Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

July 17, 2019 - The Michael Knowles Show

47:59

Ep. 383 - One Small Step For Man, One Giant Leap In Girls’ Track

Planned Parenthood fires its president, House Democrats call President Trump a racist, and Bill Whittle stops by to talk about the moon landing. Date: 07-17-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Planned Parenthood made the difficult and personal decision yesterday to terminate their president after just 10 months, or a little over three trimesters in the position.
	It is unclear whether Planned Parenthood used chemicals or forceps to evacuate President Leanna Wu from her office.
	Bizarrely, Wu took to Twitter to complain about the ouster, as though she were a human being.
	But it's Planned Parenthood's corporate body, and it's Planned Parenthood's choice.
	Besides, it's not like they killed her or anything.
	We will examine what the firing means for the modern left.
	Then, breaking news from the floor of the House of Representatives, Democrats, who have spent the last three years calling President Trump a racist, voted, you'll never guess it, To call President Trump a racist.
	Wow, they are doing the people's work.
	Finally, our pal Bill Whittle stops by to talk about his new hit podcast, Apollo 11, What We Saw on the 50th anniversary of the moon landing.
	All that and more.
	I'm Michael Knowles and this is the Michael Knowles Show.
	There was some real craziness on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday and it has a lot to do with those tweets that President Trump sent out a couple days ago.
	Trump sent out a couple of days ago.
	And it, it tells us a lot about the reaction of some conservatives to those tweets of the whole left to those tweets and whether the tweets in overall were productive or unproductive for the politics of 2020.
	We'll get into it.
	First, I want to get to Planned Parenthood because this is a pretty crazy story and the media aren't really covering it very much.
	Planned Parenthood just fired their president, Leanna Wu, after less than one year.
	Guess why?
	There are two reasons being reported from multiple sources within Planned Parenthood.
	The reason that they've fired their president is because the president believes, Leanna Wu believed, that abortion was more popular when it was framed as a health care issue rather than a political issue.
	Seems true enough to me.
	I'm sure it is more popular when you don't frame it as some crazy leftist political agenda, but you just try to call it healthcare.
	You know the second reason why they fired her?
	This is according to two sources speaking to BuzzFeed News.
	Because she wouldn't say that men can have abortions.
	The president of Planned Parenthood refused to say that dudes don't have uteruses, don't have a birth canal, She refused to say that dudes can have abortions, so they fired her for that.
	Can't make this stuff up.
	She said two true things, and they fired her for that.
	This tells us a lot.
	Tells us a lot about where the left is, where Democrats are in regard to their own ideology, where they are in regard to believing their own press releases, where they are in regard to following their own crazy premises to their highly illogical beliefs.
	I spoke yesterday about this article in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend about men beating women at women's sports.
	So Maddie Kearns wrote this piece in the journal about how these high school girl track stars are being beaten out, they're losing scholarships, they can't win any races because men keep competing in them and men are physically stronger than women and so they keep winning.
	Now, this has significant consequences.
	At the high school level, obviously, it means they could lose out on scholarships.
	That's real money.
	That really affects your college career.
	That really affects your life.
	Socially, though, it means that men now get to define what womanhood is.
	And if women object to this, then the women are smeared as some sort of bigot, as a transphobe.
	You know, when Maddie wrote that piece in the Wall Street Journal, there was this weirdo, this creepy guy, a male New York Times freelance op-ed writer and a graduate of Harvard Medical School, tells you a lot about Harvard Medical School.
	His name is Jack Turbin.
	He smeared her as a bigot.
	He said the Wall Street Journal shouldn't have published her because she referred to men as men and women as women.
	He said the Wall Street Journal shouldn't have published her because she defended women's sports.
	So I mentioned this on the show yesterday.
	Now he's smearing me.
	He's saying that I hate transgender people.
	Of course, he provides no evidence for this.
	He couldn't find any evidence for that.
	But he's smearing me as being hateful toward transgender people because I think that women's sports should exist And I think that women who defend women's sports shouldn't be smeared by weirdos who write for the New York Times.
	I guess that's what qualifies hatred toward transgender people now.
	Obviously nothing could be further from the truth.
	And I think it's time for conservatives to start articulating this.
	Not just conservatives, by the way.
	Moderates, left-wingers even, Democrats.
	Anybody who thinks that men are not women and women are not men, and that women ought to be allowed to exist, and women ought to be allowed to have their own changing rooms, and they ought to be allowed to have their own sports.
	If anything, it is gender ideology activists like Jack Turbin who demonstrate hatred toward gender-confused people.
	Why is that?
	It's because they won't tell them the truth.
	They think, the whole gender ideology crowd, think that the very, very small percentage of people who suffer from this condition of gender confusion, 0.2%, something like that, they think that they're hopeless.
	They think there is no chance.
	These people are so crazy.
	There's no way that you could ever tell them the truth.
	They can't handle the truth.
	You just have to indulge their delusions like you would a small child.
	How condescending is that?
	How pompous is that?
	How self-adulatory is it to say, I know the truth, like we all know the truth, but these little feeble-minded people, there's no way we could possibly tell them that they're not really the opposite sex, the sex that they want to be, or that they might have deluded themselves into thinking that they are.
	They would rather, people like Jack Turbin, the gender ideology people, they would rather feed these people delusions.
	Even delusions that harm those individuals, even delusions that harm society, even delusions that harm girl track stars, female athletes, they would rather feed them those delusions than give them the truth that sex is real, we're born with a sex, it is what it is.
	This is such an affront to human dignity to treat some people as though they're fundamentally incapable of understanding reality.
	It's so outrageous.
	And on this topic, I mean, from the women's sports all the way to firing a Planned Parenthood president because she says men can't have abortions.
	I have to say, as someone with a dog in this fight, as a conservative, I encourage them to keep it up.
	Oh, please, political activists, please keep it up.
	Keep on smearing women for trying to get college scholarships for sports.
	Keep on smearing women.
	Keep on trying to convince people that men are women and up is down and left is right.
	Keep on firing activists for saying that men can't get abortions.
	Keep on smearing women for trying to compete in their own sports.
	People have eyes and you can't tell people Forever.
	That they can't believe their own lion eyes.
	We are watching the left collapse under the weight of their own illogic in real time.
	This is a hopeful moment for those of us in the reality-based community.
	We will explain why.
	We'll explain what it means in one second.
	But first, Raycon earbuds are a wonderful new product.
	They help you hear reality.
	We all see reality.
	Raycon will help you hear it at about half the price of any other premium wireless earbuds on the market.
	They sound fantastic.
	So Raycon's E50 wireless earbuds have completely changed the game.
	They're extremely comfortable, much more comfortable than any other earbud on the market, and they're extremely easy to take anywhere.
	So unlike some other wireless options, I'm not going to name them, but I think we all know what we're talking about here, Raycon earbuds are stylish and discreet.
	They're not like dangling out of your ears with giant stems or wires.
	And It's not just that they look great, they sound great too.
	Raycon offers their wireless earbuds for everyone in a range of colors.
	It's not just some company telling you it has to look like this, it has to feel like this, even if it doesn't fit too bad, deal with it, we say so.
	It's an unbeatable price as well.
	Right now, go to buyraycon.com.
	Slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. Get 15% off your order.
	You're not going to get that anywhere else.
	Buy Raycon.com slash Knowles for 15% off Raycon wireless earbuds.
	If you have been eyeing a pair, now is the time to get an amazing deal.
	One more time.
	Buy Raycon.
	R-A-Y-C-O-N dot com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. I've said this for months now.
	I think that this moment, this crazy gender stuff, is the moment that is causing the left to collapse under the weight of its own illogic.
	How unified was Planned Parenthood not two years ago?
	Planned Parenthood was totally resurgent.
	I mean, they're getting all this taxpayer money.
	They've got all these marches in the streets.
	They've got all the women wearing the pink hats.
	They were on the move.
	And now they're firing their own president because the president said that men can't get abortions.
	So we're told...
	The pro-life movement is a war on women, but women can also be men, and abortion is a woman's health care right, but now it's a reproductive health care right, even if it's not about reproduction, even if it affects men.
	Very, very confusing topic.
	This is how we're going to win.
	Just keep pushing them through the looking glass.
	There has been this movement on the right.
	This has been for a few years now.
	Those who say, we've got to abandon the old school of trying to fight them point by point and just yell and scream and get exasperated.
	Just let the left...
	Destroy itself.
	Just let the left go crazy on its own.
	I would call it accelerationism.
	They're saying, forget about fighting on the question of...
	I don't know.
	Forget fighting on the scientific merits of abortion.
	Wait until you're fighting on the scientific merits of what sex is.
	Wait until you've got them trying to force grown men into the girls' locker room.
	At that point, nobody is going to support these people.
	Let them go through the looking glass.
	It's got to get crazier before it gets saner.
	And so I think some people now are looking at this and they're saying, oh no, this is the great triumph of leftism because they're putting grown men in the women's room.
	I think it's just the opposite.
	I think there is a huge awakening going on.
	I mean, actually, there is a study out from Pew that shows that the youngest generation, you know, the Gen Z types, are beginning to question the LGBTQ transgender ideology of the left.
	They're actually much more skeptical of it than millennials or even Gen X. That's pretty interesting.
	How did that change happen?
	It's because the left has overplayed its hand.
	Because also, you sort of laugh at it.
	I mean, it is just ridiculous on its face.
	Planned Parenthood fires its president because she says that men can't have abortions.
	Fifty years ago, Democrats promised to put a man on the moon.
	Today, their biggest battle that they're fighting is putting a man in the ladies' room.
	That is ridiculous.
	This is one small step for man, one giant leap in girls' high school lacrosse.
	It's ridiculous.
	Let's just turn for a moment.
	We'll get back to the craziness of the left because it's not just falling apart in Planned Parenthood.
	It's not just falling apart on the pages of the New York Times or in girls' high school track or any of that.
	It is falling apart in the halls of Congress.
	Before that, though, let's take a break from this present nonsense.
	Let's get to the great historical feats, and let's talk about the moon landing on the 50th anniversary.
	This month marks that anniversary, and there's an exciting new podcast out by Esoteric Radio Theater called Apollo 11.
	What we saw, it immediately skyrocketed to number three on the iTunes Apple Podcasts app.
	And it's still in the top five even days later.
	Episode three in the beginning drops today.
	And just coincidentally, it's being hosted by our old pal Bill Whittle, author, pilot, and space enthusiast, who takes you on the journey of what it took to get to the moon and what happened when we got there.
	And...
	Also, very excitingly, how things almost went horribly, horribly wrong.
	Head over to Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts and subscribe today to Apollo 11, what we saw when we bring on Bill Whittle.
	Welcome to Apollo 11 Mission Control.
	What's left of it anyway?
	The space race, 12 years of open warfare between two superpowers.
	The United We used our best missiles, our best pilots, scientists and engineers.
	We employed aircraft carriers, radar stations, all the military hardware we had to defeat our ideological nemesis when each team had over 20,000 nuclear warheads apiece.
	The space race was the defining act of the second half of the 20th century.
	Time for this nation to take a clearly leading role in space achievement.
	Fifty years ago, men from planet Earth first set foot upon the moon.
	You owe it to yourself and to history to experience the space age from the inside and see how it took hundreds of small steps to get to that one giant leap.
	I'm Bill Whittle and this is What We Saw.
	I will tell you, the whole podcast is as impressive as that trailer.
	How cool does that sound?
	We're joined by the host, Bill Whittle.
	Good to see you, pal.
	How you doing, Bill?
	How are you?
	You're a hit.
	This show goes up for five hours or something, and it goes straight to the top three on all of the iTunes charts.
	When I was 10 years old, I basically designed the moon landing and set up the Apollo program to be in place so that when I became 60, my podcast would reach stratospheric heights.
	Thank you.
	Thank you for the kind words.
	I enjoyed writing it.
	The production work done here is out of the park, and obviously the reason people are so interested in this is because of the anniversaries.
	Because of the story.
	And, you know, you're setting this up when you were five years old is only one of the conspiracies that I want to get to about the moon landing.
	But first, I actually just did a column on this yesterday.
	Because of your podcast, I'd seen a few rumblings about this.
	There is an episode from the moon landing that NASA basically blacked out.
	They didn't want people to know about.
	They told Buzz Aldrin to shut up about it.
	You've got the Eagle lunar module lands finally on the moon itself.
	And it's not like they just hop out.
	It's not like they park their Chevy and they're going into the movie theater.
	There are a number of hours in between the landing and when they go out and walk around the moon.
	What happens during those hours?
	Well, they were going to make the moonwalk about 12 hours after the landing.
	But for some reason, landing on the moon and having all these failures and all this other stuff down, having the entire planet looking at them and everybody's entire attention focused on them, turns out the guys weren't that sleepy after all.
	So they moved it up six hours.
	But during that six hours, Mike, once they had the LEM secure and shut down, By the way, you just mentioned they didn't have to get out of there in a hurry.
	When Armstrong got onto the surface of the moon, the first thing he did was pick up something called a contingency sample.
	He pulled out a scoop, picked up some stuff, put it in a patch in case Buzz says, Neil, we gotta go.
	We gotta go right now.
	So we had something with us.
	But during that time, there were still several hours before they started to get into their suits for the moonwalk, which was six hours after landing.
	And during that time, Buzz Aldrin did something that he had asked permission to do.
	And it's not like NASA covered it up.
	It's not like they denied any existence of it, but it was, needless to say, not publicized.
	So, Aldrin had taken with him, gotten permission to take with him, these two pouches.
	When he got to the moon, he removed this little silver flask.
	He opened one of the pouches and he poured a liquid into the flask.
	And he said in the one-sixth gravity, it was amazing how graceful all the little bits of it, you know, curling around the thing were.
	Then he opened the other package and poured the contents of that into his other hand.
	He radioed mission control, and he's talking to the mission controllers now, but this is not going out to the public.
	It's just basically for NASA. He said, I think at this point, I would like to ask everybody to take a moment to give thanks in whatever they find appropriate for this amazing achievement.
	And then, since he was an elder at the Presbyterian Church back in Houston, he took a consecrated wafer, he had a sip of wine from the chalice, And he had communion on the moon.
	The first fluid ever poured on another planet was wine.
	This is...
	An astounding moment.
	I mean, especially when you look at it in the context of the Cold War and the space race.
	You have the first foods and liquids poured, prepared on the moon, are the consecrated body and blood of Christ.
	It is this...
	And I believe he read from the Gospel of John, too.
	I am the vine.
	I don't know what he read.
	I'm sure he read an appropriate...
	A short piece of scripture, basically to himself.
	Armstrong didn't participate.
	I don't know if Armstrong was worried about the fallout or not, but it's pretty clear that he wasn't...
	that this was Buzz's show.
	But Buzz...
	You know, you've just, not just this one time risked your life, you've been risking the only life you've got for 10 or 15 years now.
	And 40 years after the landing, so 10 years ago, when Buzz wrote his memoirs, he actually almost started to, you could tell that 40 years of political correctness was starting to work on him.
	Look, you know, I don't know, maybe I regret it now, but at the time I just felt like, you know, how else can you give thanks for this incredible thing that we've pulled off?
	This was my personal way.
	Of course.
	And, you know, you've got the God-fearing Americans, basically.
	You've got what remains of Western Christendom versus godless atheism.
	You know, we think of the Cold War in economic terms, free markets versus collectivism.
	That was obviously a huge part of it.
	Mm-hmm.
	He turns off the radio, he reads the scripture to himself, and he takes the communion privately, which is an astounding historical moment.
	Why was NASA so worried about Buzz Aldrin taking communion on the moon?
	You know, Mike, I grew up with the space program.
	I was going to be an astronaut.
	They asked me to do the show because I know the space program very well.
	And I'd heard about the communion thing.
	When I did the research, after having done political commentary for 10 years now, it hit me like a thunderbolt that we landed on the moon.
	At 4.17 Eastern Time, on the 20th of July, 1969, that was the end of the space race, that was the United States defeating communism.
	Six hours later, we walk on the moon, and in the time between having our cake and eating it too, in that six-hour window, political correctness was born, and the space age as we understood it ended, in that six-hour window.
	Because what had happened was, on a previous mission, a little over a year earlier, a year and a half earlier, Apollo 8, Which was kind of an ad-lib mission.
	We had a bunch of astronauts and capsules.
	We didn't have the lunar module, so what are we going to do?
	Well, help.
	Let's just go to the moon.
	We've got nothing else to do.
	Orbit around the moon.
	So as that crew, Lovell, Borman, and Anders, are coming around for their final orbit, it's Christmas Day back on Earth, and they see the Earth rising above the moon.
	No one's ever seen this before.
	And they decided that they were going to send a Christmas message to Earth.
	So they read a little bit from the book of Genesis.
	And as the Earth is rising on Christmas Day back home, you hear the crew of Apollo 8 with their message.
	In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.
	And they read a little bit of Genesis.
	And then they ended it, Frank Borman ended it with a line.
	I just think it was a beautiful line, improv line.
	So he says, so from the crew of Apollo 8, we'd like to wish you good night, good luck, Merry Christmas, and God bless all of you, all of you on the good earth.
	And they start home.
	Well, Madeleine Murray O'Hare, who was a professional atheist, a real atheist rights person, and by the way, I just need to interrupt this and say it bears mentioning, needless to say, that large numbers of NASA engineers were atheists, and some of them were Jews, and some of them were anything else, but that's not the point here.
	Madeleine Murray O'Hare was so outraged that somebody might say something like that from the moon that she sued NASA on behalf of her atheist organization.
	And this is Christmas 1968.
	So this is not very, it was about six, seven months before the Apollo 11.
	Yeah, I said it was a year and a half earlier.
	It's about Christmas 68, we landed July 69.
	So she sues NASA and she loses.
	But NASA decides that they don't need the bad publicity.
	And here is the beginning of political correctness.
	In that six hours between defeating communism And walking on the moon, we took a need of communism.
	We bowed to it.
	Because what NASA basically said was, hey, Buzz, I know you've risked your entire life and have accomplished the most amazing thing ever in the history of the world.
	And we understand that these are your personal religious convictions.
	We're not saying you're speaking for the entire program.
	Please, please don't tell me.
	Because the loud people will give us a lot of greed.
	Because this one woman, who is the head of the American Atheists, widely called the most hated woman in America.
	The title she worked hard for.
	She worked hard for it.
	Yes, she was by all accounts a completely loathsome person and an avowed communist.
	And the point I'm making is not so much whether...
	It's not to say that the American space program was a religious space program.
	It wasn't.
	But what it does say is...
	As far as I'm aware as an amateur historian, that was the first time I can remember When Americans were told, don't say what you really think, hide your core beliefs, do not do anything that might upset the lunatics, because they write a lot of letters and they might sue us, as they did.
	Now, you said that this was the greatest achievement in all of human history, but I've spent a lot of time on the internet, Bill.
	I've read a lot of blogs, okay, I've seen a lot of YouTube videos, so I know for a fact that we didn't land on the moon.
	Yeah, a lot of people know That's right.
	And so I want you, how can you explain to me how we landed on the moon when, for instance, human beings couldn't possibly survive the Van Allen radiation belts?
	Checkmate.
	See you next time, Bill.
	There has been an enormous lie spread about the moon landing.
	There have been lies about the subject since it happened.
	But NASA's not the one doing the lying.
	The people doing the lying are the people who are selling this product, this product that it's a hoax.
	And the Van Allen radiation belts are one of just many examples of them lying in order to make money.
	The hoaxists, the conspiracy guys.
	So, they say, here's the Earth, here's the Van Allen radiation belts, we can't get to the Moon without flying through them because the radiation level is going to be high.
	What they don't tell you is, here's the Earth, here's the Van Allen radiation belts, there's the Moon.
	But the Moon's orbit is inclined at an angle, which means that during a very brief period when it crosses the axis, then you have to go through the belts.
	And then you can either fly under them or wait to that one-day window.
	If you're really determined to kill your crew, you can fly right through them then.
	Or as the Moon climbs above the plane of the belts, you fly over them.
	Now, the outer belts are a little wider, so they nick the edge of the outer belts.
	And when somebody says it's absolutely impossible, my response is, okay, what level of radiation is out there that's impossible?
	Oh, they'd fry them like it was in a microwave.
	But microwaves don't emit radiation.
	Microwaves cook with electromagnetic energy.
	They don't emit neutrons.
	So you're saying it's like they were put in a machine that doesn't make any radiation.
	How much radiation did they take?
	They won't tell you.
	They'll just say it's impossible.
	Well, as it turns out, we know what the radiation levels are.
	We knew in advance.
	And it turns out that they took about 1.5 rem.
	Just to give you an idea, it's a name.
	It's a radiation dose.
	But to give you an idea, today...
	The government has rules for how much radiation a worker can take in a given year.
	If you're working in a nuclear plant or medical imaging or airline crews, because you spend a lot of time...
	If you fly too much, right.
	So the limit per year, according to government regulations, the maximum that you can take and still be safe is 5 rem.
	And they took 1.5 rem.
	So they took about a third more...
	Okay, all right.
	So you got me on the Van Allen radiation.
	Okay, fair enough.
	How come, Bill, how could we have gotten to the moon when we know for a fact we didn't have the technology to go to the moon?
	And by the way, we can't even go to the moon today.
	Checkmate.
	Checker mate, maybe.
	When somebody says we don't have the technology, we didn't have the technology to go to the moon.
	I would respond, what gives you that idea?
	What makes you make that assertion?
	We had built 15 Saturn V rockets, and we launched 13 of them.
	The other two went to museums.
	So there were 13 rockets that developed 7 million pounds of thrust that took off from Kennedy Space Center, not recorded after the fact like the Soviets, live and in person.
	I saw two of them go.
	There were tens of millions of people at the Cape watching that Saturn V go into the air.
	So if what you're telling me is...
	We have the technology to build a 365-foot rocket that can lift 6 million pounds off of the pad.
	And we have the technology to do this, but we don't have the technology to use the extra 1% of energy needed to get us to the moon.
	I don't buy it.
	Because if you had told me that there was no such thing as a Saturn V, in other words, if the hardest part of the equation was missing, You might have a case.
	But what they will say is, they'll say, okay, well, the Saturn V's really launched, but we didn't go to the moon.
	We just stayed in lunar orbit.
	Why?
	But, more importantly, well, why was this giant moon landing conspiracy constructed?
	To beat the Soviets.
	There it is.
	You've answered it.
	But here's my question.
	If it turns out that the Apollo missions actually left because everybody saw them, and they went into Earth orbit, but they didn't go to the moon, and since the Soviets have radars that can determine where everything is in space just like we do, you would think that if we were trying to lie to the Soviets in the world,
	By pretending to go to the moon, you think that the Soviets might have had something to say about this, like, hey, sorry to interrupt the fun, but we can show radar returns of the thing in orbit, which means, Mike, that the Soviets were in on the conspiracy to defeat the Soviets.
	That's, well, this, okay, all right, maybe you've presented a slight problem for this theory, but I've got one.
	This puts to rest all of your silly fantasies that we went to the moon.
	Yeah.
	That footage that we all saw of Apollo 11, we can almost certainly tell, was filmed in a soundstage just right here in Los Angeles, okay?
	Because, you know, the flag was waving or something, and I haven't read too much about it.
	But anyway, what I know is we filmed it in a soundstage.
	Prove me wrong.
	Oh, there's a couple things I'll say about that.
	First of all, it's interesting that the flag waving that they claim is evidence of air.
	They say a gust of wind came through the studio.
	Is that something you worry about here in your studio?
	That a giant gust of wind is going to come through and blow your hair off?
	That's only when Ben rips my wall out so the wind starts coming in.
	Interesting, though, that that waving only occurs for just a few moments after they let go of the flagpole.
	If you've ever had a golf flagpole in your hand, you know, if you let that thing go, it'll vibrate and wobble.
	And without air resistance to slow the flag down, it maintains that momentum a little bit longer, which is actually evidence that it was on the moon, not that it wasn't.
	So, here's the thing, Mike.
	Anybody can Google this.
	Goosebusters.
	Mythbusters did a great job with this.
	You know what a railway oil tanker looks like, right?
	These big, heavy steel things that carry oil.
	Well, if you Google oil tanker vacuum anywhere on YouTube...
	A couple people have done experiments where they take most of the air out of an oil tanker.
	They set up a vacuum over here, they open a valve, and they pull the air that's inside the tanker out.
	And these massive, huge steel things just go crunch like that.
	It'll blow your mind.
	Right.
	Blow your mind.
	Under the pressure of the vacuum.
	Pressure of the atmosphere.
	Yeah.
	It's called the Space Power Facility.
	You can Google that too.
	The walls are something like 15 feet thick.
	It's enclosed inside of that is a steel chamber.
	The walls are like two feet thick.
	And it is not big enough to get the LEM into.
	And that is the largest area that we can make into a vacuum on the surface of the Earth because of the incredible air pressure.
	The action of the dust is showing that it's a dust in a vacuum.
	He drops a feather and a hammer and they fall at the same time, Apollo 15.
	Then what you're saying is, is that the soundstage had to be in a vacuum and it's harder to build a building the size of a soundstage.
	That's in a vacuum.
	Then it would be to go to the moon.
	Then it is to go to the moon.
	The best way to fake the moon landing, Mike, is to do it on the moon.
	And I'll just say one more thing.
	If all of this is true, and it is a giant, enormous lie, in order to convince the world that we beat the Soviets, and all of it is in danger of being exposed, and if it turns out that if Neil Armstrong decides to squawk, NASA's just going to shoot him in the head.
	Then why would we go a second time?
	Why would we keep going?
	And why would it be that when we go after two more times, why would we put a golf cart on the moon, which is transmitting live video the entire time?
	Apollo 17 went 12 miles.
	That's a big sound stage.
	Now, if there hadn't been a moon rover, would you have missed it?
	Hey, that can't be right.
	There's no moon rover on that mission.
	No.
	So why would you go six times, every time going further and further and further, In this soundstage, it now has to be the size of Montana.
	You know what I think it is?
	I think where all these hoaxes come from is because modern people living in 2019, who are so smart and so fabulous, they can't believe that 50 years ago, in the old-timey days, when everything was in black and white and they didn't even have Snapchat, that those guys could do something that we can't do.
	And yet, we know this politically, those guys could do a lot of things that we can't do.
	I've got to, unfortunately, I'm up at a break here.
	I hear that episode 3 is coming out today.
	It's out now.
	It's out today.
	And then 4 is on the anniversary on Saturday.
	So the anniversary is actually on Saturday.
	It's the 50th anniversary.
	Where else can people find you?
	All over the internet.
	Well, I'm at BillWhittle.com.
	And that's where most of my stuff is.
	But it's been just such a pleasure working here with you guys.
	And the work that you did to bring this to life here is just tremendous.
	It is my pleasure to give this podcast as much publicity as I can because it is really astounding work.
	Apollo 11, What We Saw, hosted by the one and only Bill Whittle.
	Bill, thanks for coming by.
	Thank you, Mike.
	All right, we've got to head over to dailywire.com right now.
	We still have a lot to get to today, but coming up tonight, 7 p.m.
	Eastern, 4 Pacific, tune in to our next episode of Daily Wire Backstage.
	Daily Wire God King, Jeremy Boring, Ben Shapiro, Andrew Klavan, and yours truly, we'll be sipping whiskey.
	Smoking stogies and laughing our way through politics and pop culture.
	As always, only Daily Wire subscribers get to ask the questions, so make sure to subscribe today.
	Go to dailywire.com.
	We will be right back with so much more.
	All right, we've just talked about the greatest achievement of exploration in the history of mankind.
	Let's talk about the exact opposite of great achievements.
	Stupid, petty, political trivialities on the floor of the House of Representatives.
	There was genuinely some craziness yesterday.
	Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, took to the floor of the House and called President Trump a racist.
	I know, this is so brave.
	I can't believe Nancy Pelosi would do that.
	The reason this mattered, I mean, obviously Democrats have called her, or have called Trump racist now for years and years.
	The reason this mattered is you're not allowed to do that.
	You're not allowed to engage in personality attacks under parliamentary rules in the House of Representatives.
	So, actually, as she was giving these remarks, GOP members moved to have her comments taken away, and she refused to do it, and she was actually rebuked.
	The Speaker of the House rebuked in the House of Representatives.
	Here she is.
	Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the President's racist tweets.
	To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people.
	I urge an unanimous vote and yield back the balance of my vote.
	I was just going to give the General Speaker of the House if she would like to rephrase that comment.
	I have cleared my remarks as a parliamentarian before I read them.
	Can I ask the words to be taken down?
	I'll make a point of order.
	The gentlewoman's words are unparliamentary and ready to be taken down.
	The chair will remind all members, please, please do not make comments toward personality-based comments.
	That's a pretty amazing exchange, but it's also hilarious because if you can't make personality-based comments, then Democrats would have nothing to say.
	They would fall silent.
	So they make this remark, you can't make personality-based comments.
	And then, in the same breath, the House voted to call President Trump a racist.
	Seriously, that's what they voted on.
	Doing the people's business.
	This is what the American people elected them for.
	They called Trump a racist and then they voted to call Trump a racist.
	This resolution passed along party line votes, 240 to 187.
	There were only four Republicans who voted to call Trump a racist and then Justin Amash, that sanctimonious ex-Republican, Libertarian, whatever you want to call him.
	The rest of the Republicans voted against this resolution.
	And specifically, this was about President Trump's tweets just a few days ago where he said that these Congresswomen who hate America should go back to where they came from.
	The issue being that only one of them is an immigrant.
	Three of them are not immigrants.
	And this was widely considered racially offensive.
	I did a lot of my show on this two days ago.
	So if you're curious to hear what I thought about it, feel free to go over there.
	I won't rehash all of it.
	But I will say the Republicans who voted against this resolution are getting a lot of flack for it right now, really just from the mainstream media and from squishy GOP members and from the left.
	They were absolutely right to vote against it.
	This resolution was just completely stupid and wrong.
	Even if you believe that President Trump's comments were racially offensive or racist or bigoted or whichever word you want to use, this resolution still was extremely stupid.
	And the reason for that is it didn't merely call Trump a racist.
	It said that President Trump's, quote, racist comments have legitimized fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.
	Whatever Trump's tweets did, they didn't do that.
	They didn't legitimize fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.
	His comments were only very precisely directed toward these very progressive, loudmouthed, freshman congresswomen.
	And So maybe it legitimized fear and disapproval of the squad, didn't legitimize fear and disapproval of people of color.
	I mean, President Trump has plenty of people of color working in his administration.
	He's repeatedly disavowed racism.
	He's called it evil.
	He's condemned it repeatedly.
	As far as anti-Semitism goes, there's a train station in a town in Israel named after him.
	The charge that he is some awful racial bigot or some neo-Nazi or some white supremacist is just plain stupid.
	And...
	If his comments legitimized fear and disapproval of the squad, AOC, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib, they...
	We should point out they've legitimized fear and disapproval of the squad themselves.
	For instance, when Ilhan Omar giggles about Al-Qaeda and refuses to condemn Al-Qaeda.
	When members of the squad work to have lenient punishments for people who have left America to go and become ISIS terrorists.
	When they compare America to Nazi Germany and concentration camps.
	They're the ones who have legitimized fear of It's not the fault of President Trump's tweet.
	So...
	This was the resolution that was passed on the House.
	Obviously, nobody cares.
	They called Trump racist yesterday.
	They're going to call Trump racist today.
	They're going to call Trump racist tomorrow.
	They did the same thing to George Bush.
	They did the same thing to George Bush's father.
	They did the same thing to Ronald Reagan.
	And guess what?
	They're going to do the same thing to the next Republican, regardless of how many times he condemns racial bigotry.
	But in case people missed it, In case people miss this point that Trump is an awful racist, CNN decided to have a white supremacist on Jake Tapper's show, a guy named Richard Spencer, to also call President Trump racist.
	And unfortunately for CNN, those guys can't win for losing.
	The segment didn't go quite as they had hoped that it would.
	Here's CNN interviewing white nationalist Richard Spencer.
	White nationalist Richard Spencer, who hailed Trump when he was first elected, is among those who are turning on Trump.
	Many white nationalists will eat up this red meat that Donald Trump is throwing out there.
	I am not one of them.
	I recognize the con game that is going on.
	They say Trump is all talk and no action on maintaining white dominance.
	He gives us nothing outside of racist tweets.
	And by racist tweets, I mean tweets that are meaningless and cheap and express the kind of sentiments you might hear from your drunk uncle while he's watching Hannity.
	There it is.
	That guy, he's pretty good on camera.
	I mean, this is why it's a bad idea, I think, to put him on camera is because he really has no following.
	He's a very, very fringe figure.
	And the only reason that anyone knows his name is because the mainstream media talk about him.
	He's basically a contrivance of the mainstream media.
	So he's happy to go on TV. He thinks that if he can go on and make a joke about Sean Hannity, then he can attract a few more followers.
	And he gives them a little bit of what they want.
	He says that the tweet is racist.
	But he also says, in case you missed it, that President Trump has not governed as a racist.
	Obviously, he's not governed as a racist.
	They don't name towns in Israel after racists.
	Racists don't create economic conditions that lead to record low minority unemployment.
	They don't hire a lot of racial minorities.
	They don't talk.
	They don't behave the way Trump behaves.
	Now, all Spencer cares about is race, so he's going to only talk in racial terms.
	But let's forget race for a second.
	Let's go beyond that to just the broad question of political rhetoric versus political reality.
	It is true of virtually every Trump supporter that I talk to.
	Actually, even many Trump critics.
	They like what he's doing, but they don't always like the way he talks about what he's doing.
	They don't like when he talks about Mika's face.
	They don't like the mean tweets.
	They don't like that he talks about psychopath, washed-up singer Bette Midler.
	But they do like what he's doing.
	So now the whole left is calling Trump racist.
	What's more interesting than what they are doing, what is happening, is what is not happening, what they're not doing.
	They're calling Trump racist.
	They're calling America Nazi Germany.
	They're calling ICE detention facilities concentration camps like Auschwitz and Dachau.
	But they're not voting to impeach Trump.
	They're saying Trump is Hitler.
	This is the 1930s.
	Donald Trump is the Fuhrer.
	But we're not going to impeach him.
	They're all talk.
	Why won't they impeach him?
	Because they don't believe it.
	They don't believe what they're saying.
	They don't think he's this awful racist bigot.
	They don't think America's like Nazi Germany.
	And they don't think that ICE is operating concentration camps.
	At least the elites don't.
	Nancy Pelosi doesn't think that.
	Maybe some of the rank and file do.
	But all the sideshows in the world...
	Don't matter.
	Why is Nancy Pelosi going out here and saying, he's a racist.
	I don't care if I'm rebuked.
	He's a racist.
	Why is CNN pushing this?
	Because then they don't have to do the actual implication of what they're saying.
	They don't have to impeach him.
	But some people are.
	Al Green, the congressman, not the singer, has now introduced articles to impeach.
	And this puts Democrats in a real pickle because they don't want to vote for it because they have the numbers and it would pass.
	So whoever doesn't vote for it is going to incite the fury of the base.
	The radical democratic base, the donors, the people who hand out palm cards, they want impeachment.
	The American people don't want impeachment.
	The American people feel that since the 2016 election, Hillary basically never conceded.
	She said it was rigged.
	She said it was stolen.
	The Democrats have said this.
	It was the Russians.
	It was the Macedonians.
	It was James Comey.
	It was everybody but us.
	Now, there's another presidential election, and they're still trying to take it away from him.
	All these investigations, all this impeachment, all these non-traversies.
	But if impeachment comes up, not voting for it expresses the left as hypocrites.
	And to top it all off, the feud with the squad is back on.
	So we were told that President Trump's tweets had stopped all the Democrat infighting between AOC and Nancy Pelosi.
	Turns out that's not true.
	Tune into CBS and you find out the feud is back on.
	Are you speaking to Nancy Pelosi?
	Our teams are in communication.
	Our chiefs are...
	But shouldn't it be a face-to-face?
	I want to know if you were speaking...
	She's the new member, not the speaker.
	No, but I want to know...
	She has every right to sit down with her in any moment, any time, with any of us.
	She is Speaker of the House.
	She can ask for a meeting to sit down with us for clarification.
	The fact of the knowledge is, and I've done racial justice work in our country for a long time, acknowledge the fact that we are women of color.
	So when you do singles out, be aware of that and what you're doing, especially because some of us are getting death threats, because some of us are being singled out in many ways because of our backgrounds, because of our experiences and so forth.
	But I think...
	Alexandria, are you interested in having a conversation face-to-face with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi?
	Why wouldn't you sit down with her?
	Yeah, no, absolutely, and we've reached out to that end.
	So the feud is back on, except now, the only difference between today and a few days ago is now the bulk of Democrats are rallying behind those women.
	They're rallying behind the squad.
	They're not exactly backing Pelosi.
	I mean, Pelosi was rebuked on the floor of the House of Representatives, for goodness sakes.
	She's the Speaker of the House.
	This raises the question.
	Were the tweets politically astute?
	Were they the right thing to send from President Trump?
	It wasn't a home run.
	He actually screwed up.
	He shouldn't have told the people who were born here to go back to their own countries.
	He should have phrased it differently and said, go check out those foreign countries.
	Get out of here.
	I think he could have gotten all the political run out of it without putting him in that bind where he said something that was just factually untrue.
	So it wasn't a home run.
	But it was a base hit and really maybe it was a double.
	if you look at where the left is now.
	You now have the left in this political bind.
	They're introducing articles of impeachment, or at least they're trying to.
	You've got them in the bind where the feud is still going on.
	The tweets didn't stop the feud, except now there's a lot more support for these women whose support was in the single digits just a few days ago.
	Now the Democrats are rallying behind them.
	You've got what Trump manages to do through his trollishness, basically, is get the left to follow their own ideas to their logical conclusions.
	Planned Parenthood has never been more radical.
	Gender ideology has never been more radical.
	These women elected in Congress, the four horsewomen of the political apocalypse, have never been more radical and the base is going behind them.
	At the end of this whole tweet episode, which has now gone on for like three days, it's hard to imagine how this works out any better for conservatives.
	It's a good place to be.
	You've got to take the hits when you can get them.
	We will examine tomorrow how this all looks for 2020.
	Get your mailbag questions in.
	We'll get to them then.
	In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles.
	This is The Michael Knowles Show.
	I'll see you backstage tonight and on the show 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.
	Today on the Ben Shapiro Show, Democrats pass a resolution condemning Trump's quote-unquote Racist tweets.
	And we explain the poll numbers.

▲