Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Oct. 23, 2019 - The Michael Knowles Show

45:00

Ep. 437 - High-Tech Lynchings

President Trump refers to the impeachment inquiry against him as a “lynching,” a major win and an even worse setback for sanity in the gender identity movement, a possible presidential candidate, and assurance from Miley Cyrus that you don’t have to be gay! Date: 10-23-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	President Trump referred to the impeachment inquiry against him as a lynching.
	And the left is absolutely furious that the man that they have spent three years calling a Nazi would even consider referencing racial violence in his metaphor.
	We will use our high tech To examine the history of high-tech lynchings.
	Then a major win and an even worse setback for sanity in the gender identity movement.
	A possible new Democratic presidential candidate.
	An assurance from Miley Cyrus that you don't have to be gay.
	And even more weird, creepy Democrat sex scandals.
	All that and more.
	I'm Michael Knowles and this is the Michael Knowles Show.
	What a day.
	We're going to be talking about lynchings, gender identity, whether or not you have to be gay, Miley Cyrus' words, not mine, and Democrat sex scandals.
	But first, I've got to thank our friends over at Mint Mobile.
	You know, I know.
	You sign up for a big wireless plan.
	You don't really know what you're getting, but you sign on the line, and then every month you don't know what they're going to charge you.
	All you know is they're going to charge you a lot more than you thought you were signing up for.
	That is where Mint Mobile comes in.
	Mint Mobile can cut your cell phone bill down to $15 a month.
	Oh, Michael, that's not possible.
	There's no way.
	It's going to be 15 plus this plus that.
	No, 15 bucks a month.
	That's it.
	How does it work?
	The way it works is that big cell companies sell you unlimited data that you don't need.
	You're on Wi-Fi for the vast majority of your day, whether it's at home or at the office or wherever.
	You're not using it.
	So what you can do with a Mint Mobile plan, you can get unlimited nationwide talk and text.
	You can get extremely fast 4G LTE data.
	You can cut that bill down to $15 a month with your existing phone number, with your existing contacts.
	You can use your own phone with any Mint Mobile plan.
	If you're not 100% satisfied with Mint Mobile, they've got you covered with the 7-day money-back guarantee.
	But you are going to love it.
	I know you've been burned so much that you don't believe that you can get your cell phone bill down to $15 a month.
	You truly can.
	To get your new wireless plan for just $15 a month, get the plan shipped to your door for free.
	Go to mintmobile.com slash Knowles.
	That's mintmobile.com slash Knowles.
	K-N-O-W-L-E-S. Cut your wireless bill down to $15 a month.
	mintmobile.com slash Knowles.
	Here it is.
	Here is Lynchgate.
	President Trump used the word lynching in a metaphor to refer to a political attack against him.
	He tweeted out, quote, Okay.
	I've heard this before.
	You might think you've heard this before.
	But the Democrats, the left, are furious that President Trump would ever reference racial violence in his metaphor.
	For comment, we turn now to Beto O'Rourke.
	Is that not going too far to make a comparison between the president of the United States and the Nazis?
	Find me a better analogy of another leader of a Western democracy describing all people of one religion as inherently defective or disqualified or dangerous.
	And that's what the president has done when it comes to Muslims, seeking to ban all Muslims from this country, repeating the lie that Mexican immigrants pose a violent risk to this country, calling them animals and predators and rapists and criminals, asking four women of color elected by their constituents to Congress to go back to their home country asking four women of color elected by their constituents to Congress to go back to their home country and having an almost Nuremberg-like Oh, it's okay when the left does it, but it's not okay when Trump does it.
	By the way, he opens up and he calls Trump a Nazi.
	Then he lists all these things that Trump didn't do.
	He never said that all people who are Muslims are terrible, awful people.
	He never said that all people who are Mexicans are rapists and murderers.
	Never did any of those things.
	Then it ends with Nuremberg.
	So he brings it back to Nuremberg in the end.
	That's okay.
	But when President Trump uses the word lynching, that is evil.
	The left was actually trying to defend this distinction yesterday.
	They were actually trying.
	You could see it all over the internet.
	They were saying, look, Trump is doing things like the Nazis, and therefore it's okay to invoke racial violence against Jews in the 1930s and 40s.
	When you're talking about a metaphor with Trump, but it's not okay to invoke lynchings.
	That was actually the position that they were trying to defend with a straight face until we used our little high technology over here to go into the way, way back machine of the internet, which is forever, to find out that the Democrats have actually used the word lynching in political metaphors for a very, very long time.
	So here's the left, here are the Democrats, with a real straight face telling you how absolutely terrible it is to use the word lynching.
	How dare the president compare lynching to impeachment?
	I don't know how to characterize that former president except as grotesque.
	Thousands of African Americans were slaughtered during the lynching epidemic in this country for no reason other than the color of their skin.
	How dare he do this?
	Does he not know the history of lynching in this country?
	The president should not compare a constitutionally mandated impeachment inquiry to such a dangerous and dark chapter of American history.
	It's irresponsible for him to do so, and I hope that he will apologize.
	Does he not know that thousands of African Americans were lynched, mob, violence?
	Does he not know that this is the equivalent of murder?
	How dare the president compare Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution, a lawful constitutional process, to mob violence and lynching?
	It makes you no better than those who burn crosses.
	It makes you no better than those who wear hoods and white robes.
	Do you not understand what you're doing to this country?
	If you use the word lynching in a political metaphor, you are basically a member of the Ku Klux Klan.
	You're basically committing racially motivated lynchings yourself.
	Joe Biden tweets out, Impeachment is not lynching.
	It is part of our constitution.
	Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think, to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent.
	It's despicable.
	Isn't that right, Joe Biden?
	Isn't that right, Democrats?
	It's abhorrent, right?
	You would never, ever do it, right, Joe Biden?
	The president should be impeached.
	History is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching or whether or not it was something that, in fact, met the standard, the very high bar that was set by the founders as to what constituted an impeachable offense.
	And indeed, it is a political lynching.
	Political lynch mob.
	I will not vote for this lynching.
	We're in so much hurry to get this done so it can be in the Saturday-Sunday news cycle and have our mint juleps at 5 o'clock.
	We are going to find a rope, find a tree, and ask a bunch of questions.
	Oh, no.
	And you know the best part?
	Biden obviously didn't expect this to come out, so he responded to this on Twitter because they said, wait a second, dude, you did the same thing.
	When it was the impeachment of Bill Clinton, you were all using the same exact language that Trump used that you're azalean for.
	And Biden tweets this out, quote...
	This wasn't the right word to use, and I'm sorry about that.
	Trump, on the other hand, chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily.
	Joe Biden actually said, yeah, when I said it, it was fine.
	But when Trump said it, it's really, really bad because he didn't remember that he said this, that he used it.
	And by the way, it's not like they just used the word once.
	They all used it a lot.
	And then by the end, you had Jim McDermott there saying, we're going to go get a rope.
	He's actually vividly describing this.
	Now, of course, all of this, the Democrats and President Trump's reference, was brought along by the most famous use of this metaphor, which was by Justice Clarence Thomas, when leftists tried to railroad his nomination to the Supreme Court.
	Clarence Thomas famously said, this is a circus, it's a national disgrace, it's a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks.
	Something is dreadfully wrong with this country when any person...
	Any person in this free country would be subjected to this.
	This is not a closed room.
	There was an FBI investigation.
	This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment.
	This is a circus.
	It's a national disgrace.
	And from my standpoint, As a black American, as far as I'm concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas.
	And it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you.
	You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured, By a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.
	Incredibly powerful testimony from Clarence Thomas.
	It ended the whole ridiculous circus of them trying to railroad his Supreme Court nomination.
	They've been doing it to conservative nominees ever since Judge Bork in the 1980s.
	And obviously they still do it up to Brett Kavanaugh.
	And so Clarence Thomas uses this famous phrase, high tech lynching.
	The phrase has a long history in political metaphors because it serves as a good metaphor.
	What's so amazing, though, it's not just that we've forgotten the history of the term lynching in politics.
	We've actually forgotten the history of lynching.
	And it's all part and parcel of this leftist constant strategy to silence conservatives, to say that they can say certain things.
	They can do whatever they want.
	They can speak their mind.
	But when conservatives speak their mind, it's evil and terrible and they have to get shut up.
	We'll get into the real history of that in a second.
	Then we'll get into the high tech lynching itself.
	We'll get into impeachment, possible new Democratic candidate for president and weird, weird leftist sex scandals.
	But first, I've got to thank our friends over at NetSuite.
	I've been a part of a number of growing businesses, businesses that I've helped to start, businesses I was there at the very beginning.
	And one of the biggest problems that always happens with growing businesses is they have these different systems to manage different aspects.
	So you've got, you're managing your numbers over here, your accounting, your HR, all these different computer systems, they're not talking to one another.
	Introducing NetSuite by Oracle, which is the business management software that handles every aspect of your business in an easy-to-use cloud platform.
	So really importantly, it gives you visibility and control that you need to grow.
	So with NetSuite, you can save time and money and unneeded headaches.
	And what people forget is that time is money, and those unneeded headaches cost you both time and money.
	It manages sales, finance and accounting, orders, HR instantly, right from your desktop or your phone.
	That is why NetSuite is the world's number one cloud business system.
	When you're growing your business, there are enough challenges.
	Do not make it hard on yourself unnecessarily.
	Use the best system.
	Give yourself visibility.
	Save time and money.
	Get an advantage in your business.
	Right now, NetSuite is offering you valuable insights with a free guide.
	That guide is seven key strategies to grow your profits at netsuite.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
	That's totally free and really, really excellent advice to get you started.
	Netsuite.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
	To download your free guide, seven key strategies to grow your profits, netsuite.com slash Knowles.
	So what's the history of lynchings?
	Is it okay to use lynching?
	Is it only okay for Democrats to use lynching?
	Is it only okay for leftists to use the word lynching?
	Obviously, the term lynching has a racial component to it.
	So from 1882 to 1964, there were 4743 lynchings recorded in the United States.
	That's a lot of lynchings.
	I mean, you're talking about a period of 90 years or something during an incredibly racially divided period.
	And so, you know, you could think the number would be significantly higher than that.
	But still, 4743 lynchings recorded in the United States.
	72.7% of those were perpetrated against black people.
	Also a sort of surprising number because at least in my mind, before I knew that historical tidbit, I thought 100% were perpetrated against black people.
	But that actually wasn't the case.
	It was the vast majority of them, but not all, a little less than three quarters.
	An additional 27.3% were not perpetrated against black people.
	They were perpetrated against other people.
	Actually, it turns out, little known historical tidbit, the largest mass lynching in the history of the United States was against Italians.
	It was a group of 11 Italian Americans in New Orleans.
	They were all lynched en masse in 1891.
	And that's part of the reason why the next year in 1892, we started to celebrate Columbus Day before leftists ruined that holiday too.
	The term lynch itself also does not reference killings of black people.
	That's not where the term Lynch comes from.
	So what etymologists believe, etymologists, the people who are studying the meaning and history of words, they believe that phrase arose during the American Revolution, and it referred to Lynch's law, specifically to these two brothers, Charles and William Lynch.
	And what Lynch meant specifically was not even just, you know, hanging somebody, you know, in the mob violence.
	It was...
	All extrajudicial punishments, so punishments that took place outside the scope of proper jurisdiction and the law.
	Charles Lynch was a guy who headed a county court, and during the American Revolution, he imprisoned Tories, people who were sympathetic to the British, for up to a year, even though he didn't have proper jurisdiction.
	So he basically took justice into his own hands and imprisoned these Tories during the American Revolution.
	But it's not like this was being used against black people specifically, which is how the term later came to be used.
	Actually, Charles Lynch does appear to have had a racial bias, but the racial bias was not against black people.
	He acquitted black people of murder on at least three occasions.
	The racial bias, it would appear, was actually against Welsh minors.
	He just had a real thing for the Welsh.
	So that's the early history of the term.
	Then there's the question that the left is posing, which is, is there a racial requirement to use plain language?
	More or less what they're saying is Trump can't use the word lynch because he's not a black person.
	Then it turns out that the white Democrats were all using that word lynch.
	They say, well, yeah, they can use it too because we give them permission to use that.
	But white Republicans are not allowed to use that.
	Obviously, you do not need to pass some racial purity test to use a metaphor.
	That is not the case.
	But if there is a racial purity test to use a metaphor, allow me.
	Certainly my Sicilian heritage should give me some say in this stupid leftist premise, given that Italians were the victims of the largest mass lynching in American history.
	So I hereby invoke my Southern Italian DNA to officially absolve President Trump of the sin of using a metaphor.
	Is the metaphor apt?
	Absolutely.
	What is a metaphor?
	A metaphor is when you're comparing something to something else.
	So if you go out and you say, hey, how'd you do on that test, on that exam?
	You say, I killed it.
	Is that offensive to victims of murder and the family of victims of murder?
	No, it's not.
	You're using a metaphor.
	You didn't actually murder the exam, but you killed it, man.
	You slayed.
	You did a great job, right?
	Same thing with the word lynching.
	It's why it's been used by people of all races, of all parties, to refer to political acts.
	And here, what the president is talking about is he's saying there is an extrajudicial, illegal process going on to remove me from office because the Democrats are upset they lost the 2016 election.
	That is happening.
	That's been happening for three years.
	There is no legal basis for this impeachment inquiry right now.
	How do I know that?
	Because they've been trying to impeach him since day one and they've been looking for a crime.
	It's an impeachment in search of an impeachable offense.
	First it was Russia, then it was Stormy Daniels.
	Now it's a long distance phone call to Ukraine, basically.
	How else do I know that this is extrajudicial?
	The impeachment inquiry has completely shut Republicans out.
	This is not one branch of government doing its duly appointed oversight duties on another branch of government.
	This is left-wing Democrats shutting out members of their own branch of government to try to attack the president who's of the opposite party.
	How else do I know this?
	So much of this is based on anonymous whistleblowers.
	Who's the so-called whistleblower?
	We have no idea.
	We have no idea.
	Obviously, the Democrats haven't thought far enough ahead about this because if they actually do impeach the president, then it's going to go to trial in the Senate.
	And if it goes to trial in the Senate, Lindsey Graham is definitely going to call that whistleblower to testify.
	So this isn't going to last forever.
	think the Democrats even think or care that it's going to get that far.
	This is a political stunt being used to affect the 2020 election and very likely to anticipate the IG investigation and the Durham investigation, which are looking into all the Democrat misdeeds that occurred in the 2016 election.
	And they're basically trying to get out ahead of that and say that everybody's corrupt.
	But on the extrajudicial part, on the illegal aspect of this, let's not forget how many sources in this impeachment push have been anonymous.
	They've been murky.
	They've been hiding in the shadows of the bureaucracy.
	You can't face your accuser.
	You can't answer these charges.
	Just the other day, to use an example of this that is slightly related, Chris Wallace, even on Fox News, came out and he said, you know, big time Republicans tell me there's a good chance that Trump gets thrown out of office.
	But he doesn't say who the big-time Republican is.
	It's an anonymous source.
	Much worse than that, the New York Times published an anonymous op-ed last year called, quote, I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration, published anonymously, so breaking with precedent and with norms of journalism.
	And the subheader was, I work for the president, but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
	Basically saying, I am part of the swamp and I am going to undermine the election of 2016.
	I'm going to undermine the duly elected president because I want to and no one can stop me.
	And this is being abetted by the mainstream news media and by the left, but I repeat myself because they're publishing this anonymously.
	This is, as far as political metaphors go...
	The perfect opportunity to use this metaphor of lynching.
	Because what is lynching?
	It is an unjust mob that shows up all anonymously.
	Nobody's held to account.
	Nobody's following any laws.
	And they're taking somebody out.
	They're exacting their vengeance.
	They're exacting their own...
	Poor form of justice on that person without any accountability.
	That's a high-tech lynching.
	And fortunately, we have high-tech at our disposal to go back and see the hypocrisy of this, of the very same people like Joe Biden who are assailing Trump for using that word, used the same word 20 years ago.
	We have that.
	We have good high tech there.
	But also, why is no one, while we're on the subject, why is no one talking about how offensive President Trump's use of the term witch hunt is to members of the Hillary Clinton community?
	You ever think about that?
	We're really going to be analyzing how terms are being so misapplied here.
	Trump is using witch hunt as a metaphor.
	That's very offensive to real witches.
	And speaking of those witches, we might get another 2020 Democratic presidential candidate.
	I kid you not.
	There is a prospect right now that we could get Hillary 3.0.
	This being reported by the New York Times, being reported by a number of outlets, Mrs.
	Clinton, The chances that another major contender decides to run are remote.
	But she's talking about it.
	Let me tell you something.
	This would not appear in the New York Times.
	The Clinton paper.
	This would not appear in the official Democrat Pravda if this were not being pushed by the Clinton campaign.
	Hillary Clinton was on a campaign stop.
	Oh my God, that was a Freudian slip.
	She was actually on a book stop, but it seems like a campaign stop, with her daughter.
	And she was asked who she's going to back in the election.
	She said, well, it's just important we have the best candidate.
	It's just important that we win, you know?
	And I'm not, she's not going to come out and support anybody yet.
	Someone yelled from the audience, you should be the candidate.
	And she encouraged it.
	She said, oh, get out of here.
	Oh, come on, go on, go on.
	There is a chance that we could get Hillary 3.0.
	And frankly, if I'm a Democrat right now, maybe that's not the worst idea.
	You got to give the devil her due every now and again.
	She did come pretty close to beating Trump.
	If she could pick out Wisconsin on a map, she very likely would be in the White House right now.
	And the pitch that she was making on that campaign stop is, look, you might hate me.
	I might be a terrible, awful, corrupt person.
	But maybe I have the best chance to win.
	There was that poll out of New Hampshire from the Boston Herald that showed that you had the top three candidates, Warren, Biden, and Bernie, all statistically just about tied in New Hampshire.
	But then when you added in a candidate like a Michelle Obama, who's not currently in the race, but is popular among Democrats, all of a sudden those other candidates go away.
	Michelle Obama's the top dog.
	The Democrats are unsatisfied with their choices right now.
	You could see Hillary 3.0.
	I could not possibly be more delighted if that were the case.
	It would be so, so enjoyable again.
	I think we should all encourage her as much as we can.
	Trump has been encouraging her a lot.
	It's very possible.
	The defining feature of the Clintons is that they have no shame.
	That is the defining feature.
	They commit scandal after scandal with impunity.
	They don't answer for it.
	And then when you finally ask them for months and months, they say, oh, that's an old scandal.
	They just do it.
	They lie right to your face.
	Bill Clinton goes on national television, lies to the American people.
	I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
	And then it goes on TV, what, a month or two later, it goes, all right, listen, I know I might have had sexual relations with that woman just a little tiny bit, but I'm being really honest now.
	You can believe me now.
	Bill Clinton.
	With a complete straight face.
	No hint of irony in it whatsoever.
	So I can't wait.
	I think it might actually happen again.
	There is a chance.
	We can close our eyes.
	We can dream.
	It would be a lot of fun.
	We've got a lot of left-wing sex scandals coming up.
	Some of them are funnier than others.
	We will get to the Sex scandals that involve actual elected members of Congress, but there's a bigger sex scandal at play here, and that is the sex scandal of the gender-neutral society.
	That is the sex scandal of trying to deny sexual difference itself, which the left has been doing for a long time, and now it's exploded in this transgender ideology.
	This is not just a victimless crime.
	This is not just some silly social experiment.
	We'll see how it turns out.
	This is affecting real people.
	This is very likely going to ruin a little young boy's life We'll get into the terrible Texas decision that led to that.
	Then there's a slight victory at least for sanity in this gender ideology movement.
	You remember Jessica Yaniv?
	Jessica Yaniv is that man who identifies as a woman who put little immigrant women's beauty parlors out of business, these small businesses, because they refused to wax his scrotum and he wasn't able to force himself on them.
	You know, this is Jessica Yaniv, the same man who tried to host a topless pool party for LGBTQ youth 12+.
	It's not a joke.
	This lunatic.
	There was a slight victory against him.
	And then Miley Cyrus, even confusing the issue further by saying you don't need to be gay.
	Queer icon Miley Cyrus says you don't need to be gay if you find a good man.
	We will get into the specifics.
	First, I've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
	You'll probably notice that I haven't been in my studio in LA all week.
	I'm now sitting in a lovely hotel room in Gainesville, Florida, with pictures of pelicans and flamingos on the walls.
	That is because I'm going to be speaking tonight at the University of Florida.
	When I was at the Kennesaw State University in Georgia the other night, there was actually a professor who required her students to protest me.
	That was their class assignment for the day was to protest me.
	Obviously, she had no idea about anything I've ever said.
	I assume she's never heard me speak or watched a show or listened to a lecture or anything.
	But she knew she hated my guts and she wanted the students to protest me.
	She was a gender studies teacher.
	Surprise, surprise.
	She taught a course called Love and Sex.
	Ironic because those are two of my favorite subjects.
	Welcome to my show!
	It is their ideology that is causing suffering.
	It is their ideology that is hateful and dismissive of their fellow Americans.
	And we will put an end to that lie tonight.
	Leftism is not compassionate.
	If you are not able to make it out to Gainesville, Florida, then be sure to check it out on the YAF YouTube page.
	That's the Young America's Foundation YouTube page.
	Head on over to dailywire.com.
	$10 a month, $100 for annual membership.
	You get all the shows.
	You get questions in the mailbag.
	Ask them because that's coming up tomorrow.
	And you get the Leftist Tears Tumblr.
	Going to be very important tonight at the University of Florida.
	Dailywire.com will be right back with a lot more.
	Major setback for sanity in the gender identity movement.
	And this coming from a judge in Texas.
	Texas of all places.
	Jeffrey Younger is a father of a seven-year-old boy.
	Jeffrey Younger's, I guess, ex-wife is trying to get sole custody of this seven-year-old boy and is trying to transition, quote-unquote, the seven-year-old boy into a girl.
	She wants to start dressing him as a girl, making him identify as a girl, and eventually give him puberty blockers and permanently screw up his body chemistry and ruin his life.
	Jeffrey doesn't want that to happen to his son.
	So he petitioned a court in Texas to give him sole custody of his twin sons, James and Jude.
	James, younger, is the little boy whose mother is trying to ruin his life.
	And James, the little boy, when he's with his mother, he says he'll be called Luna and he'll be a little girl, obviously just to please this horrible woman.
	But when he's with his father, he says he doesn't want to be a girl.
	So the father takes this to court, and the court sides with the mother.
	And it's actually worth noting, the mother is his adopted mother.
	The mother is actually not the biological mother of James Younger.
	James Younger was conceived through in vitro fertilization from Jeffrey Younger and a donor egg.
	So the mother has no biological connection to the son, though she is his adopted mother and has ostensibly helped to raise the boy, who she's now trying to turn into a little girl, or to turn into a simulacrum of a girl.
	The mother is Ann Jorgoulos, She wants to chemically castrate her son.
	She wants to begin hormone replacement therapy for her son.
	Not only did the court deny Jeffrey Younger's petition to have sole custody, It actually just granted Anne Georgoulas sole custody of her children and allows this woman to go forward giving James life-changing medical procedures based on no science,
	without any idea of what the consequences for this will be for this poor kid, and without the consent of his father, and without his own consent because he's a seven-year-old boy and he can't give consent.
	That's why we have age of consent laws.
	I mean, the people who back this kind of stuff, this sick, sick perversion, just think about age of consent.
	Because consent has become a big topic these days, especially in the Me Too movement.
	You're telling me that a 17-year-old girl is not able to give her consent for a one-night stand with a 23-year-old guy, let's say.
	But a seven-year-old boy can give consent to permanently alter his body chemistry based on totally experimental medical procedures.
	You're telling me that a 25-year-old woman, a 30-year-old woman, who has six or seven drinks with Matt Lauer and then goes up to his hotel room, is too drunk to give her consent to continue a months-long sex affair with him.
	But a seven-year-old boy is old enough to give consent for life-altering medical procedures that will permanently screw up his body chemistry.
	Have you lost your freaking mind?
	No.
	What the left has done, they're not using their mind at all.
	What the left is doing here is they are prioritizing their ideology over reality and over human suffering, as they always do.
	I mean, this is the leftist line that you hear as early as the French Revolution, and you hear it from people surrounding Joseph Stalin.
	They say, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
	Yeah, sure, maybe we're going to completely ruin this little boy's life.
	But look, it's important to our gender ideology.
	It's important to equality of the sexes and genders and it's important to the sexual revolution that we ruin a seven-year-old boy's life.
	So you got to do it.
	Can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.
	Absolutely terrible stuff.
	The mother of this boy...
	Anne Georgoulis should be in prison.
	She should be removed from society.
	There should be laws to prevent this.
	And obviously, a society that permits this kind of thing has not just gone a little bit astray, it has seriously rotted itself out from the inside.
	And it shows you just the work that is to be done by anybody who has any sense of goodness, truth, and beauty.
	Anybody who's trying to conserve any semblance of sanity and civilization in our society.
	That's the bad story.
	The good story, the slight victory at least, is that that lunatic guy, Jessica Yaniv...
	He's the one who dresses up like a woman, goes into beauty parlors, and insists that impoverished immigrant women wax his scrotum, and when they say no, he puts them out of business.
	That guy.
	The guy who was found to have inappropriate sexual contact with underage girls.
	That guy.
	The guy who, this past summer, tried to host a topless LGBT youth pool party for people ages children, ages 12 and above.
	That guy.
	Jessica Yaniv.
	Jessica Yaniv has lost his suits against those beauty parlors for not waxing his genitals.
	He lost the suits.
	So the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms is representing five of the women who were targeted by Yaniv because Yaniv didn't just do it to one beauty parlor.
	He went to like a dozen beauty parlors because he doesn't actually even care to get his...
	Unpleasant parts waxed.
	He's trying to advance this ideology.
	You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
	So he's totally willing.
	He's eager to put these immigrant women out of business because it can advance his sexual delusions and his ideological fantasies.
	So the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms announced that the cases, Jessica Nieves' cases against his clients, Okay.
	$2,000 is nothing in the grand scheme of ruining someone's business.
	You can't live on $2,000 for very long.
	It's a slight victory.
	I'm glad that a human rights tribunal in British Columbia has not completely lost its mind.
	It is pretty sad, by the way, though, that left-wing Canada is saner on the topic of gender ideology than a Texas courthouse.
	That's a big problem.
	It shows us how far the United States has fallen.
	So Yaniv puts at least one of these women out of business.
	Now he has to pay two grand out to three women, so he's got to pay out six grand That ideology is going to go marching on.
	They're not going to be stymied by $6,000, especially when they're getting such victories in Texas.
	For those of you who say, who cares?
	It's not a big deal.
	Let's just talk about the economy.
	Let's forget about all this gender stuff.
	It's all wacky, but it doesn't affect me.
	How can you possibly say that?
	How can you stand by and say nothing and do nothing when a seven-year-old boy's life is about to be ruined by some sick, pervert mother?
	How can you possibly do that?
	Based on an ideology that changes every single day.
	This gender and sex ideology.
	It's not like we said for all of human history, men are not women.
	And then five minutes ago we said, oh wait a minute, men can be women and we now have a fully fleshed out ideology and this is what it is and this is how it makes sense.
	Of course that's not how it works.
	The ideology changes all the time.
	The sexual ideologies change all the time.
	At first we were told that same-sex attraction, homosexuality is a choice.
	You're choosing certain behaviors.
	Then we were told in the 80s and 90s it's not a choice.
	Who would ever choose this?
	We are born this way.
	It's the Lady Gaga song.
	I'm on the right track, baby.
	I was born this way.
	Then we were told by Cynthia Nixon, a lesbian, that she chose to become a lesbian.
	It was a choice for her.
	Then the transgender movement chose to adopt this idea.
	They said, we're born this way.
	Who would ever choose to not be born this way?
	Who would ever choose to be born this way?
	It involves so much suffering.
	Then we were told by the transgender movement, actually, you're not born this way.
	You can choose your gender.
	It's completely fluid.
	You can choose to be a man one day and a woman the next day and one of the other 54 genders the day after that.
	There is no internal logic, there is no consistency to these movements whatsoever, and yet we are told if you do not go along with whatever we deem to be the official orthodoxy today, we will ruin you, we'll put you out of business, we'll destroy your child's life.
	The person who is exemplifying this for all of us, who is actually showing the world the incoherence of this ideology, is Miley Cyrus.
	You know, wisdom comes from strange places sometimes.
	Kanye West has had more moral clarity than most people in the country probably over the last few weeks.
	Miley Cyrus is showing this too.
	Miley Cyrus was doing an Instagram stream with, I guess, a friend of hers, and she said...
	You don't have to be gay, that she thought she had to be gay because she couldn't find a good man, then she found a good man, and she doesn't have to be gay anymore.
	So you have gay icon, LGBTQ whatever icon, Miley Cyrus, now coming out and saying the most retrograde comment you possibly could about homosexuality, that it's basically just a fallback option if you can't find a good member of the opposite sex.
	Here's Miley.
	I was being a little too, like, I was just being like, I don't know.
	Not allowing anyone in, but now I am.
	There are good men out there, guys.
	Don't give up.
	You don't have to be gay.
	There are good people with d**ks out there.
	You just gotta find them.
	You gotta find a dk that's not a dk, you know what I mean?
	You don't have to be gay.
	I know.
	I always thought I had to be gay because I just thought, like, all guys were evil, but it's not true.
	There are good people out there that just happen to have I've only ever met one But I'm And I'm just live Okay Not the most eloquent way to put it but actually a pretty sophisticated idea What Miley Cyrus is saying is sexuality is very complicated.
	sexuality is a deep and profound and essential aspect of human nature, and we don't know everything about it, and you can't spell it out into a little doctrine and put it on a slogan and hand it out on a leaflet.
	It's very, very complicated.
	It's based on a whole lot of factors.
	There's even one little factor hidden in there, which is she said, I've only ever met one good guy, and he's on this stream.
	She's ostensibly referring to her friend.
	How do you think her father feels about that?
	What do you think that says about her relationship with her father?
	I don't want to get too much into psychobabble here, but she's the one saying these things.
	And all of that is playing in, obviously.
	She's saying, Sexuality is very complicated.
	My views on sexuality change a lot.
	And of course they do.
	They change with seasons of life.
	Your views on sexuality when you are 30 years old are a lot different than they are when you're 25 years old.
	Or a lot different when you're 20.
	Or a lot different when you're 15.
	Or a lot different than when you're 7 years old when this monster in Texas is trying to castrate her adopted son.
	That is a cause for humility.
	That's all I'm suggesting.
	That is my grand statement on politically how to handle the sexual revolution is slow it down.
	You don't know everything that you're pretending to know.
	We cannot possibly comprehend sex.
	Sex is so mysterious.
	is.
	It's one of the most mysterious aspects of our human nature.
	And if you one day declare that this sexual innovation, this new idea is, this is the only virtuous way to view sex, you probably have it wrong.
	Maybe you should compare that to the wisdom of the ages because people have been thinking about sex for a very long time.
	Miley Cyrus isn't the first one to do it.
	Jessica Yaniv is not the first one to do it.
	This sick pervert mother in Texas is not the first one to do it.
	The court in Texas is not the first group to do it either.
	We've thought about this for a long time.
	Maybe you do not comprehend everything about one of the most complex parts of your human nature.
	It's the same thing, by the way, on Capitol Hill.
	This is, I guess, the very literal sex scandals.
	There are two major sex scandals going on right now in the House of Representatives.
	objectives.
	Among Democrats that not a lot of people are talking about because the mainstream media are going to block it out because it doesn't look good for Democrats.
	There's Katie Hill, who is a Democrat congressman who was engaged in not just a lesbian love affair for a couple of years.
	She was engaged in what was termed a thruple, a three-way love affair with her husband and this very young staffer.
	And there's a photo that leaked of Katie Hill sitting completely naked, combing and brushing her 22-year-old staffer's hair.
	This photo leaked.
	Now imagine, of course, if this were a Republican, what the story would be.
	I mean, this would be wall-to-wall coverage, demands for resignations.
	This would be going on 24-7.
	Now imagine it were a man.
	Oh, my gosh, I can't even contemplate if it were a man.
	But because it's a Democrat, it goes away.
	Ilhan Omar is in a sex scandal now because she left her husband for.
	Oh, by the way, the thing with Katie Hill, the reason she broke up the couple and her husband is now filing for divorce is because Katie Hill simultaneously was sleeping with her male campaign consultant as well.
	Same thing here.
	Ilhan Omar has an affair with her campaign consultant.
	She's married.
	He's married.
	He leaves his wife.
	She's leaving her husband and they're having an affair together.
	I don't mention this because I even want to publicly shame Katie Hill and Ilhan Omar for their sex scandals.
	Politicians having sex scandals is not news.
	Politicians having sex scandals is a daily occurrence.
	Especially this is true of members of Congress.
	So I don't mention it to shame them.
	I mention it.
	I mean, I'm sure they feel a lot of shame as they should.
	But I mention it because, one, it shows you the double standard on how sex is treated among Democrats and Republicans.
	Two, it shows you how complicated sex and relationships are.
	I mean, there were some people who were applauding Katie Hill for leaving her husband because she's come out as a lesbian now.
	And her husband responded and said, she's not a lesbian.
	She's bisexual and she's leaving me for a man.
	She's not.
	And so that's a bad thing.
	But it would be good if she left him for a woman for some reason.
	And to show you the double standard on the behavior.
	On every topic from sex to rhetoric to lynchings all the way to presidential rhetoric at the top.
	When Democrats do it, when the left does it, it's wonderful and beautiful and to be celebrated.
	When Republicans do exactly the same thing, it's awful and terrible and could never be worse.
	The one advantage we talked about yesterday about how awful social media is and how it really feeds into this narcissism we all feel in our culture is The one advantage of this high technology is it gives us a lot of historical perspective.
	Nothing goes away on the internet.
	The internet is forever.
	We can compare these things.
	We can expose that hypocrisy.
	That is the silver lining in the storm cloud.
	Come check us out tonight at the University of Florida.
	We're going to be talking about why leftism is not compassionate, and you can stream that on the YAF YouTube channel as well.
	In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles.
	This is The Michael Knowles Show.
	See you tomorrow.
	If you enjoyed this episode, and frankly, even if you didn't, don't forget to subscribe.
	And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe.
	We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever else you listen to podcasts.
	Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, The Andrew Klavan Show, and The Matt Walsh Show.
	The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Rebecca Dobkiewicz 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.
	Assistant Director Pavel Wydowski.
	Edited by Danny D'Amico.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
	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.
	If you prefer facts over feelings, aren't offended by the brutal truth, and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune in to The Ben Shapiro Show.
	We'll get a whole lot of that and much more.

▲