Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Dec. 3, 2019 - The Michael Knowles Show

47:25

Ep. 459 - Psycho Monday

Cyber Monday turns into Psycho Monday, from the TV ads selling cheap consumer goods to the politicians trying to sell themselves. We will examine all the sociopathy. Then, speaking of psychos, the Deep State goes on offense before the Inspector General releases his report on the origins of the Russia investigation. Can we the people beat the bureaucrats? Date: 12-03-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Cyber Monday turns into Psycho Monday, from the TV ads selling cheap consumer goods to the politicians trying to sell themselves.
	We examine all of the sociopathy.
	Then, speaking of psychos, the deep state goes on offense before the inspector general releases his report on the origins of the Russia investigation.
	Can we the people beat the bureaucrats?
	All that and more.
	I'm Michael Knowles and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
	There is actually a connection, I promise you, between a ridiculous viral ad for Peloton bicycles and the 2020 Democratic candidates for president. between a ridiculous viral ad for Peloton bicycles and the There is.
	Few people have picked up on it.
	We will get to that in a second.
	First, I've got to thank our friends over at Paint Your Life.
	Guys, listen to me.
	Pay attention.
	Stop your car.
	Whatever you're doing, pay attention.
	I know that you're shopping for Christmas presents right now.
	If you want to give a truly meaningful gift, you have got to try PaintYourLife.com.
	I freaking love this product.
	What is Paint Your Life?
	Paint Your Life is when you get an original painting of yourself or your family or your kids or a special place or a pet that you love or whatever at a price that you can afford from PaintYourLife.com.
	It is a true painting.
	It is done by hand by a world-class artist created from a favorite photo.
	So it's very easy.
	You don't need to go there and sit and pose for three days.
	You upload a photo.
	It makes the perfect Christmas gift.
	You choose the artist whose work you most admire, and you work with them throughout the process until every detail is perfect.
	There's no risk here.
	If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded.
	I was extremely skeptical of this product.
	I thought there is no way that you can actually have a high-quality, hand-done painting made from a photograph online.
	I just didn't think it was going to work.
	So, of course, I didn't use it on a painting that I wanted to have made for myself.
	I did it for my stepbrother, for his wedding.
	I upload this painting of him and his wife in Grand Central.
	There's a ton of detail there.
	I'm getting proofs throughout the whole process.
	I get to approve.
	I get to pick the frame.
	I get to do everything about it.
	It comes.
	It's big.
	It's beautiful.
	The art is exquisite.
	I'm very particular when it comes to art.
	I love this thing.
	I'm obviously going back.
	You should go back too.
	Right now, you should, for a limited time, get 30% off of your painting.
	That is a limited time, 30% off, free shipping.
	Get this special offer by texting Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, to 64000.
	Very simple.
	Text Michael to 64000, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, to 64000.
	All right.
	So most of the stories from this crazy Cyber Monday yesterday...
	We're strictly political.
	Not all of them.
	I want to start with one that was not strictly political.
	It was a Cyber Monday ad for Peloton stationary bicycles.
	Obviously, all the companies are trying to sell their product on Black Friday and Cyber Monday.
	Peloton bicycles, if you haven't seen them, it's actually a very cool product.
	I kind of want to have one of these products, except this ad is making me less likely to buy their product.
	It's a stationary bicycle and you can kind of...
	Skype in or, you know, video conference in to these classes and you can do it from your own home and it seems kind of like a cool product.
	This ad had every single thing wrong with it.
	Take a listen.
	Okay, you ready?
	Yes!
	Now!
	A Peloton?
	Give it up for our first time riding!
	Alright, first ride.
	I'm a little nervous but excited.
	Let's do this.
	Five days in a row.
	You surprised?
	I am.
	6am.
	Yay.
	Rising with the sun.
	That was totally worth it.
	Let's go, Grace of Austin.
	50 rise.
	She just said my name.
	A year ago, I didn't realize how much this would change me.
	Thank you.
	This holiday, give the gift of Peloton.
	Oh, what?
	What on, let's just begin from the very beginning on everything wrong with this ad.
	First, what kind of psychopath gets his wife a stationary bicycle for Christmas?
	That is to say, you know, what does your wife want?
	She wants jewelry, she wants clothing, she wants, I don't know, something.
	And you say, hey honey.
	You're looking a little puffy these days, a little round around the edges.
	So I'm going to maybe get you a little bicycle you're going to work out for the next 12 months.
	And then, by the way, you're going to have to record it.
	You're going to have to Instagram it.
	You're going to have to stream it.
	So that in one year, next Christmas, we're going to review the results and see how you did losing all that extra weight.
	That's the first part that's a little odd.
	Then she says she's really nervous.
	Why is she nervous to get on a stationary bicycle?
	That is the safest, most basic activity you could possibly engage in.
	It's not even an outdoor bicycle.
	It's a bicycle you do in your own living room.
	Maybe she's nervous because she's got this psycho husband who's making her work out for an entire year and that's her Christmas present.
	Then she's Instagramming herself.
	While sitting on the stationary bike.
	I guess perhaps it's proof that she actually did it for her husband.
	Except there is no proof of it because from the beginning to the end she looks exactly the same.
	Which makes sense because they obviously shot this over the course of one or two days tops.
	And so she didn't have time to lose a lot of weight.
	Not that she had to lose weight in the first place.
	She just ends up sort of sweaty at the end.
	So I guess that's what changed in her life.
	But then how does she get to the end and say, I didn't realize my life would change so much.
	You know, from the beginning to the end.
	How did your life change?
	Well, here's one way your life changed.
	Where'd the kid go?
	At the beginning of the ad, there was a kid.
	Then by the end of the ad, there's no kid.
	That's a little weird.
	Do they really need to spend two Christmases?
	Two Christmases talking about this bicycle?
	Doesn't make a lot.
	Every single second of the ad...
	It makes you more curious as to how this ad got made.
	And if you're me, it makes me less likely every second of the way to get this bicycle.
	This ad was ratioed on YouTube 15 to 1.
	15 dislikes for every one like.
	And yet the ad went viral.
	It went viral because it's such an absurd, terrible ad.
	Some people are saying that the joke's on all of us because the stock for Peloton bicycles rose 5% yesterday.
	Now, that's true.
	That's only part of the story.
	Their stock is actually way up this whole month.
	It's up like 45% or something.
	So I'm not sure that you could really credit this ad for the increase in the price.
	This is still an objectively bad ad.
	And this is where the political aspect of this ad comes in, or at least the political significance.
	Because there's this big debate.
	Is it a good ad because we're all talking about Peloton?
	Or is it a bad ad because it makes Peloton look kind of stupid and weird?
	This is an objectively bad ad.
	It's a bad ad because it doesn't make any sense.
	It puts the product in a bad light.
	And even though some people are talking about it, In the long run, I don't think this helps them.
	Yes, some people are talking about Peloton.
	A lot of people are talking about Peloton now.
	You could have also gotten people to talk about Peloton by making the ad a commercial of a big fat naked guy walking on screen and vomiting.
	Right?
	If that was the ad, there wasn't even a bicycle in it.
	It was just a big, fat, naked guy who walks on the screen and vomits on screen.
	We would all be talking about Peloton, too.
	It would have gotten Peloton a lot of attention.
	Maybe their stock would have gone up.
	I don't know.
	But it wouldn't be great in the long run.
	It would be the wrong kind of attention in the long run.
	That is what is happening in the Democratic primaries.
	The Democratic primaries are this Peloton ad.
	Every single one of these candidates just about is doing this Peloton ad.
	Lots of flash.
	Lots of attention seeking.
	Works for the short term.
	Gives them a boost in the short term.
	not great in the long run.
	One of the great examples of that is Beto O'Rourke.
	Beto O'Rourke is a walking, talking Peloton bicycle ad because he comes out there, right?
	And his whole candidacy doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
	He's just like an ex-congressman and a failed Senate candidate.
	But for some reason, we're all talking about it and he's bicycling and he's making jokes with his wife and he's filming his dentist visit.
	It's getting him a lot of attention.
	It gets them to rise in the polls.
	It gets them a Vanity Fair cover.
	And then people realize, oh, wait a second.
	No, this isn't great.
	This isn't going to last throughout the long run.
	Another example of this, Kamala Harris.
	Kamala Harris bursts onto the scene in the early days of the primary.
	And it's all flash.
	It's all...
	Attention seeking.
	It's negative attention, but it's attention.
	She plays the race card.
	She calls Joe Biden a racist.
	She talks about smoking blunts while listening to Snoop Dogg before Snoop Dogg ever released an album, right?
	She's getting all this attention.
	She is convinced that she's a top tier candidate.
	Here's Kamala Harris back in July.
	This is going to sound immodest, but I'm obviously a top tier candidate.
	And so I did expect that I would be on the stage and take hits tonight because there are a lot of people that are trying to make the stage for the next debate.
	Okay, she said she's a top-tier candidate, and it sure looked like that back in those early days when she's getting all of this negative attention.
	Where is she now?
	She's trailing Mike Bloomberg.
	She's trailing Mike Bloomberg, a guy who's barely in the race.
	There is a poll that just came out.
	It's a poll from Harvard Harris.
	Mike Bloomberg is entering the race at about 6%.
	So he's not doing well.
	He's got like Beto numbers, right?
	He's got 6%.
	Kamala Harris is down at 2%.
	She went from a top-tier candidate, at least in her own mind, to 2% trailing the ex-mayor of New York who's half a Democrat, who's a billionaire, who's a white guy, who should not be doing well in this Democratic primary.
	And who isn't doing well, but he's doing better than her.
	He's up three points.
	She's down two points.
	Because all the attention that Kamala Harris got was sizzle.
	It was all sizzle, no steak.
	Same thing for Elizabeth Warren.
	It's not even just these low-tier candidates like Beto or Kamala or the people that we forget.
	Liz Warren, too.
	Liz Warren is now considered a top-tier candidate.
	All sizzle, no steak.
	In the case of Elizabeth Warren, it's all smoke signals, no peyote.
	Elizabeth Warren comes out, right, a couple weeks ago.
	She unveils her health care plan.
	And this gets her a lot of attention.
	$52 trillion plan.
	She has no idea how she's going to pay for it.
	She says that she's going to pay for it by taxing billionaires.
	That doesn't make any sense.
	621 billionaires in the country.
	Their combined net worth is about $3.2 trillion if she took away all of their money.
	It wouldn't get her through one year of her plan.
	But it gets a lot of attention.
	She's rising up all the momentums with Elizabeth Warren.
	And then once people stop and consider that plan, she starts to tank in the polls.
	Now once you get into this cycle, once you get into the cycle of requiring all of this just negative attention and attention at all costs to stay relevant, to stay in the headlines, it creates a very vicious cycle.
	So now she's out of the news for a little bit.
	All that good press that came quickly has fizzled.
	So she's trying to recapture it by even more radical plans.
	She just endorsed the other day getting rid of the Electoral College.
	Here she is.
	As a presidential candidate, what are your thoughts on the Electoral College?
	I want to get rid of it.
	So here's my goal.
	My goal is to get elected and then to be the last American president elected by the Electoral College.
	I want the second term to be that I got elected by direct vote.
	I'm ready.
	Popular vote.
	I just think this is how a democracy should work.
	Call me old-fashioned, but I think the person who gets the most votes should win.
	Alright, that doesn't make a lot of sense for a number of reasons.
	First of all, called me old-fashioned, but I think that we should overturn over 200 years of American precedent in electing our president.
	That doesn't make any sense.
	If you were old-fashioned, you would support this institution, the Electoral College, which has served our country very, very well since its founding.
	But she won't do that.
	It's amazing.
	They talk about how Donald Trump is overturning norms and traditions in our country.
	He's totally unprecedented.
	He's a radical.
	He's overturning norms.
	These people are trying to overturn all of the basic norms of our country.
	They're trying to overturn the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Electoral College.
	They're trying to overturn all of these things.
	And yet they attack Trump for it.
	This point she's making, though, doesn't make a lot of sense for another reason.
	She says the electoral college is totally corrupt.
	It's terrible.
	It's an awful thing.
	It's undemocratic.
	So she's saying, I want to, when I get elected, I promise to abolish that corrupt, terrible, undemocratic, untrustworthy institution that elected me president.
	That doesn't have a whole lot of ring to it.
	It doesn't make sense.
	And the argument...
	At least from the left are the only people making this argument.
	The argument to get rid of the Electoral College is that there's no way Democrats can win with the Electoral College because we've now twice had a situation in the last 30 years where, or the last 20 years I guess, where a president got elected even though he lost the popular vote.
	Now, we don't elect presidents on the popular vote.
	We are the United States of America, not the United people of America.
	We have a federal system here, and the vote for president is more complicated than just some guy going to the polls so that New York and LA and San Francisco don't dominate every presidential election.
	But if the argument is that Democrats can't win with the Electoral College, and then a Democrat wins with the Electoral College, then the argument for getting rid of the Electoral College sort of goes away.
	It's radical.
	She just needs to say it to get more press because she's lost a little bit of her momentum.
	Again, polls keep showing that people don't want this kind of radicalism.
	The problem for these candidates is they require the radicalism to stay in the news.
	She's stepped in it again, getting even more negative attention, throwing off much of the race, and another candidate is waiting in the wings.
	We will get to that in a second, but first I've got to thank our friends over at Ring.
	I love feeling safe in the knowledge that my home is secure.
	This season can be a whirlwind of deliveries and visitors and holiday travel, right?
	So it is the best time of year to upgrade your doorbell and keep an eye on your home, no matter where the holidays take you.
	Ring helps you stay connected to your home now.
	From anywhere.
	From anywhere.
	So if there's a package delivery, you ordered some Christmas present, or there's a surprise visitor, maybe your mother-in-law, you will get an alert.
	You will be able to see, hear, and speak to that person all from your phone, whether you're in your bedroom, or you're at the office, or you're on a beach somewhere.
	So if you're at home, right, the package delivery guy comes, you can speak to him and say, leave it there, put it there, whatever.
	If it's your mother-in-law, you can stay perfectly, perfectly still and hope that without movement she doesn't see you, thinks nobody is home, and goes away.
	You can check in anytime on your home.
	I'm on the road a fair bit.
	I'm traveling around speaking at different colleges.
	Sweet little Lisa's a pretty good shot.
	She knows how to handle a firearm, but I feel very safe knowing that we can take a look at our home from anywhere.
	As a listener, you have a special holiday offer on a Ring Starter Kit available right now with a Ring Video Doorbell 2 and motion-activated floodlight camera.
	The Starter Kit has everything you need to start building a ring of security around your home, no matter what this holiday season brings.
	With Ring, you are always home.
	Just go right now.
	Because this makes a great gift, by the way.
	I've given these out as housewarming presents, and people love them, and they look so cool, and they make you feel like you're living in the Jetsons.
	And the best part for you, the gift giver, they're not very expensive, so you get to seem like a really cool guy, you know, but you don't have to spend a ton of money.
	Go to ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. That is ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. Additional terms may apply.
	So, Elizabeth Warren steps in it again.
	She's getting even more, much more negative attention.
	Beyond policy, on the personal front, Liz Warren is one of the most shameless liars in the country, right?
	She's lied for decades about being Indian.
	She lied about being the first nursing mother to take the bar exam in New Jersey.
	She said that there's no reason to believe that that is true.
	She lied about being a single mother when she met her second husband.
	She wasn't.
	She was married when she met her second husband, and she left her first husband for her second husband.
	She lied about getting fired from teaching because she was pregnant.
	How do we know she lied about it?
	Because she told us the true story years ago.
	And now she's changed the true story, which is that she wasn't fit for teaching.
	She didn't want to do it.
	She wanted to stay home with her kids.
	Now it's that she was the victim of some awful oppression.
	And that was all because she was pregnant.
	Now she's lying again.
	Another major lie from Elizabeth Warren.
	She's lying about her kid going to public school.
	We don't have the same choice that you make for your kids because I read that your children went to private school.
	But even if it was public school, it probably was the best public school.
	So you heard that.
	She said, your kid probably went to private school.
	No, no, my kids went to public school.
	They didn't.
	That's not true.
	Warren's daughter, Amelia, went to public schools for...
	The entirety of her elementary and high school education.
	But her son Alex spent most of his school years at one of the most prestigious private schools in the country, an elite private school called the Haverford School.
	This was according to yearbooks from the Haverford School that were obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
	So technically, not a total lie, right?
	Because if her son Alex went to public school for even one year, she can say, my kids went to public schools.
	Yeah, they went for a little bit.
	I don't know.
	It was like a friend of mine used to say, Hey, Michael, you know, I went to Harvard.
	Yeah, but they were closed the day I showed up.
	It's like saying, you know, you take a tour of Alcatraz when you're in San Francisco and you say, Yeah, I've been to prison.
	I've been to prison.
	I just got out.
	Well, yeah, you've been there, but you haven't actually been to prison.
	You could go to public school for a year or two, but if you spend the majority of your formative years, you get most of your education in a private school, especially a very fancy private school, then you didn't send your kids to public schools.
	But she's a pathological liar.
	Total psycho.
	Who lies about this kind of stuff?
	Who lies about being a Native American?
	Who lies about that?
	Well...
	Funny you should ask, Michael.
	Speaking of these pathological liars, speaking of these psycho-blonde female Democratic candidates, guess who is waiting in the wings, looking at this mayhem and destruction in the Democratic 2020 primary and just clamoring to get back into it?
	I'll give you one guess.
	When she came to the end of her career, she did this final endorsement advertising campaign, and the tagline was, forget me.
	Why did that appeal to you, Hilary?
	Well, what she was saying as she retired was, you know, I want to make way for new people.
	You know, forget me.
	Forget my accomplishments.
	Let's clear the decks.
	Let's encourage more young people, not only to play football, but run for office, be a great chef, be a writer, be whatever.
	And I loved that.
	Hmm, hold on.
	You love that, Hillary?
	That does not sound like the Hillary Clinton I know.
	Because the Hillary Clinton I know, First Lady of Arkansas, then she's the First Lady of the United States.
	And she's the first lady on this idea of buy one, get one free.
	That's how Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992.
	He said, you get me, but you also get Hillary Clinton.
	I can't even imagine what his campaign advisors told him.
	Like, hey, Ixnay on the Hillary hay, right?
	People don't really like her that much.
	So he...
	He becomes president.
	He gives Hillary the opportunity to try to put health care through.
	It totally flops because she's really not that talented a politician other than being married to Bill Clinton.
	And then she just walks away, right?
	She moves on and lets someone else have the spotlight.
	No!
	She forces herself into a Senate seat from New York, pushes other people out of the way, moves to New York randomly, total carpetbagger, and through the sheer power of Clinton's presidency, becomes senator.
	Then she runs for president, gets rejected by the American people again.
	She is appointed Secretary of State by Barack Obama because keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
	She runs for president in 2016, gets rejected by the American people again, but then she steps away, right?
	Doesn't she want to step away?
	She's going to make room for other people to take their opportunities, right?
	Right.
	Not so fast.
	And where are you?
	Are you saying, forget me?
	Is that your mantra now?
	Not yet.
	Right.
	So...
	Because the rumor mill is flying that you could step back into the ring.
	Yeah, I hear that.
	I especially have been deluged in the last few weeks with thinking about doing that.
	But right now, I'm not at all planning that.
	I'd have to make up my mind really quickly because it's moving very fast.
	But I do want to continue to influence the debate.
	Not yet.
	Uh, no, well, hold on a second there.
	I like other people moving out of the way for other people, especially me.
	I, myself, do not like getting out of the way for talent to come up.
	Hillary obviously still wants to run.
	She desperately wants to run.
	She's left the door open.
	She's sent her senior advisors like Philip Rines to go on television and stoke the speculation about whether or not she will run.
	Why is she even doing this right now?
	She's doing this right now because the field is weak.
	Because frankly, this woman, this woman, shameless, psycho, one of the least popular women in America, she is pretty much the best that they've got.
	Who else is it going to be?
	Is it going to be Joe Biden?
	With his eyes exploding and his teeth falling out and biting his wife's finger?
	I don't know.
	He's collapsing in Iowa.
	He's collapsing in New Hampshire.
	Sometimes collapsing maybe on the campaign trail.
	Is it going to be Pastor Pete Buttigieg?
	No.
	I don't think so.
	He's really off-putting.
	Is it going to be Elizabeth Warren?
	Her numbers have tanked in recent days.
	Going to be Kamala Harris?
	She's at 2%.
	Is it going to be Mike Bloomberg?
	He's the new entrant.
	He's at 6%.
	We need to get rid of this New York billionaire and replace him with a New York billionaire.
	I don't think so.
	They've got...
	Nobody.
	They've gotten so much attention, these Democratic candidates, over the past three years, by talking about how terrible Trump is and the Russia investigation and the taxes and Stormy Daniels and Ukraine.
	And yet, when you finally put the spotlight on them, you say, okay, in the long run, are you really going to be what America is asking for?
	They all collapse.
	They're all collapsing to the point that the Democratic Party is seriously considering returning to Hillary Clinton.
	Not great.
	And so, now that the left is looking at their own candidates saying this is not looking good, they're turning their attention away from them, back onto President Trump, and they're going to try to win the 2020 election, not by putting forward really good candidates who are really popular, but by We're sabotaging President Trump's campaign.
	This is happening now at the highest levels of Google and YouTube.
	We have evidence of it.
	We'll get to that in a second.
	First, I've got to thank our friends over at Quip.
	There are very few habits that you can get into regularly that will help your health, quite like just brushing your teeth, doing a good job brushing your teeth.
	That's why most people brush their teeth very well.
	I do it strictly out of vanity.
	I just want my teeth to look nice and shiny.
	That's where Quip, the makers of Quip electronic toothbrush, comes in.
	Quip's electric toothbrush has sensitive sonic vibrations with a built-in timer and 30-second pulses to guide a full and even clean.
	Quip makes it easy to stick to a healthy brushing habit, starting with an electric toothbrush, refillable floss, and anti-cavity toothpaste.
	The Quip floss dispenser comes with pre-marked string to help you use just enough.
	Because if you're like me, you never know how much floss you're supposed to use, so you pull it out and you pretty much could decorate your Christmas tree with it.
	Plus, Quip delivers fresh brush heads, floss, toothpaste refills to your door every three months with free shipping.
	So your routine is always right.
	I used to brush with a regular toothbrush.
	Now to me, that feels like brushing with a stick.
	You need to get an electric toothbrush.
	It's so much better.
	It keeps your teeth so much whiter and healthier.
	Join over three million healthy mouths and get Quip today starting at just $25.00.
	If you go to getquip.com slash Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L right now.
	You will get your first refill for free.
	That is your first refill free at getquip.com slash michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, G-E-T-Q-U-I-P.com slash michaelquip, the good habits company.
	Got a lot more to get to.
	We've got to get to how Google is trying to sabotage the Trump campaign.
	We have got to get to...
	Actually, there's a silver lining in that story because the mainstream media actually did their jobs.
	We've got to get to Lisa Page, the...
	FBI bureaucrat who was caught in text messages talking about how they were going to try to overturn the 2016 election.
	We will get to the reaction to the deep state from the Trump DOJ. Lots of shenanigans going on that very few people are reporting on.
	We will get to all of that.
	First, I've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
	Head on over to dailywire.com.
	What do you get?
	You get me.
	You get the Andrew Klavan show.
	You get the Ben Shapiro show.
	You get the Matt Walsh show.
	You get to ask questions in the mailbag.
	You get Another Kingdom.
	Another Kingdom.
	We're in our third and final season.
	Super popular show, which I'm very pleased about, but it's a really, really good show.
	I can say that because all I do is read the words that Drew Klavan wrote.
	It is...
	A really profound novel.
	It's a really profound piece of work.
	I'm so pleased and privileged to be a part of it.
	Really recommend, especially if you're looking for something to get into this Christmas season, it's really, really good to listen to.
	And you get, most importantly, the leftist Tears Tumblr.
	I don't know if you saw it, but yesterday, the left-wing outlet NowThis, they make all these really annoying videos on social media.
	NowThis did a big hit piece on us.
	Ben, me, Drew, Matt, Daily Wire, talking about how terrible it is that we're really successful on social media.
	And they put this hit piece out, a guy named Judd Legume, I think is his name.
	He...
	Was so upset in this video about how The Daily Wire is really successful, thanks to listeners like you.
	And so, obviously, I wanted to thank NowThis for the free promotion, but I wanted to thank them also for their tears, which I collected in my Tumblr.
	And I tell you, oh, wow.
	Whoa, you know, I've had a little bit of a head cold the last couple days, and just that saline, just that salt from those tears, totally clearing me up.
	Head on over to dailywire.com.
	We'll be right back with a lot more.
	I sound better already.
	Wow.
	Oh my goodness gracious.
	I feel so great from those leftist tears.
	There's a big story out now from Google and YouTube about the Trump campaign.
	Google has removed more than 300 ads from President Trump's re-election campaign.
	They did that over the summer, so I don't know even what they're doing now.
	Google and YouTube removed...
	Google is YouTube, right?
	They're the same company.
	They've removed the ads for, quote, violating company policy.
	Okay, fair enough.
	What's the policy?
	They haven't told anybody.
	Video ads were paid for by Trump's 2020 presidential campaign, Donald J. Trump for President Incorporated.
	They ran them for several days on YouTube before they were taken down.
	There was an investigation into this by 60 Minutes on CBS. This is the silver lining of the whole story.
	Mainstream media never do their job.
	Mainstream media absolutely terrible.
	Hacks, right?
	In bed with the left.
	And yet, 60 Minutes actually looked into the story.
	Leslie Stahl, who I think is actually a great TV journalist.
	She's never been of the Jim Acosta variety.
	She's always been relatively more fair.
	Leslie Stahl on 60 Minutes sat down with Susan Wojcicki.
	I don't know if I'm pronouncing that correctly.
	Frankly, I don't care.
	Susan is the YouTube CEO. Leslie Stahl sat her down and asked her directly about the YouTube takedowns of Trump's ads.
	President Trump has been advertising a lot on YouTube lately.
	Have you taken down any of President Trump's ads at all?
	There are ads of President Trump that were not approved to run on Google or YouTube.
	Do you have an example?
	Well, they're available in our transparency report.
	There it is, the transparency report.
	Those ads are available on the transparency report.
	Well, maybe they are, maybe they aren't, because the report doesn't seem very transparent.
	I want to stress here that having your ads removed on YouTube, maybe it's not a big deal if you're a company or you're another political candidate because you're advertising all over the place.
	What's crucial to know here is that YouTube was incredibly important in President Trump's 2016 strategy.
	This is not some secret conspiracy theory.
	Every major political analyst admits this.
	Trump beat Hillary on social media, specifically on YouTube.
	Even on the election day, Trump was running big banner ads for his campaign.
	The Clinton campaign wasn't really doing that.
	So YouTube in particular was instrumental in the Trump victory.
	The left was furious about this.
	That's why the left has spent the last three years crying and whining about how Republicans did better than them on social media.
	And that's not supposed to happen, which is why they're now clamoring to get Facebook and Twitter and YouTube to censor conservatives, shut up conservatives, direct people away from conservatives and specifically President Trump, point them in the left-wing direction because that could sway, who knows, 30 million votes or more.
	So she says it's in the transparency report.
	To their credit, Leslie Stahl and CBS do not take that for an answer, that non-answer for an answer.
	They ran the story, they followed the story, and they pushed back on the BS answer.
	Here she is.
	Kind of.
	Google keeps an archive of political ads, and we looked at President Trump's ads.
	Over 300 videos were taken down, mostly over the summer.
	But the archive doesn't detail what rules they violated.
	There's no transparency in the transparency report.
	The ads typically did run for a few days before they were taken down, and Google got paid for them.
	Good on her.
	I mean, good on her for following this story.
	This, by the way, is all that conservatives are asking for.
	It's all we're asking for.
	If journalists, the investigative journalists on TV, would just actually investigate, if the reporters would just actually report, even if they have their opinions, even if they have their preferences and their biases, that's fine.
	We're actually okay with that.
	If you just give any even slight modicum of fairness, if the media all behaved like Leslie Stahl here, you would not hear all of the applause when President Trump calls out the fake news media.
	So she looks at it, 300 ads removed from YouTube, from the Trump campaign, and the transparency report doesn't offer any transparency.
	So what is the YouTube CEO's answer?
	She says there is no bias against conservatives.
	As you know, conservatives think that you discriminate against them.
	How do you answer that?
	Well, first of all, there are lots of very successful conservatives creators on YouTube.
	Our systems, our algorithms, they don't have any concept of understanding what's a Democrat, what's a Republican.
	That's not true.
	I say this as a conservative who's on YouTube.
	Sure, YouTube lets conservatives exist.
	Sometimes they don't totally throttle us.
	Conservatives are disproportionately attacked and demonetized and restricted and targeted.
	I have been the object of this on many occasions.
	Prager University has been the object of this.
	Steven Crowder was demonetized by YouTube for videos that YouTube admitted did not violate its policies, and yet YouTube demonetized him anyway.
	YouTube will target regularly, if you want to just talk about the algorithm, YouTube targets conservative videos, including my own, to try to debunk the claims that we're making.
	I'll give you an example.
	A long time ago, I did a video about climate change, about global warming.
	YouTube, you can go look it up, YouTube actually added a disclaimer below my video to say that global warming is real, it's seriously happening, it's going to destroy the world.
	They added this global warming alarmism banner underneath my video to try to debunk my video.
	They don't do that for liberals.
	They don't do that.
	So what the CEO of YouTube just said is not true.
	Now, are they totally blocking conservatives?
	No, they still let us do our show.
	That's nice.
	Glad to hear it.
	But what Leslie Stahl is asking for in this report, what we are asking for, is not special treatment.
	It's not even fair treatment.
	It's just transparency.
	And yet, we don't get any of that transparency.
	Leslie Stahl gives the CEO the last word.
	We do hear this criticism from all sides.
	We also have people who come from more liberal backgrounds who complain about discrimination.
	And so I think that no matter who you are, we are trying to enforce our policies in a consistent way for everybody.
	That isn't true.
	If they did that, maybe they're trying to do that.
	If they succeeded at doing that, if they just were consistent and even-handed about it, nobody would complain about them.
	It's true that liberals whine about YouTube, but liberals won't whine about everything, so that's not a big shock.
	The fact of the matter is conservatives are treated more harshly on YouTube.
	With less transparency and less fairness than the left is.
	That's just the way it is.
	This is all about 2020.
	This was not true before the 2016 election.
	Before the 2016 election, conservatives did great on YouTube because we had been shut out of the mainstream media.
	So now that we had this opportunity to bypass those gatekeepers, we did great.
	That helped us win the 2016 election.
	The left is really doing their darndest not to let us accomplish that again.
	And it's not just the politicians.
	It's not just big tech.
	It's also the government bureaucracy itself.
	So, if you haven't read it, there's really no need to.
	I'll give you the highlights right now.
	The Daily Beast left-wing publication just published a 13-page interview with Lisa Page.
	You'll remember Lisa Page is one of the adulterous FBI agents who revealed in text messages that there was a conspiracy at the FBI to try to overturn the 2016 election or to try to rig it against President Trump.
	This is not tinfoil hat territory.
	You can read the text messages themselves.
	So she has rightly been pilloried by the right and by even the center for her inappropriate behavior.
	She was also pilloried by the FBI.
	She was also pilloried by the inspector general.
	And she says that she's a big victim.
	Now, it is true, on occasion, you might say, President Trump has been particularly harsh on Lisa Page.
	Here's President Trump talking about her at a recent rally.
	...on the FBI server so their spouses wouldn't find out because they didn't want to put it on their private.
	That didn't work out too well for Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, did it?
	Lisa, I love you.
	I love you, Lisa.
	I love you, Lisa.
	I love you so much I can't even see straightly.
	Lisa, she's going to win 100 million to nothing.
	But just in case, Lisa, my darling, I love you, God.
	Just in case she doesn't win.
	We've got an insurance policy essentially saying we're going to take him out.
	These are corrupt people, folks.
	And then she said, Peter, I love you.
	I love you so much.
	You're so great, Peter.
	I don't think she loves him too much anymore, do you?
	Okay, that's really inappropriate and not funny at all, so don't you dare laugh at that.
	Don't you dare laugh at President Trump making fun of the two corrupt FBI officials who were cheating on their spouses, you know...
	Betraying their families and children to have this affair together.
	And I don't even really care about that too much.
	What people do in their private lives is their problem.
	It's going to be their problem before God.
	But, you know, I've got more things to worry about.
	They were also betraying their public office by promising one another via text to overturn the 2016 election, to undermine the 2016 election, referring to meetings that happened in FBI senior officials' offices.
	That discussed overturning that 2016 election.
	What President Trump was doing there was reenacting the text messages that we can all read, okay?
	Here are the text messages from Lisa Page.
	Lisa Page texted about Hillary Clinton and specifically taking pressure off of Hillary Clinton during that election.
	Investigation into her email server.
	She said, she might be our next president.
	The last thing we need is us going in there loaded for bear when it's not operationally necessary.
	You think she's going to remember or care that it was more the DOJ than the FBI? This is as much about reputational protection as anything.
	In other words, take the pressure off Hillary.
	She's going to be our next president.
	You know, you don't need to go that hard against her.
	Shortly after the 2016 election, Strzok texted Lisa Page.
	Strzok is her lover.
	OMG, I'm so depressed.
	Page replied, I don't know if I can eat.
	I'm very nauseous.
	She meant to say nauseated.
	People confuse those two words all the time, but a minor detail.
	We move on.
	Page asks, quote, he's never going to become president, right?
	Right?
	This is Trump running for president.
	He's never going to become president, right?
	Strzok replies, no.
	No, he won't.
	We'll stop it.
	We'll stop.
	Who's we?
	The FBI. He's talking about him in the FBI, as we know that the FBI is engaging in surveillance of President Trump's campaign, trying to undermine President Trump's campaign.
	That's really bad.
	From my perspective as an American citizen, that's a lot worse than cheating on your husband and kids or cheating on your wife and kids.
	Because you were betraying the public trust that you had.
	And now, she's going on offense to pretend that she's a victim.
	Why is she doing it now?
	She's doing it now because you got the IG report coming out.
	She's doing it now because you got the John Durham investigation coming out.
	All these investigations into the 2016 election, into how the Russia investigation began in the first place, into the very corruption that Lisa Page and Peter Strzok are texting about.
	So she's going on offense.
	Lisa Page is not a victim.
	President Trump did not cause her trouble.
	She caused her trouble.
	According to the FBI, this is an FBI's internal investigation, Page inflicted damage to the FBI that went, quote, to the heart of the FBI's reputation for neutral fact-finding and political independence.
	That's not an awful right-wing website that said that.
	That's not President Trump who said that.
	That's the FBI. According to the Inspector General, Page's text messages had, quote, potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or other improper considerations.
	It's not Trump who said that.
	That's not mean old Michael or mean old Daily Wire or mean old conservative TV. That's the Inspector General who said that.
	Okay?
	And yet, here she is, Lisa Page, talking about how she's a victim.
	Lisa speaks.
	There's no fathomable way I have committed any crime at all.
	By the way, no one's really saying that she committed a crime.
	We're wondering if crimes were committed at the FBI and DOJ. But what we're saying is she acted inappropriately.
	She demonstrated political bias.
	She undermined the neutrality of the FBI. She abused her power.
	And she sent messages that were indicating that the FBI abused its power.
	That's indisputable.
	That's what happened.
	That's a very bad thing.
	It's so ironic, you know.
	We're now in this impeachment investigation where the Democrats are saying, who cares if Trump committed a crime?
	He abused his power and that's enough to impeach him.
	Now Lisa Page is saying, I didn't commit a crime.
	Maybe she did, maybe she didn't.
	I don't think she did.
	She abused her power.
	The FBI in general abused its power.
	That is some pretty bad stuff.
	And you're going to see a lot more of this coming down the pike because we're about to get the inspector general report on how the Russian investigation began in the first place.
	And there are already shenanigans with that.
	There have been some conservatives who thought, yes, the inspector general report is going to come out and it's going to take down this corrupt cabal of bureaucrats that has been operating with impunity in the federal government.
	And this IG report is going to take them down.
	I never thought that.
	I never believed that.
	You think the bureaucracy is going to take down the bureaucracy?
	I don't think so.
	The bureaucracy has been remarkably durable since it was created.
	It's existed for over a century now.
	That wasn't going to happen.
	But the elected people, the appointed people, the people who have some accountability to we the people...
	So, there's a new report out.
	Attorney General William Barr is reportedly refuting a key claim made by the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz in the soon-to-be-released report.
	Barr has reportedly told associates that he disagrees with the IG conclusion that, quote, The FBI had enough information in July 2016 to justify launching an investigation into members of the Trump campaign.
	Now that's according to the Washington Post, so take it with a grain of salt.
	The Post says, though, Barr has not been swayed by Horowitz's rationale for concluding that the FBI had sufficient basis to open an investigation on July 31, 2016.
	The Attorney General has privately contended that Horowitz does not have enough information to reach the conclusion that the FBI had enough details in hand at the time to justify opening such a probe.
	He argues that other agencies, such as the CIA, may hold significant information.
	They could alter Horowitz's conclusion on that point.
	That's according to people familiar with the matter.
	Now, I think what the left is going to tell you, if this report turns out to be true, is see, conservatives, there was no there there.
	There was nothing real.
	And now you're all just complaining because the investigation didn't turn up anything.
	Hold up just a minute.
	Hold up.
	We could predict that the IG wasn't going to expose the bureaucracy here.
	We could predict that a number of months ago.
	And we did predict that a number of months ago.
	And I suspect Attorney General Barr predicted that a number of months ago, which is why he also appointed John Durham, the federal prosecutor, to investigate this matter separately.
	When the Durham investigation was announced, when Durham was appointed, A lot of people didn't take any notice.
	The people who did take notice said, wait a second, why is Durham launching an investigation, which has now become a criminal investigation, if the IG is just going to file their report?
	It's because we knew the IG report wasn't going to have teeth.
	It might show you something, but it wasn't going to have teeth.
	So the real story is going to come out from John Durham or it won't.
	I mean, there's a chance that there's no there there.
	I'm totally open-minded to that, but it would appear from everything that we've seen, from the text messages we've read, from the investigations that were launched, from the spying that did take place.
	We know for a fact it took place on the Trump campaign and now from AG Barr's reported conclusions, it would seem that all of us had the right hunch in the first place and there will be a lot more to this story.
	It takes a lot longer to take down those psychos here on Psycho Tuesday.
	It's not Psycho Monday anymore.
	It's Psycho Tuesday.
	Tune back in tomorrow on Wednesday.
	In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles.
	This is The Michael Knowles Show.
	See you then.
	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 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.
	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.

▲