
	Alright, that's our show.
	show I ran late today.
	The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Senia Villareal.
	Executive producer Jeremy Boring.
	Senior producer Jonathan Hay.
	Our supervising producer Mathis Glover.
	And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
	Edited by Jim Nickel.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
	Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
	The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire Forward Publishing production.
	Copyright Forward Publishing 2018.
	Hey everybody, I'm Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
	Today we're going to be talking about that dust-up between Donald and Chuck and Nancy and how everything after a while becomes TV. Also, it's mailbag day, which means all your problems will be solved.

▲