Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

June 11, 2019 - The Michael Knowles Show

48:33

Ep. 363 - Trump Wins Big With Mexico

We examine what is really in the deal. Then, deadbeat parents won't feed their kids, pervert parents pimp their kid at drag bars, Masterpiece Cakeshop is sued again, and another social media platform bans conservatives. Date: 6-11-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	President Trump wins big on his immigration deal with Mexico.
	Of course, the mainstream media won't give him any credit for that, so we will examine what is really in the deal.
	Then, deadbeat parents want the government to feed their kids for them.
	Pervert parents pimp their kid out to drag bars.
	And the Gestapo sue Masterpiece Cake Shop owner Jack Phillips for a third time.
	Then, another social media platform bans conservatives.
	All that and more.
	I'm Michael Knowles and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
	There is a lot to get to today because I notice almost nobody is covering this Trump-Mexico deal fairly.
	I notice almost no one is actually reading from the deal.
	So we'll get to that first, and then we've got to get to some really inspiring stories from 10-year-old Americans and some really profoundly disturbing stories from 10-year-old Americans.
	All that, but first...
	Let me help you.
	Big Token is a new app that lets you share your data about yourself, your interests, and habits, and then get paid for it.
	Because right now you're already sharing all of your information.
	All of your information is going out to big tech companies that hate you, and they all make money off of it.
	You should make some money too.
	That's where Big Token comes in.
	Here is how it works.
	First, you download the app.
	You sign up for a free Big Token account.
	I just did this.
	You complete the actions.
	You earn points.
	It's that simple.
	I thought this was going to be more complicated.
	It's not.
	Actions include answering surveys, checking into locations, just where you are already, connecting your social media accounts, and more.
	Then you get a bunch of points.
	You redeem those points for rewards like cash or gift cards, or if you're a nice guy, you can donate those earnings to charity.
	You can choose which data you share with Big Token.
	Then you get paid for it.
	It's like you're just doing what you are already doing to a lot of big tech companies, except now you get paid.
	You can also get more points for referring friends and family.
	Your data are always secure with BigToken.
	Based on the data you choose to share, you will be placed into specific ad groups.
	Brands will then buy access to those ad groups, and you will get more personalized advertising.
	The best part is, I just have to remind you, you will get paid for it.
	If you want to start earning money for your data, go to the App Store or Google Play, search for Big Token, B-I-G-T-O-K-E-N, that's one word, download the app, and sign up.
	Make sure, though, this is the most important part, you use my referral code, Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, so that I get the credit and my show doesn't go off the air.
	Again, you have to search Big Token in the App Store or Google Play, download the app, use my referral code, Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, to sign up.
	Claim your data and get paid.
	Talk about good deals.
	President Trump just secured a very good deal with Mexico over immigration and walking back the threat of tariffs.
	This has been in the news for three weeks nonstop.
	The Trump trade war.
	It's going to destroy the whole world.
	Everything's going to hell in a handbasket.
	So then, on Friday, President Trump secures the deal with Mexico.
	I go to try to figure out the specifics of this deal.
	None of the mainstream media articles actually cover the specifics.
	I could not find the text of this deal anywhere.
	Eventually, I just had to go to the White House website to read the joint statement from the United States and Mexico.
	What were the headlines over this deal?
	Washington Post, the dubious art of Trump's deal with Mexico.
	You see, it's dubious.
	USA Today, Donald Trump claims there's more to migrant deal with Mexico than he announced, but offers no specifics.
	What did he announce?
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	You haven't told me.
	CNN. Trump fights back against skeptics of his New Mexico deal.
	Against the skeptics.
	Who are the skeptics?
	CNN. That's who.
	But that's the story.
	Not that President Trump secures a good deal.
	Not what is in the actual deal.
	No, no.
	It's fighting back against the skeptics.
	By which they mean, of course, CNN. What actually happened?
	President Trump has been threatening tariffs on Mexico if Mexico does not help us to stop illegal immigration into the United States.
	Gotta remember, if you're gonna cross the southern border into America, you've gotta cross into Mexico first.
	The vast majority of these illegal aliens coming into America are not Mexicans.
	They come from Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, other places in Central and South America.
	Then they cross into Mexico, then they come to America.
	So President Trump said, listen, Mexico, you've got to put some security along your southern border and stop this before it becomes a problem for us.
	Mexico hasn't done it because it's mostly a failed state and because Mexico has a huge economic incentive to continue to allow illegal immigration.
	When these illegal aliens are pouring through Mexico's southern border on their way into America, this brings a lot of money to Mexico's economy.
	Most of that money is going to the cartels, but then those cartels are spending all of that money within Mexico, in Mexico's economy.
	We're talking about over a billion dollars at least.
	So, Mexico has no normal economic incentive to stop illegal immigration, and they have a lot of incentives to keep it going.
	So, President Trump threatens tariffs.
	Everyone said this wasn't going to work.
	Oh, no.
	The tariffs are going to hurt the American economy.
	Nobody takes Trump seriously.
	He doesn't really mean it.
	Well, President Trump has slapped tariffs on our foes and on our allies.
	And so he said, listen, I'm not joking about this.
	I will do it.
	And it goes down to the final hour when they could be negotiating this deal.
	And what happens?
	Mexico agrees to beef up its immigration protection.
	That's what happened.
	We were told the tariffs are going to destroy the economy.
	He's not really going to get any concessions because of the tariffs.
	The tariffs aren't even going to work.
	And all of those critics were proven totally wrong, and President Trump's strategy totally worked.
	I don't know how else to say it.
	I guess it could have been a little bit better.
	We'll get into how in a second.
	But this is a major win.
	I mean, this is a basically unqualified win for Trump and an unqualified loss for his critics who said that tariffs weren't going to work.
	What is in the agreement?
	The joint statement from the U.S. and Mexico reads, Additionally,
	the United States and Mexico commit to strengthen bilateral cooperation, including information sharing and coordinated actions to better protect and secure our common border.
	Now, this last part is subject to some scrutiny from the mainstream media, because President Trump said as part of this deal, Mexico is going to buy a whole lot of new American products, and so that's going to help with our trade deficit.
	Now, There's not a lot of evidence that they're going to buy more products.
	The Mexican ambassador is saying that nothing has been ironed out specifically.
	So what President Trump is referring to is this line here about greater cooperation, the implication being Mexico is going to buy some more U.S. goods.
	Who knows?
	That part I don't think really matters at all.
	I mean, I guess it would be nice if Mexico bought more goods, but that's not really what this deal is about.
	What this deal is about is dealing with illegal goods.
	Immigration.
	We have a lot of trading partners.
	They can buy more American goods.
	What we need Mexico for is to stop the flow of illegal aliens, which now are 3,000 per day in some cases.
	I mean, a lot of people coming in to the United States.
	What is Mexico going to do?
	They've already deployed 6,000 National Guard troops to the southern border.
	That is a very tangible step in the right direction.
	So what else does the deal accomplish?
	They write, the United States will immediately expand the implementation of the existing migrant protection protocols across its entire southern border.
	This means that those crossing the U.S. southern border to seek asylum will be rapidly returned to Mexico, where they may await the adjudication of their asylum.
	Big win.
	What this means is that the people who do get into Mexico, then they come into the United States and they ask for asylum.
	We will not have to keep those people in the United States.
	We will be able to send them back to Mexico and Mexico will take them.
	Now when this first began a few months ago when these negotiations were taking place, Mexico limited the scope of holding the asylum seekers.
	So they said, okay, we'll keep some asylum seekers, but not all of them.
	We're going to limit how many can come here.
	Now they will accept an unlimited number of asylum seekers.
	And this is very important because in the United States, if you come, you seek asylum.
	What we generally do is we lose track of you.
	and then you just get into the United States and then you're just here.
	And you don't show up for your adjudication hearings and you don't ever need to show up in court again because you've already gained entrance into the United States, sometimes with more than one of you, sometimes with a whole family unit.
	Keeping them on that other side of the border is crucial to reducing the flow of illegal aliens and this was a major win.
	This is also important because it limits family The people who are coming seeking asylum specifically, or who say they're seeking asylum, usually they're just economic migrants, but they say they're seeking asylum come with a lot of people.
	And this creates major political problems.
	Now you're not allowed to split up the parents from their children and hold the children with HHS, Health and Human Services, and hold the parents in cells.
	You're also not allowed to put the children in cells.
	I mean, this is the reason why In 1997, we decided that eventually we had to split up the parents and the children anyway.
	So you're in a situation where you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't, if they get into the United States and get to stay there while they seek asylum.
	Now they get to go back to Mexico.
	The deal could be slightly better.
	So what we would really like to secure here is something called a safe third country agreement.
	A safe third country agreement.
	We have one of these deals with Canada, which is that when people are coming in from a third country, whichever country they arrive at first, if they come through Canada and they're going to Mexico, or if they come to the United States and they're going to Canada, the country they arrive at first is the country where they have to seek asylum.
	They can't just keep going through to get to the better country.
	And this gets to the whole argument of asylum.
	What the left is saying in this illegal immigration dispute is it's these desperate people who are just seeking a better life and avoiding threat of death in their own countries, in Guatemala, let's say.
	And what the right is saying is, no they're not.
	They're coming for economic opportunity in the United States.
	The way you know the right is correct here is if they were just fleeing the threat of immediate violence in their home countries, they wouldn't walk through 20 different countries on their way to the United States.
	They wouldn't march from South America all the way up to the U.S.
	They could seek asylum in any country along the way.
	But they're not seeking asylum.
	They're seeking economic opportunity.
	Because the U.S. is a way better place to live in than Mexico.
	So what a safe third country agreement would do is say, okay, if you're going to come and you're going to enter Mexico first, then you're getting asylum in Mexico.
	And you can't seek asylum in the United States.
	You've got to seek asylum in Mexico.
	Obviously, Mexico doesn't want to do that.
	That would be slightly better.
	But what we've got is quite good.
	It could have been a lot worse, too.
	Even the guys at National Review, which is a never-Trump publication, right?
	It's been decidedly anti-Trump.
	They made a huge issue in 2016 against Trump.
	So many of their editors and writers have been opposed to Trump.
	Even National Review said, we've got to hand it to Donald Trump on this point.
	And so if it's good enough for NR and the anti-Trump forces on the right, it's good enough for me.
	We'll get to the main takeaways here, then we'll move on to a very inspiring story.
	But first, you should not have to choose between overpriced designer sunglasses and cheap shades that won't last you through the summer.
	I have had both.
	And now I have movement sunglasses, and movement sunglasses are the best sunglasses.
	You know movement.
	I've got my movement watch on.
	It's the watch I get most compliments about.
	Movement totally disrupted the watch industry.
	Now they are doing it again with sunglasses.
	These are constructed with durable acetate and lightweight materials for that perfect, reliable fit.
	You don't need to choose between style and function.
	With movement, you get both.
	And with free shipping and returns policy, you can try on as many as you want right from your home.
	I am a sunglasses aficionado.
	I'm from the East Coast, from New York and of Italian descent, so I've been wearing sunglasses since I was two years old.
	These are excellent sunglasses.
	And by the way, you need to get good sunglasses.
	You do.
	It's something, especially during the summer, you wear them every day.
	You change your shirt every day.
	You change your pants every day.
	But your sunglasses you wear every day, and you've got to make sure that you look really good in them.
	That's most important.
	And second of all, that they work really well and they protect your eyes.
	Movement sunglasses do both.
	They are superb.
	This is why Movement has sold 2.5 million products across more than 160 countries, and their collections are always expanding.
	Get 15% off today.
	With free shipping and free returns, go to MVMT.com slash Knowles, K-N-A-W-L-E-S. See why movement keeps growing?
	Check out their expanding collection.
	MVMT.com slash Knowles, K-N-A-W-L-E-S. Join the movement and look good and be prepared for summer.
	The main takeaway from this Trump deal with Mexico is that the chief purpose of the negotiations were achieved.
	No matter what the mainstream media say, they were achieved.
	Big win for Trump.
	But for those of you who think that Trump is still an idiot, I mean, there are some people, I think, who still think that Donald Trump is just this incompetent ignoramus, even though he somehow keeps achieving all of his goals.
	Even if you think that, don't forget this deal was also achieved with the negotiating skill of Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
	Do you really think those guys are just complete fools, nincompoops, idiots?
	No.
	This was, there was great skill involved in this deal.
	There was great brinksmanship.
	There were great threats of tariffs.
	And it worked.
	And this is what's so important.
	Because when this was announced on Friday, everyone basically had to admit that it worked.
	Then people started to try to revise history.
	So the New York Times, the Huffington Post said it's not really a big deal.
	It is a big deal.
	And the reason it's a big deal is not even just for Mexico and illegal immigration.
	It's because of what this says for China.
	We have been engaged in a trade war with China and various proxy wars with China for years and years now.
	They steal our intellectual property.
	They violate World Trade Organization treaties.
	They illegally subsidize their steel and aluminum.
	They inflate their currency.
	They put spyware in our tech, which is all manufactured in China.
	They are...
	Quite hostile to us.
	And so what President Trump is doing is putting pressure on them through trade to make concessions, to protect our IP, all of those goals of the United States.
	And one way he's doing it is threatening tariffs.
	What this is about, this is a referendum on the effectiveness of threatening tariffs as a negotiating tool.
	And what we learned from the Mexico deal is it works.
	And what the left is desperately trying to convince you is that no, it didn't really work.
	Don't believe your lying eyes.
	Just believe what you read in the New York Times.
	It did work.
	And this is going to come back again and be very important when we start talking about China because those tensions aren't going away anytime soon.
	So enough about geopolitics.
	Let's get to a genuinely uplifting story that tells you a lot about our culture.
	Actually, it tells you a lot about our culture from the perspective of the story itself and from the perspective of how people are reacting to the story.
	There's a nine-year-old kid in California.
	He attends West Park Elementary School.
	His name is Ryan Kirkpatrick.
	Ryan Kirkpatrick realized that his classmates had some school lunch debt.
	So they would show up to school and their parents didn't give them any money to buy lunch at school.
	And so...
	The school still gives them the lunch, obviously, but they're just in debt.
	So they had this debt, and this kid, Ryan Kirkpatrick, decided to pay it off himself with his allowance money.
	His classmates had $74.50 in student lunch debt.
	Ryan saved his money from his allowance, gave it to pay off the debt.
	And even more importantly, he did it anonymously.
	This story came out, I guess, because of either the parents or because of the school.
	But when Ryan himself did it, he did it anonymously.
	And when asked finally why he did it, he said, quote, I want them just to realize people actually think about them, the classmates, instead of just telling them what they did because you're just bragging about stuff.
	I want them to feel happy that someone cares about them.
	And this is the key to the whole story.
	Because there is a major ideological difference between how people are reacting to this story.
	The people on the right heard this story and they thought, this is terrific.
	This is really beautiful.
	It's uplifting.
	It's inspiring.
	What a good kid.
	What a kid who was clearly raised right and who has just made wonderful decisions.
	The left saw this story.
	You saw the blue check marks on Twitter and you saw other people reacting and saying that this is awful.
	This is embarrassing for our country.
	Depressing story.
	Because in a country as rich as ours, students shouldn't have student lunch debt.
	The schools should provide all the meals for the kids for free.
	There should be no debt.
	This is so awful.
	How unjust it is.
	How awful.
	There were a lot of people suggesting that schools should just provide free lunches and breakfasts for all the kids.
	What our colleague Matt Walsh pointed out the other day is if there are 50 million kids in public school in the United States, you give them two meals a day, that's 100 million free meals per day.
	There are 180 days in a school year, which means there are about 18 billion free meals per day that the left wants us to create a new government entitlement for.
	That's what they're calling for.
	So you could do that Or parents could stop being deadbeats and feed their children.
	New federal entitlement, 18 billion meals a day, or parents can be parents.
	This story overall is incredibly inspiring.
	And the reason it's inspiring is because a nine-year-old kid decided to give his allowance to charity anonymously.
	That's great.
	That is just a morally wonderful, unqualified, good act.
	There is something wrong in the story.
	The thing that's wrong is that deadbeat parents are not feeding their children.
	The thing that's wrong in the story is not that the government isn't doing enough.
	The government actually is doing enough.
	The schools are already providing the hot lunches to the kids, regardless of whether or not they can pay.
	So the government is already doing that.
	They're already giving out the free lunches.
	The problem with this story is that deadbeat parents aren't feeding their children.
	If you can't feed your children, your children should be taken from you.
	It's that simple.
	If you cannot feed your children, either a family member of yours who is not a deadbeat should take your children and raise them and take care of them, or the state should come in and remove your children from you, you deadbeat, and give them to a family that will not starve them and will be able to give them basic food.
	Feeding your children is the most basic role of a parent.
	There are many things that parents do.
	All parents most basically have to feed their kids.
	Either you can do it, or a family member can do it, or the state can do it.
	Now you say, well, what if some parents don't make a lot of money?
	Then those parents should go hungry while they feed their kids.
	Well, what if...
	What if some parents, I don't know, they just don't have a good job, they're living in poverty.
	First of all, in America, that doesn't need to happen because we have a robust social safety net.
	So if you aren't making a lot of money, I have friends and family who have been in poverty, and you can go on food stamps or other welfare programs, and then you can use that to buy food and feed your children.
	What if that's not enough?
	Or what if you're spending it improperly?
	Or what if you don't qualify or something?
	There's a lot of private charity also that will allow you to feed your children.
	The way to illustrate this most clearly, I think, is that the poor in America are much, much, much more likely to suffer from obesity than they are from starvation.
	People don't starve in America.
	They don't starve by necessity.
	There are a lot of options in this country.
	The reason that these parents are not feeding their children is not because they don't have the money.
	It's not because life is so hard.
	It's not because they're starving.
	It's because they're stupid freaking deadbeats.
	And we're not holding them to account to do their basic function as parents.
	So in this case, obviously the schools should give the kids food that they're eating.
	They shouldn't make the kids go hungry.
	But it's not just that they should erase the student debt or something.
	The schools should give the kids food and then call those parents and hound them and ask them, say, hey, excuse me, this is Principal So-and-so from the school district.
	Why aren't you feeding your child?
	Is something wrong?
	Do we need to send Child Protective Services to your house?
	Do we need to go have a little intervention here?
	Why aren't you feeding your kids?
	Now, another takeaway from this is that people can follow this kid's excellent example and give to charity to make up for deadbeats.
	I mean, that's what charity is for.
	Charity is a wonderful thing.
	Everyone should give to charity.
	And it's great that this kid is learning to give to charity.
	There's actually a word of caution here because I know...
	I was almost hesitant to bring up this story because I know what conservatives are going to think and really everybody in this new internet culture we have is, wow, this kid did such a good thing and now we should reward that kid with a GoFundMe campaign.
	I bet one already exists.
	This is what we do now.
	Anytime anyone does anything that we like, anytime anyone does any slight act of kindness or act of charity, we throw hundreds of thousands of dollars at them as though...
	That's the only response.
	There should not be a GoFundMe for this.
	Do not make a GoFundMe.
	Do not donate to a GoFundMe.
	People think that money solves every problem.
	Money does solve a lot of problems.
	This isn't a problem.
	This is just charity.
	This is a good thing.
	An act of charity is good, and we should let this kid engage in an act of charity and see how it feels and see how people react to it, see what it means, and just do it.
	It's a lovely thing.
	That's it.
	That's all.
	That's all you got.
	That's lovely.
	Good job, kid.
	Ryan, well done.
	You're an inspiration to your classmates and your countrymen.
	Speaking of child abuse, we have an example of really egregious child abuse.
	I guess even worse than not giving your kid lunch.
	We finally have to address the case of the 10-year-old drag queen that his parents are calling him.
	This is a truly horrifying story, but we have to address it because it's all over the news right now.
	And it's, I think, better to confront it head-on than to put our heads in the stand any longer.
	We've got that.
	We've got a lot more coming up.
	We've got Kirsten Gillibrand making a fool of herself.
	We've got the poor Masterpiece Cake Shop guys getting targeted again.
	And another social media platform bans conservatives.
	But first, I've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
	Go to dailywire.com.
	It's $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 the Matt Wills show, you get to ask questions in the mailbag, you get another kingdom, you get the Leftist Tears Tumblr.
	Why do you need to subscribe to Daily Wire?
	Well, you get all that great stuff, so that's terrific.
	The reason you need to subscribe is because we're all about to be kicked off of social media.
	We're going to be kicked off of YouTube.
	We're going to be kicked off of other social media platforms, especially as the 2020 race heats up.
	It's just going to happen.
	They've launched this crusade.
	They were testing the waters about six months ago.
	Now they have gone full steam ahead.
	They're demonetizing all conservatives.
	They're limiting the reach of my videos on YouTube.
	We'll talk about that a little bit more later.
	It's just happening.
	So go subscribe right now if you want to keep the content coming.
	We'll be right back with a lot more.
	This story is horrifying, but we just have to talk about it.
	There's an 11-year-old drag queen.
	It's an 11-year-old abused child whose parents are calling him a drag queen.
	His stage name is Desmond is Amazing.
	I didn't want to talk about this story.
	I've put off talking about it for months, or at least rather put off showing the video.
	I think I've mentioned it before, but I've put off showing the video for months because I just don't want to add to this.
	But it's everywhere.
	It's Pride Month.
	This kid is being trotted out everywhere.
	where he's on all of the media outlets online.
	So I think it's better to confront it head on.
	11-year-old kid, his name is Desmond, his parents are pimping him out as a sexualized transvestite model, and the mainstream media are totally buying it.
	This from the Huffington Post. - I was born in Pride Month in the year 2007.
	Gay pride means self-expression to me.
	Hi, I'm Desmond is amazing.
	I'm 10 years old and I'm a drag kid and I live in New York City and I'm an LGBTQ activist and advocate.
	I discovered that I wanted to drag when I watched the first episode of RuPaul's Drag Race when I was two.
	Then I moved on to, like, little dresses.
	Then I moved on to making outfits.
	I got my inspirations from designers like Alexander McQueen, Betsy Johnson, Clums de Garçon, Jean-Paul Gaultier, the club kids, their fashion and the makeup, not the bad things, the Blitz kids of London.
	And if you wanted to drag, just start off with a little wig and some lip gloss and a little, like, t-shirt and a little skirt and some heels or sneakers, whatever.
	You can be a drag no matter what.
	I've always been able to be myself because of my supporting mom and dad.
	Say hi, mom.
	Hi.
	That's my mom, and I love her to death.
	Drag is a form of expression and being yourself and dressing however you want and looking fair.
	So that is horrific.
	I don't know where to begin.
	He says that he got into drag.
	He knew he wanted to be a drag queen when he was two years old.
	And he's able to do it because his parents are so supportive.
	Say hi, mom.
	Love her to death.
	Yeah, that's all true, I guess.
	It's the parents.
	Parents who should be in prison or deported.
	They should not be permitted anywhere near children or anywhere near polite society.
	What they have done should be a crime and they should go to jail for that and they should be arrested and not permitted in free civilized society.
	The parents are trying to justify their abuse.
	There is a profile on them, ironically, in a website called Fatherly.com.
	This is the headline.
	What a sick pervert that father is.
	What a sick, twisted pervert that guy is.
	But you see what he's trying to do.
	Even if he's looking at this now and saying, gosh, this is really messed up.
	I've really made a mistake.
	Even if he's looking at that, what he's trying to do is take his own agency out of it.
	He's saying, oh, we knew.
	We knew.
	He was born this way.
	We knew.
	He was born a drag queen.
	No one's born a drag queen.
	You need clothing and lipstick to be a drag queen.
	He wasn't born that way.
	You made him that way.
	He said, no, he just was.
	He was never in the closet because he was just always so fabulous.
	He goes on, he says, I have a picture where I'm holding him, and he's the length of my forearm.
	He's like this big.
	He's sitting there with a little smile on his face, posing for the camera five minutes after he's born.
	We should have known right then, but we didn't.
	So the baby, he was posing for the camera.
	No, he wasn't.
	He's a newly born baby.
	He's not even conscious.
	Babies aren't conscious for quite a while after they're born.
	He wasn't posing for the cameras.
	You imagined that because you're a sick pervert and you're trying to justify and rationalize the horrific child abuse that you've inflicted on your son.
	He wasn't a drag queen when he was born.
	He wasn't conscious.
	And he wasn't naturally a drag queen.
	He says that he knew he wanted to be a drag queen when he watched RuPaul's Drag Race at age two.
	First of all, he doesn't remember anything from when he was age two.
	So that's a story that you've told him that he's now been convinced of.
	But let's say he did remember something from age two.
	You showed him a sexualized show about drag queens when he was two because you are a pervert and a horrible parent.
	And you are right now, currently, abusing your child.
	The fatherly story goes on.
	By the time Desmond was two or three, it was clear to his parents that he was likely gay.
	They had been testing him.
	What?
	They've been testing him?
	Exposing him to different things?
	What did he like?
	The Sissy Duckling, a 1999 animated film about a duckling that doesn't quite fit in.
	He named one of his two fish after him.
	RuPaul's Drag Race, Pride Parades, Musicals.
	It wasn't that he was indifferent to sports, but that he saw them as a distraction from fashion and performance.
	So, Desmond really liked all of the super confusing sexualized stuff that you put in front of him when he was three.
	That's what you're saying.
	Yeah, we experimented on him.
	We tested him, is what they said.
	We put a lot of sexual content in front of him and then he got confused.
	So, therefore, he was born a drag queen.
	Also, so they took him to pride parades.
	That's pretty weird.
	But then they say at the end there, they say he really liked musicals and he didn't really care for sports.
	So therefore we knew he was a drag queen.
	Let me tell you, here's confession time.
	I liked a lot of musicals as a kid.
	I performed in musicals.
	I saw Broadway musicals.
	And this is going to be a big shocker for you.
	I wasn't that good at sports.
	I played Little League for eight years.
	I think I hit the ball like four times.
	But I leaned into pitches, so I had a very high on-base percentage.
	That's a story for another time.
	I was bad at sports.
	I liked musicals.
	I'm not a drag queen.
	I'm not gay.
	I'm mostly a pretty regular guy.
	I wasn't posing for the cameras at five minutes after I was born because nobody does because that's in your pervert imagination because babies aren't conscious when they're born.
	All of this evidence is just a way for these parents to justify their abuse.
	And then you know what they did.
	These parents brought this kid to a gay bar and they had him dance on the bar while a bunch of men threw dollar bills at him like he's a stripper.
	This is all cheered on in our culture in the name of pride or gay rights or LGBTQ. Am I allowed to say Q anymore?
	Q I think is now a bad word, but it's still in the acronym, so I guess I have to say it.
	This is being cheered on.
	Child abuse, bringing a little 10-year-old kid to a drag bar and throwing dollar bills at him while you talk about how sexy his dance moves are.
	Our moral discourse on this issue has become ridiculously shallow.
	It's become so shallow.
	Fortunately, we have a Democrat presidential candidate to sum up what our entire moral discourse on this question has become.
	That's it.
	It's just us wearing a shirt.
	Kirsten Gillibrand is wearing a rainbow shirt at a gay bar on Pride Parade, and the shirt says, love is brave, which it's not, by the way.
	Love is wonderful.
	Love is patient.
	Love is kind.
	Love is wonderful.
	We could talk for many years about what love is.
	It's not brave.
	And she's there, and she's kind of dancing, moving along, and then she just puts her hand up, and she yells at her.
	She goes, gay rights!
	Gay rights.
	That's it.
	That's the whole thing.
	Hey, don't you think it's maybe a bad idea to bring a 10-year-old boy to a gay bar and have him dance on the bar while lecherous men throw dollar bills at him?
	Gay rights!
	Oh, I hadn't considered that before.
	What a sophisticated response that makes me think about this issue in a new and interesting way.
	Of course not.
	Let me ask you this, though.
	Let's say you're the most extreme leftist sexual revolutionary.
	You say, yeah, absolutely.
	We should dress up our little children.
	We should, first of all, when they're two, show them sexualized television shows about drag queens.
	Then we should dress them up in sexualized ways.
	Then we should take them to gay bars and have lecherous men throw dollar bills at them.
	Let's say that you're all behind this.
	What if it were a little girl?
	What if there were a little girl who said, I want to be a pole dancer?
	And, oh yeah, little Susie, she knew she wanted to be a pole dancer from age two.
	We actually knew the minute she was born, she, you know, she was born, we were swaddling her, and then she just jumped up and did a bunch of spins on a pole, and we knew she was a pole dancer from the minute she was born.
	And she loved, we showed her a bunch of videos of strippers when she was two years old, and she really liked them.
	them.
	So we knew she was a stripper from age two.
	And so we brought a little girl to a bar and she got up in sexualized clothing and danced on a bar while men threw dollar bills at her.
	What would we say about that?
	Would we say that's gay rights, pride, great, woohoo, yeah, that's awesome.
	What are we willing to tolerate?
	Obviously, the sexualization of children is horrific and indefensible.
	The left tolerates it, though, in the name of sexual liberation.
	That's what this is all about.
	Sexual liberation.
	You do you.
	Love is love.
	Be proud.
	Be weird.
	Be proud.
	How far are we willing to go for sexual liberation?
	Are we willing to abuse children?
	The left is.
	Are we willing to say no?
	Are we willing to stop them?
	Are we willing to say, no, you've gone too far?
	Forget about the sexualization of children for a minute.
	Go to a completely different place.
	In this question of sexual liberation.
	Right now, the owner of Masterpiece Cake Shop, Jack Phillips, we've had him on the show before, Jack Phillips is now being sued again for a third time for refusing to participate in activities that violate his religious beliefs.
	He first became prominent because these LGBTQ activists targeted Jack Phillips to try to get him to bake a cake, a customized cake, for a gay wedding, so-called.
	And he said, I can't do that because I'm an Orthodox Christian and I don't think there's any such thing as a gay wedding and it violates my religious beliefs to use my artistic skills to create a custom cake to be part of your gay wedding.
	If you want to just buy one of my regular cakes, you're more than welcome to buy one of those and then you can use it at your wedding.
	But they didn't actually want the cake.
	They wanted to ruin his life because Jack Phillips is a Christian.
	So they said, no, you have to make a custom cake and if you don't, we're going to sue you into the ground and take away your livelihood and your business.
	So they did that.
	The Colorado Civil Rights Commission came out against him.
	They tried to litigate this guy into the dirt.
	This went all the way up to the Supreme Court and he won.
	So guess what they did?
	They went after him again.
	A transgender activist, a fellow by the name of Autumn Scardina, then tried to get him to bake a cake, to get Phillips to bake a cake, to celebrate his Scardina's gender...
	Change.
	I don't know what they call it.
	Transformation.
	And he wanted the cake to be blue on the outside and pink on the inside.
	Get it?
	Because he's a man on the outside, but he's a woman on the inside.
	Frankly, I'm very offended that this guy, Autumn Scordina, would associate blue with masculinity and pink with femininity.
	How bigoted.
	How judgmental.
	How patriarchal.
	You don't...
	Boys don't get blue.
	Girls don't get pink.
	How dare you, sir?
	That's, again, a side note.
	Jack Phillips refused to bake the cake, so they follow this case all the way down.
	Phillips does okay.
	Now there is a third lawsuit, again by this trans activist, Autumn Scardina.
	And it's not for refusing to bake a gay wedding cake.
	It's not for refusing to bake a trans celebration cake.
	It's for refusing to bake a birthday cake.
	Ah, so this transgender activist, now he's got Phillips.
	The trick here, you might wonder, why didn't Phillips just bake the birthday cake?
	It's because it's a birthday cake for Satan.
	This guy, Autumn Scardina, wants Phillips to bake a cake that would feature an upside-down cross in black and red frosting and a head of Lucifer.
	So, as you might imagine, Jack Phillips declined this.
	This began, by the way, the day that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jack Phillips.
	This activist called him and asked for another cake, a three-tiered white cake, cheesecake frosting.
	The topper would be a large figure of Satan licking a nine-inch black sex toy.
	Use your imagination.
	And the sex toy had to be a working model, according to the request.
	So this obviously has nothing to do with the cake.
	There are a lot of bakeries around here, by the way.
	You'd think Jack Phillips is the only baker in America.
	They're actually explicitly LGBTQ bakeries, LGBTQ-centered bakeries, closer to the people asking for these cakes than Phillips.
	But they target Phillips because they want to ruin his life because he's a Christian.
	I've met this guy.
	You might think, because he's been in the news so much, this guy Jack Phillips, he's probably not a regular baker.
	He's probably some kind of activist.
	He's just, look, they're trying to get famous on it.
	He's trying to get famous on it.
	It's just a political battle.
	Not so.
	He's actually just a nice baker.
	He's just a nice guy.
	I've met him.
	I was actually shocked.
	Oh, you actually are a baker who is just completely being unfairly targeted for being a Christian.
	This shows you that the calls for live and let live, tolerance, you do you, all of that is nonsense.
	This shows you that the left, they're not happy with tolerance.
	They're not happy with acceptance.
	They're not happy with toleration.
	They want to break down your beliefs.
	You now no longer are permitted to hold Orthodox Christian, Jewish, or Islamic views on sexuality on YouTube.
	That's not allowed anymore.
	That's hate speech.
	That's gone.
	You're now not allowed to refuse to bake a cake for Satan's birthday.
	That's gone.
	They want to destroy your religious beliefs.
	You know, we've been talking about this debate that's been going on on the right.
	Do we want a conservatism that begins with certain religious premises, certain cultural premises?
	Like Sohrab Amari, the writer, was advocating a traditional conservatism.
	Or do we want this kind of classical liberalism that says there's no foundation to anything, it's just all a neutral space?
	There's no neutral space.
	There's not.
	This is what neutral space gets you.
	It gets you...
	It gets your life ruined and your business destroyed because you refuse to bake a sex birthday cake for Satan.
	That's what it comes down to.
	A little news we have to get to before we get out of here.
	Pinterest is a new social media platform banning conservatives.
	It's not a new social media platform.
	It's been around for a while.
	We have now uncovered, we now know, they are banning conservatives.
	And that's thanks to James O'Keefe at Project Veritas.
	Pinterest is now blocking, for sure, Ben Shapiro.
	Our editor-in-chief, so I've got to assume they're blocking all of the Daily Wire content.
	They're blocking PJ Media, a right-wing site.
	They're blocking live action.
	They're now saying live action is pornography.
	That's the pro-life site.
	And this is all thanks to James O'Keefe talking to a big tech whistleblower who showed him the Slack threads, the email threads, showed him behind the curtain that live action is going after conservatives.
	Here is just a little bit of that interview.
	What are we looking at here?
	It seems to be a bunch of XXX and porn websites and then there appears to be the live action website.
	What are we looking at here?
	You're looking at pins with domains that are blocked.
	Any domain on the porn block list, you can't make a pin like that.
	And I happened to discover this because of a Slack thread talking about pro-life content, and somebody happened to notice that LiveAction.org was blocked.
	And so I was pretty surprised, and I went to our porn domain block list, and then sure enough, I found LiveAction on there.
	LiveAction is a group founded by Lila Rose that tries to educate people about the pro-life movement.
	LiveAction.org was added to a porn block list.
	That means that if you try to make a pin that links to liveaction.org, you won't be allowed to.
	The pin won't be created.
	Megan works on the trust and safety team and on government operations, and she was the one who added liveaction.org to the porn domain block list.
	So we're getting a lot of good information.
	The reason that that guy's voice is all messed up is not because it's James Earl Jones as the whistleblower.
	It's because he wants to keep his identity anonymous, obviously.
	This is absurd to add.
	Live Action is the most wholesome website on the internet.
	It literally just exists to protect babies and stop babies from being killed.
	It is the most wholesome, family-friendly website on the entire internet.
	You know, if they had added Daily Wire as a porn website, I mean, I've taken some strange photos here.
	I mean, I've taken photos without any pants on a couch.
	I've taken photos licking a cake without a shirt on.
	So I would understand that a little bit more.
	Live action, there's no explanation other than this was a vindictive play from a social media platform abusing its power, abusing the rights, the special protections that have been given to it by the government.
	And it is using that because it really supports abortion and it wants to shut up pro-life activists because they know they can't win the argument, so they have to censor them.
	Now, it's not just live action that's being targeted here.
	It's not just the narrow case of abortion.
	It's Christians generally.
	It's so much more of the people who reject leftist orthodoxy.
	Here he is.
	It contains offensive terms, porn terms, anything that we don't want to show up on search.
	There are a lot of terms about Christians, Bible verses.
	So we have Pinterest open right now.
	I'm going to type in the word Muslim.
	And what we see happen on the screen is it separates it into two words.
	Muslim fashion, Muslim quotes.
	And this is called autocomplete.
	I'll do it again for the word Jewish.
	I'll type in the search, Jewish art, Jewish wedding, Jewish recipe.
	But then I type in the word Christian.
	And something interesting happens.
	Some of the other words that are on this severity level is And those are now being compared to Christian quotes.
	So in autocomplete now, you can search Jewish, Muslim, but when you search Christian, this is being blocked, and it's being put on the level of cocaine and racial slurs and pornography, sex searches, Christianity, specifically singled out.
	Not religion, generally.
	Not religious freedom.
	Christianity.
	Anti-Christian.
	Anti-baby.
	Anti-pro-life.
	Anti-conservative.
	That's what we're getting.
	According to the documents James O'Keefe found, Ben was censored in a, quote, zero-tolerance movement.
	Christianity blocked from autocomplete.
	Video series exposing Planned Parenthood was in a censor list as a harmful conspiracy.
	A harmful conspiracy that we can watch on video.
	Don't believe your lying eyes.
	Just believe Pinterest.
	Live action on a list of porn sites.
	Content couldn't be clicked through by users.
	The Slack channels, this is my favorite part, the Slack channels on the public policy and social impact managers instructed employees to, quote, monitor the platform for white supremacist content from individuals like conservative commentators Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens.
	White supremacist content by a Jew and a black girl.
	The sneakiest white supremacists.
	Those are the ones you...
	Forget the regular white white supremacists.
	The ones you've got to look out for are the Jewish and black ones.
	This is just another platform.
	How many other social media platforms are doing this?
	How much more intense is this social media censorship going to get before 2020?
	And what needs to happen before conservatives come to their senses and start insisting that the law be enforced on these companies to break up their outrageous abuses of power?
	All good questions.
	We'll get to them some other time.
	I'm Michael Knowles.
	This is The Michael Knowles Show.
	See you tomorrow.
	The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Rebecca Dobkowitz and directed by Mike Joyner.
	Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
	Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
	Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
	And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
	Edited by Danny D'Amico.
	Audio is mixed by Dylan Case.
	Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
	And our production assistant is Nick Sheehan.
	The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
	Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
	Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
	Fake hearings in Washington amplified by fake news on the networks immortalized and fake movies in the theaters and on TV. The left has created an empire of lies in which America is living under racist and sexist oppression led by that reincarnated Hitler, Donald Trump.
	I'll take you into the heart of the machine.
	Plus, I've got an interview with a true American hero on The Andrew Klavan Show.

▲