New York governor Andrew Cuomo is blaming Europe for the coronavirus even as evidence mounts that China knew about the virus, covered it up, destroyed the world economy, and killed lots of people. But American leftists keep defending the Chinese Communist Party because no less than their whole political program rides on it. Then, a New York Times writer wants you to pay her for raising her own children, a judge issues a major ruling on transgenderism before the case even begins, and Slate Magazine comes up with a new term for monogamy.
If you like The Michael Knowles Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: KNOWLES and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/Knowles
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is blaming Europe for the coronavirus, even as evidence mounts that China knew about the virus, covered it up, destroyed the world economy, and killed lots of people.
But American leftists keep defending the Chinese Communist Party, because no less than their whole political program rides on it.
A New York Times writer wants you to pay for her raising her own children.
A judge issues a major ruling on transgenderism before the case even begins, and Slate Magazine comes up with a new term for monogamy.
All that and more.
I'm Michael Knowles and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
Cuomo is blaming Europe for the coronavirus.
That one's new.
There is a reason that they're doing this.
There is a reason why they're trying to shift blame and take it away from China and put it on Europe.
We'll get to that in one second.
First, I've got to thank our friends over at Ring.
Really, I've got to thank all of our sponsors because these are very challenging economic times and we really appreciate the sponsors who have stuck with us.
Allow us to keep the show on the air.
We would appreciate it if you would help them out as well and go support them.
Ring, more than ever these days, is necessary.
It's hard to keep a close eye on things.
More deliveries mean more boxes left unattended and more opportunities for packages to go missing.
A lot can happen outside of our front doors, and we're not always free to check on things in person.
With Ring, you keep your home safe no matter where you are.
Maybe you're like me and you're at the office right now.
Maybe you're not.
You're in the bedroom.
Maybe you're somewhere else.
You've gone out of town.
You can always check in on your home.
It gives you a lot of peace of mind around the clock, from video doorbells and security cameras to smart security lighting and alarm systems.
Ring has everything you need to make sure your family and your belongings are safe, secure, anytime, anywhere.
I love these guys.
I rely on them.
I trust them.
And I give them out to my friends because they have this added benefit of being super cool and make you feel like you're living in the future.
And they're not very expensive.
So you get to, if you give them out as a gift, you look like a really cool guy.
Get a special offer on the Ring Welcome Kit right now when you go to ring.com slash Knowles.
That includes the Ring Video Doorbell 3 and Chime Pro.
It's all you need to start building a ring of security for your home today.
Just go to ring.com slash Knowles.
Ring.com slash Knowles.
A virus, by any other name, is just as deadly.
But the left doesn't know that.
And the left, playing these new word games when it comes to the coronavirus, is showing us a lot, not just about how they use words, not just about political correctness, not just about how they view the West versus the East.
It shows us a key part of the liberal international political agenda.
It shows us how desperate they are to defend China.
Here is Andrew Cuomo bestowing the new name on the Wu flu, the European virus.
If you had said, when we started this...
Yes, we have more cases than anyone else.
Yes, we had this European virus attack us and nobody expected it.
But we're not only going to change our trajectory, we're going to change the trajectory more dramatically than any place else in the nation.
So the first issue, of course, with what he's saying is...
It's not true.
The virus doesn't come from Europe.
There's no evidence the virus comes from Europe.
No one before Andrew Cuomo has ever even suggested that the virus comes from Europe.
That's the first part of it.
The second part of it was his delivery.
Delivery wasn't great.
He knew what he was doing.
He's trying to be provocative and change the conversation.
Say, oh, you say it's from China?
Well, you know what?
I say it's from Europe.
You know, Governor Cuomo, it actually is from China.
We know that for a fact.
Yeah, okay, well, maybe, okay, whatever.
I say it's from Europe.
But the way he delivered it was halting.
It was awkward.
He knows, even he, Andrew Cuomo, a trained liar for his whole life, knows that that isn't true.
The third issue with this is...
Isn't that racist by the left standards?
Remember, the left said, if you say where the virus comes from, then that's racist and bigoted and terrible.
You can't call it the Chinese virus or the Chinese coronavirus.
That's wrong.
But you can call it the European virus.
Well, of course, that's the way the left always works.
If they didn't have double standards, they would have no standards at all.
It's okay to demean your own country and your own civilization.
I mean, I guess Europe's not our country, but it's the continent that we come from.
It's the civilization that we come from here in America.
So you're allowed to demean that, but you're not allowed to demean foreign places.
Because according to the left, the West is bad and everywhere else is good.
According to the left, our civilization is bad.
Everywhere else is good.
And so we deserve all the scorn that we can get.
But it isn't true.
And the way that Cuomo defended this argument is he said, well, we shut down flights from China, but we didn't shut down flights from Europe, even though we actually did.
But it took a few weeks longer.
And so people were coming in from Europe, and maybe they had the virus, and it doesn't matter where it came from in the first place.
Not a very good argument, of course.
But it's more than just political correctness run amok.
It's more than just a Westerner hating his own civilization.
China actually matters to the left's ongoing international agenda.
Okay?
So there's this fight that's coming down.
The fight over who to blame for the virus is not just about pointing fingers for the heck of it.
It's about where we go from here as a civilization.
And obviously, on the don't blame China side, you've got Andy Cuomo making up new phrases.
On the blame China side, you have more and more evidence mounting.
Senator Tom Cotton was on Maria Bartiromo's show the other day, and Maria has been very good on sussing out what's really going on with this story.
Senator Cotton pointed out that it appears from cell phone data that there were road closures around Wuhan.
Way, way back at the very beginning of this virus.
Road closures suggesting that the Chinese government knew about this.
They were trying to stop it in their own country, but they weren't blowing the whistle to help save the rest of us.
There is cell phone data that we have seen now that indicates that there was a shutdown of the Wuhan Virology Lab, the origin, likely origin, of the coronavirus.
Explain the cell phone data and why it's important.
Maria, reports emerged yesterday in the media that publicly available cell phone data suggests that roads around the lab in Wuhan was closed in the middle of October.
Again, this information is publicly available.
American media has used it to analyze mobility patterns in states to see if our people are practicing social distancing.
So the reports indicate that on major roads around these labs in Wuhan, you obviously had thousands and thousands of cell phones pinging towers day in and day out, and then all of a sudden in October it stopped, and it remained stopped for several days.
That would suggest, without any further information, that those roads were blocked for some reason.
I think these two guys, Andy Cuomo and Tom Cotton, do a pretty good job of representing the two sides in this debate over China's guilt in the coronavirus.
You have Andy Cuomo, he says, it's not China, it's Europe.
It's Europe's fault.
And then you have Tom Cotton, he says, well, actually, we have the data from cell phones for weeks and weeks, and we can see the road closures very precisely around this time.
And then Andy Cuomo cuts him off and goes, no, not China, la, la, la, I can't hear you.
That's it.
The evidence is all on Tom Cotton's side.
Forget just the Wuhan cell phone data.
We now have a report out of German intelligence that when China found out about the virus, which happened very early on, Xi Jinping, the head of the Chinese Communist Party, personally called the head of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Gabrizius, and told him to cover it up.
So, according to this new report from German intelligence...
The world could have gained four to six weeks in tackling the coronavirus if Xi Jinping had not personally asked the WHO chief to delay warning the rest of the world about human-to-human transmission.
You remember early on, WHO was saying, there's no human-to-human transmission.
Don't worry.
Calm down.
They weren't sending anybody to China.
And we thought, why are you jumping on this?
Why are you trying to downplay this?
Now we think we have an answer.
We think it's because...
Xi Jinping was the one who pushed it.
Don't forget, there was a survey or study that came out of the University of Southampton probably a month or a month and a half ago now, which said if the coronavirus had not been covered up for just one extra week, if China had just acted one week more quickly than they did, they could have reduced the spread of this virus by 66% around the world.
If they had acted two weeks earlier, They would have reduced it by 86%.
If they had acted three weeks earlier, just three weeks, they could have reduced the spread by 95%.
The global economy would not have shut down.
Many, many people would still be alive today.
And they didn't do it.
And now we have even more information that China covered it up because we got it out of German intelligence.
That call from Xi Jinping to the WHO was reportedly on January 21st, that far back.
So the evidence is totally clear.
The mainstream media, the main mouthpieces for the left, continue to carry water for the Chinese Communist Party.
This time we saw it, just this week, on 60 Minutes.
We'll get to that in one second.
First, I've got to thank our friends over at Rock Auto.
You know how when you go to the auto parts store, they never actually have what your car needs, and then they end up ordering it on the internet, and they probably actually go to rockauto.com, and then they charge you twice as much?
You know that?
You know when that happens?
Well, skip that step.
That's what happens to me.
You can skip it.
RockAuto.com always offers the lowest prices possible rather than changing prices all the time with a bunch of gimmicks.
Why spend up to twice as much for the same parts?
Like, for instance, let's say you need a Delphi FG1456 fuel pump assembly for a 2005 to 2010 Honda Odyssey.
And you don't even know what that part looks like if you're like me.
And you find out that it costs $354 at the big store, the big brick and mortar.
Well, you could get that exact part on Rock Auto for $217.
I wouldn't have known that if I had gone into the store.
That's why I rely on Rock Auto.
Great guys, family company, they've been serving people online basically as long as the internet's been around.
Go to rockauto.com right now, see all the parts available for your car or truck, and then write Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, in the How Did You Hear About Us box so that they know that we sent you.
So, evidence clear, right?
I mean, we could go on and on and on showing all the evidence for China's guilt, but I think you get the point.
All right, and there's no evidence on the other side that China is somehow not guilty for this.
CBS News doesn't want to hear it.
CBS News on 60 Minutes, which is a very major television news program, highly respected, been around for a long time.
60 Minutes is doing its level best, right?
To get China off the hook and to actually place blame, not just on Europe, but even on the United States.
So just listen to the kind of language they use to cover for China.
Why did the president just cancel DOSAC's funding?
It's the kind of politics which might seem ill-advised in a health crisis.
President Trump is blaming China's government for the pandemic.
The outbreak was first detected in the city of Wuhan.
The administration has said at times the virus is man-made or that, if it's natural, it must have leaked out of a Chinese government lab.
Both the White House and the Chinese Communist Party have been less than honest.
And so, in China and in the U.S., the work of scientists like Peter Daszak is being undercut by pandemic politics.
So, just stop it right there for a moment.
You see what he does?
He says, so the big dishonesty here is that the United States said that this might've come from a lab, which by the way, every single day, it seems more and more likely that this virus came from the lab as, as not just senators, but as other scientists have been talking about as well. but as other scientists have been talking about as well.
And he says, but look, and maybe China hasn't been totally honest, but it's mostly the, the examples I'm going to give you are how the United States hasn't been honest And so at the very least, we can say both sides haven't been honest.
It's this false equivalency between China, which...
China created the virus one way or another, whether it was made in nature and then observed in the Wuhan laboratory, or whether it was made in nature and just happened to escape into the world because of these Wuhan wet markets, because of these unsafe food practices, which, by the way, does not seem very likely.
But even if it were, that is China's fault.
And they're lying about it.
And then...
The United States calls them out for it, but because it's not 100% certain that that's what happened, because we don't know, because China covered it up, then you're saying the United States is also dishonest.
Bizarre behavior, especially for an allegedly American television news program.
Then he tries to pull out and say, look, there's really just this third party called the scientists, and they're the ones that we need to follow.
And both of the political actors, China and the United States, they're basically both the same, and so...
Don't give the US any more credit than you give to China.
Then he goes on to defend even more the alleged objectivity, untouchability of the scientists.
The Wuhan Institute is internationally respected.
Two years ago, a team from the US Embassy visited.
That team sent a cable to Washington concerned that one lab in the complex had a serious shortage of trained investigators.
But the cable, first reported by the Washington Post, emphasized the Wuhan Institute is critical to future outbreak prediction and prevention.
So what this guy just did is what I call the compliment sandwich.
It's what a lot of flatterers will do, too.
And it's what a lot of PR people will do.
If they want to break some bad news, they'll say a really good thing, then they'll put the criticism in there, and then they'll say another really good thing.
So he opens up, he says the Wuhan Institute of Virology is internationally respected.
No, I don't think it is.
I think actually it's the least respected lab in the world right now.
I think people hate the damn Institute of Virology in Wuhan because it gave us this global plague.
So, no, it's not internationally respected.
Also, how do I know it's not internationally respected?
Because the very next thing he says is, you know, some U.S. inspectors pointed out that it wasn't very safe.
But it was only one lab, and it wasn't all the places, but yeah, it wasn't very safe.
Well, okay, well, if it's not very safe, then...
How on earth would you call it internationally respected?
And actually the people who pointed out that it wasn't safe were international in China.
And then they say, but it's very important.
This lab is very important in fighting diseases.
No, it clearly isn't.
It would appear that the lab is very important in spreading diseases.
So one good way to fight those diseases might be to shut down the lab and not fund it as we in the United States did.
And as a lot of people, including Dr.
Fauci, seem to be involved with this decision to fund the laboratory.
But that's the compliment sandwich.
It's a really great lab.
Yeah, okay, they might have started this global pandemic, but it's a really great lab.
Then we get to the real thing.
Criticism of America.
So far we haven't had any criticism of China, just about.
But then we get to the criticism of America.
The victim of this crime.
China's the perpetrator.
America's the victim.
CBS blames the victim.
I mean, we are now in a case where you have a rapist and a victim, and CBS 60 Minutes is covering it, and they say, well, she was wearing an awfully short skirt.
Well, she shouldn't have been out in that neighborhood at night.
I mean, that is the kind of victim blaming.
You hear that phrase from the left a lot?
This is a perfect example of that.
Victim blaming from the mainstream media.
We'll get to that in one second.
First, though...
I've got to thank our friends over at We The People Holsters.
You know, if you have a good handgun but no holster, then you are just not doing gun ownership right.
And especially now, especially with We The People Holsters, you can get a holster for an unbelievable price.
Be safe.
Holster that new gun in a We The People Holster starting at just $39.
$39 to get a We The People Holster, which is custom designed to fit your firearm perfectly.
Made right here in the USA, not in other places that maybe are not so good to us around the world.
They have thousands of options to choose from, plus an amazing selection of printed holsters.
Their proprietary clip design allows for you to easily adjust both the cant and ride of your holster so that it will fit comfortably and securely at all times.
And now is the time, I don't even need to say it, To support American companies.
You know that.
You know, supporting a holster company that is made in America is, I think, basically the most patriotic thing you can do.
So go to wethepeopleholsters.com slash Knowles right now to get yours.
Every holster ship's free, comes with a lifetime guarantee.
And, wait for this, you get an additional ten bucks off.
With the offer code Knowles.
K-O-W-L-E-S. Satisfaction guaranteed.
If it's not a perfect fit, send it back for a total refund.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Knowles.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Knowles.
Offer code Knowles.
You get the $39 holster.
$10 off.
So it's $29 plus free shipping.
Go do it.
I'm practically giving these away to you.
You have the compliment sandwich.
Then CBS gets to the hard work of blaming America.
EcoHealth's work with Wuhan ended one week after Mr.
Trump's briefing room pledge when the NIH revoked the grant.
Initially, President Trump praised China.
But in the following weeks, testing in the U.S. failed to catch up to the need.
Vital equipment was short.
Bodies filled refrigerated trailers and science was continuously challenged.
As the US led the world in illness and death, the White House moved the focus to the Chinese government.
Nothing that he just said is true.
Nothing.
I don't think one syllable of that was true.
Initially, he blames America for defunding the Wuhan laboratory as if this is some great tragedy.
You know what?
If you start a global pandemic, and I'm not saying they constructed the virus.
This is the left-wing trick.
They say there is no evidence that they constructed the virus in the lab.
Nobody is saying they constructed the virus.
We're simply saying that the virus was very likely present in the lab and may have escaped.
And a lot of evidence is suggesting that that was the case.
They're trying to obviously fight a straw man because they can't argue against that pretty salient observation.
He says, defunding the Wuhan lab was a terrible idea.
If starting a global pandemic is not enough to get your lab defunded, then there is no criterion for getting your lab defunded.
Of course we should have done that.
Then, he says, the bodies started piling up in the United States as the United States led the world in death and carnage.
No, we didn't.
China did.
But China is lying about their numbers.
You can follow every other country on Earth.
You look at the progression of the virus, it goes up, up, up, right, and then maybe there's a little plateau, but it keeps following this pattern.
With China, it goes up, up, up, and then one day it just completely drops down.
Now do you think that's because the Chinese people have some amazing fact of their biology that all on one day just shuts down viruses?
Do you think that the Chinese have some amazing magic, some wizardry, where they wave a wand and then just one day magically the virus goes away?
Or is the Communist Party lying about their numbers?
Guess what?
It's the latter.
How do we know that?
They actually admitted they were lying about the numbers.
They're still lying, but they admitted that the numbers out of Wuhan were not true.
So that total, total shill for the Chinese Communist Party.
Then he keeps going on and says, science was being denied in the United States.
Science was being denied.
Who's denying science here?
The one who believes that the virus just magically disappeared in China one day?
The one who believes that the laboratory that very likely started this pandemic still should be funded?
Which science is being denied?
Which model?
Because all the models contradicted each other and it turns out they were all wrong too.
Who is denying science?
He, of course, is treating science as though it's a sort of religious faith.
You could be a denier, but then you're a heretic.
You ought to be burned at the stake, practically.
When, in fact, science...
Oh, we could do a whole episode on the word science.
The word science just means knowledge.
It comes from shire, the Latin word shire, to know.
And the word has been so politicized now that one political interest group, these materialists, people who engage in a very modern study of empirical material investigation, have now monopolized the entire word for knowledge.
That's a whole other issue.
But it does play into the politics here.
Because what he is saying when he talks about science being denied is, we know everything.
We have a monopoly on the facts.
We have a monopoly on information.
And it's being denied by mean old conservatives like Donald Trump.
And that is why the U.S. has led the world in death and destruction.
None of which is true.
And then he takes one final swipe to defend China.
Last Sunday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attempted to resurrect a debunked theory that the virus was man-made in China.
There it is.
Did I predict it?
I predicted it.
It's a debunked theory that the virus was man-made.
First of all, that's not debunked.
You debunk that theory.
We know very little about this virus to begin with.
But second of all, nobody's saying it was man-made.
We're saying it had something to do with the laboratory.
Those are two completely different things.
And because the CCP's lapdogs and the American media can't actually argue against what appears to be pretty likely that the lab had something to do with the virus, they try to argue against this straw man.
This is not just about orange man bad.
That's part of it.
This is not just about Trump doesn't like China, so the left does like China.
The left has been pushing China for years.
Do you remember Joe Biden?
I forget when this was.
It was maybe five, six years ago, something like that.
Joe Biden was giving a speech on this topic, actually with some lucidity, with some clarity.
Those are rare attributes for Joe Biden these days.
But he was addressing the real question.
The real question at the time and today was, Is a rising China good for America?
Obviously, it's good for China.
It's good for China to be able to lift people out of poverty.
It's good for China to be able to, I don't know, have more material goods.
It's good for them.
But is it good for the rest of the world that this brutal, vicious government, the CCP, is growing in strength and influence?
And Joe Biden's response was emphatically, yes.
and quite frankly throughout most of the West is whether a rising China was in the interest of the United States and the wider world.
As a young member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I wrote and I said, and I believed then what I believe now, that a rising China is a positive, positive development, not only for China, but for America and the world writ large.
Can't get clearer than that.
I think maybe Joe is doing better for himself these days that he just kind of mumbles confusedly in these meandering stories about corn pop.
because when he says his actual views about politics, they're not so great.
They're not so popular.
They're not so smart.
Maybe that's why Joe Biden doesn't want his files opened up at the University of Delaware.
He told us that.
He said, I don't want people to know my positions on things.
There are a lot of speeches and policy positions I've had in there.
Okay.
Well, yeah, you're right.
We probably don't want to hear those things because you were dead wrong about the most important political questions of our time.
The left has been pushing this for many years, decades now at this point that we need to have a rising China.
Donald Trump comes in and says, no, we don't.
There was a kind of consensus on the left and the right.
Rising China is good.
Globalization is good.
Big markets all over the world, that's a good thing.
We're all just going to have total unfettered free trade and there aren't going to be any distinctions.
Trump comes on the scene and says, no, China's...
Not treating us right.
We need to have our own national policies, regardless of what it means for China themselves.
And so he takes this hard line.
At the White House briefing yesterday, the media kept pushing this idea that the virus is like America's fault or Europe's fault.
And President Trump pushes back, as always, he goes, ask China.
Put your focus back on China, the real source of the problem.
Many times that the U.S. is doing far better than any other country when it comes to testing.
Yes.
Why does that matter?
Why is this a global competition to you if every day Americans are still losing their lives and we're still seeing more cases every day?
Well, they're losing their lives everywhere in the world.
And maybe that's a question you should ask China.
Don't ask me.
Ask China that question, okay?
When you ask them that question, you may get a very unusual answer.
Yes, behind you, please.
Sir, why are you saying that to me specifically?
I'm telling you.
I'm not saying it specifically to anybody.
I'm saying it to anybody that would ask a nasty question like that.
That's not a nasty question.
Please go ahead.
Okay.
Anybody else?
Please, go ahead in the back, please.
I have two questions.
No, it's okay.
We'll go over here.
But you pointed to me.
I have two questions, Mr.
President.
Next.
Next, please.
You called on me.
I did, and you didn't respond, and now I'm calling on the young lady in the back.
Please.
I just wanted to let my colleague finish.
Okay.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.
Appreciate it.
Thank you very much.
I love the way he handled this.
That woman, that first woman that asked the question, should be fired.
I mean, she won't be fired because she wasn't doing her job as a reporter, but she was doing her job as a leftist hack.
So, obviously, she'll probably get a promotion.
She's going to be the editor wherever she is.
She asks the question.
She basically makes the accusation that America is doing a terrible job on the virus and letting lots of people die and is probably to blame for a lot of the pandemic.
Right?
A lot of the...
We're not controlling the spread.
And Trump says, what are you talking about?
Ask China.
They're the one that actually is to blame for all of this.
And she doesn't have an answer for that because she knows it's true.
So she says...
The woman, if you couldn't see the clip, the woman is Asian.
And so she says, why'd you ask me that question specifically?
Why'd you tell me to do that specifically?
Is this the first time you've ever heard Trump say, talk to China?
I don't think so.
I think Trump's been saying that since he came down the elevator in 2015.
I think he's been saying that almost as much as build the wall.
These days, a lot more than build the wall.
So it's a totally dishonest, disingenuous playing of the race card from this woman, whatever reporter she is, whoever she works for.
She said, why'd you ask me?
It's because you're a racist or something like that.
And then...
He says it was a nasty question, and she fights back.
She goes, it's not a nasty question, but why does it matter?
That gives away the game.
Why does it matter when it comes to China?
You said it matters who's to blame.
You said it matters whose policies are not working that well, right?
You said it matters when you blame the United States, but then all of a sudden when you mention that it's actually China's fault, it doesn't matter.
We're not allowed to use a term that describes where the virus comes from when we call it the Wuhan virus or the chop fluey or the wubonic plague or whatever.
That's terrible and bigoted and racist and sexist probably and I don't know, maybe it's homophobic too.
I don't know, it's all those isms, right?
But then when you call it the European virus like Andy Cuomo, that's a fine thing.
That's all well and good.
This didn't stop in the White House briefing.
Later on on CNN, you had Brian Stelter there making the same racism accusation.
Why all the fighting over China?
Because China is the key to the current liberal agenda.
China is the key to globalization.
We'll get to that in a second.
We'll get to the New York Times begging you to pay to raise their children.
We will get to the cost of life and we'll get to...
A very troubling new development in the legal battle over the definition of sex and transgenderism.
First, though, I've got to thank you.
I've got to thank you.
And I've got to tell you about Daily Wire's newest, most exclusive membership tier, the All Access tier.
You get so much, right?
You get...
The Tumblr, you know you need that.
You get the new all-access show.
I call it a show, but it's not really a show.
It's just kind of hanging out.
And you turn the camera on and ask questions.
I did an Elvis impression on it the other day.
There's a lot of stuff.
There's a lot of stuff in there.
Head on over to dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Join Daily Wire's all-access club with a new membership or an upgrade.
Get 10% off with coupon code Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S. That's dailywire.com slash subscribe.
See you there.
So the woman in the, in the press briefing calls Trump a racist for mentioning China because in the press briefing calls Trump a racist for mentioning China because it's the last card they've It's the last refuge of a scoundrel.
And then Brian Stelter on CNN doubles down, says this is key evidence.
Ignore the question.
Ignore the point.
This is just evidence of Trump's bigotry.
Well, clearly the president was rattled, rattled enough to walk off because he didn't want to hear the questions from Caitlin Collins and Weijia Zhang.
And I think what we saw in that exchange with Weijia Zhang is something that has racial overtones.
It is racist to look at an Asian American White House correspondent and say, ask China.
This isn't happening in a vacuum.
This is part of a pattern of behavior from the president that goes back many years.
So he doesn't have the benefit of the doubt that someone might have if, for the first time ever in their life, they made a comment like that to a reporter.
But the president has been rattled by Weijia Jiang's questions in the past.
He has treated her and other female reporters differently in the past.
And he's also had this pattern of reacting to minority journalists in a very specific and different way, Wolf.
Listen to what he's saying.
He's saying that if President Trump mentions China and the person that he's talking to is Asian, if anybody that he's talking to is Asian and he mentions China, that's racist and he's not allowed to do it.
They can't get more obvious about it.
What they're telling you is, hey, when you are trying to upset our agenda, shut up.
Hey, okay, look, you want to blame China, we want to blame anybody but China, so saying China's racist.
Do you remember, they did this to Trump the last time, he was at a press briefing, and an Asian reporter, who said she was from Hong Kong, came out and asked this very fluffy question for China, and he said, who do you work for?
She goes, Phoenix TV. He goes, yeah, is that owned by the Chinese Communist Party?
She goes, no, no, no, it's owned by Hong Kong.
Yeah, you sure?
And so then he answered the question.
The left went crazy.
They said, he's a racist.
He's calling out his Asian reporter and suggesting that she works with the Chinese Communist government.
Guess what?
She did.
The news organization, Phoenix TV, is owned by the Chinese government.
They actually bought a station just over the border in Mexico, and they're broadcasting into Southern California, where I am right now.
And Senator Cruz and I spoke about this on our show, Verdict, and Senator Cruz is now trying to get that TV station shut down.
But Trump was right the first time on this.
They still called him racist.
And then here, he's not making any sort of suggestion that this woman's working for China.
He's just saying, ask China, like he's asked of many other reporters throughout this entire crisis, and they play the race card.
China is the key.
That's what this is about.
It's not just about Orange Man Bad.
China is the key to globalization.
China is the key to the liberal world order.
There's a reason that the left and parts of the right, the globalist right or the economists and sophister and accountant right, the right that just looks at the world as an economic question, they've been pushing China for so long.
That vision of the world is one in which we'll have relative peace all around the world as long as we keep expanding markets.
And the most important market to expand to is China, obviously, because they've got the most people and they keep buying up all of our news media.
They keep buying up all of our sports.
They keep buying up all of our Hollywood movies.
They are the key.
That's why Hollywood is really nice to them.
The news media are really nice to them.
And the NBA, and you remember there was that NBA scandal where There was some criticism made of the Chinese government by an NBA employee.
There was some support given to Hong Kong and they had to back off of that.
They had to defend the Chinese communists over the pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong because he who pays the piper calls the tune.
And that's the problem.
That's the problem with that world order that they're suggesting.
Oh, wouldn't it be so nice you can get global free trade and, you know, all the prices of goods goes down and, yeah, you might lose your job and, yeah, we might not have any manufacturing in the United States and, yeah, as a result of that, opioid overdoses might go up and, yeah, suicides might go up, but we'll get really cheap consumer goods and we'll have relative peace and won't that be nice?
Who's calling the shots then?
That's the trouble.
Who's calling the shots?
Some sort of international organizations, international trade treaties that have no bonds of loyalty to our local communities, to our families, to our states, to our country.
No accountability, obviously, to you, the citizen.
That's the problem.
You lose all of the political rights that we've come to cherish in our self-government here in the United States.
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
He who pays the piper calls the tuna.
And so we're beginning to realize that now.
And the people who have gone all in, who have put all their chips in on this...
Utopian vision of a world order based on trade and primarily trade with China are trying to defend that.
And they're defending that by lying to you.
And they're doing that by defending one of the worst regimes ever in the history of the world, the Chinese Communist Party.
And they're doing it through absurd...
Tactics like trying to blame Europe for the virus or, you know, just whenever you point out that China might have a problem, they call it a conspiracy theory.
And then when it turns out the conspiracy theory is true, they call you a racist.
That's what they want, according to liberalism.
All of politics.
I mean this of liberalism on the left, what we'd call progressivism or leftism.
And I also think of that on the right.
You know, the kind of more squishy conservative types, the people who still view politics primarily economically.
And during a pandemic, that's a good time to remember that we are not primarily economic actors.
I mean, just consider the New York Times.
Yesterday, two days ago, for Mother's Day...
They put out this piece.
Forget pancakes, pay mothers.
It's an idea that's gaining currency on the left and even a little bit on the right.
This idea that the state should pay mothers to raise their own children.
One lesson from the pandemic.
Child care is work and it should be compensated.
After just six days of sheltering in place, I found myself thinking about all the women I'd taken for granted.
So this woman, Kim Brooks, writes...
I started with Griselda, who cared for my kids when they were babies, a few hours each week.
If someone had asked me why I paid these women to do things that I could do myself, particularly when I made so little money with the time they freed up, I'd say that I did it because I wanted to work, because I needed to work, not just out of economic necessity, but also out of a need to feel like a full human being.
How sad is that?
We're told that the only thing that matters is your job.
Making widgets as a middle manager at Widget Inc.
is so much more important than raising children, even though the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.
That's a novel concept, and obviously this woman has bought it hook, line, and sinker.
Throughout my 30s, I found myself largely occupied with keeping a home and raising children.
This work, despite bringing joy and meaning to my life, shared many of the qualities of the menial jobs I've done before.
But there was one small difference.
The work I've done as a mother, I've done for free.
So she says, it's like the compliment sandwich, you know.
It's brought a lot of joy and meaning to my life, but actually it's terrible and I hate it.
And, you know, look, I've gotten paid for other work.
I want to get paid for this work.
You didn't do it for free.
You got children.
You got a family out of it.
That's the pay.
That's a good thing.
That's a lot better than making 15 bucks an hour at the widget factory.
Then she points out that she had a, she's been divorced with attitudes like this.
Okay, you know, maybe not the most shocking thing to learn.
I mentioned this article because some conservatives are, are, are embracing these kinds of ideas.
They say, oh, maybe it's a good idea.
If the problem is that all people are now being compelled to go work at the widget factory, they're all being compelled just to get jobs and not raise kids, maybe we need a new government policy, a new entitlement or something to encourage women to raise kids.
No, you're being played for suckers if you think that's what this is about.
And this woman actually admits it.
She says, in 2012, the Marxist feminist Silvia Federici published a collection of essays.
Ms.
Federici writes, to say that we want wages for housework is the first step toward refusing to do it.
It makes what's invisible visible.
And that gives away the whole game.
It's not the first step in returning to raise children and keep a home.
It's the first step toward abolishing it altogether, toward making this problem of economic modernity even worse.
This idea that we're all just cogs in a machine, even worse.
She says, as I wrote this, my sweet daughter reminded me it was almost Mother's Day, you know, and she was going to make pancakes.
And then this woman, unbelievable, she says, everybody likes pancakes, but everybody also likes to be compensated for the contributions they make to the world.
You are compensated.
You have a family.
Be happy.
Have some gratitude.
You know, it's such a ridiculous argument because they say pay women a wage.
Andrew Yang said this during the campaign.
What's the wage?
What's it worth?
Give me a number.
What is the hourly wage or the annual salary that mothers should be paid or that wives should be paid for keeping a home?
Pick a number.
You can't, because any number you pick is going to be offensive.
You couldn't go to the feminist and say, okay, I'll tell you what, you make $30 an hour.
$30 an hour is a good wage, right?
They would be so offended.
You think my work is only worth $30 an hour?
What is it, $100,000 a year?
It's a 24-7 job, right?
If you look at it primarily as a job instead of as a life.
But there's no price.
What could the price be?
Obviously, I'm not going to get paid a salary to do what I do as a husband.
I don't do all that much around the house as a husband.
But I guess there's some things, right?
Maybe emotional support.
I don't know.
How do you quantify these basic and ineffable aspects of our humanity?
How do you quantify that?
You can't do it.
And yet, that's what these eggheads want to do.
The egghead economists on the left and the right.
There's an article that just came out in Wired.
I won't bore you with it.
It's very, very long and not really worth reading, but it brings up a point that they're talking about.
How much is a human life actually worth?
As the U.S. economy reopens amid a deadly pandemic, a dire question looms.
Let's weigh the risks and do the math.
Sacrifices have to be worth it.
The good has to be greater.
How much is a human life worth as a society?
We have historically been willing to incur costs to save lives and improve public health care.
To save a vast number of lives, we'll pay a huge cost until that cost seems too high.
This calculation is fundamental to the way Americans make policy decisions in normal times.
That's not how I view policy decisions.
Maybe that's how these modern utilitarians view it.
But that's not how I view policy decisions.
And that's not how politics should be.
It's not just a matter of spreadsheets and tabulating and saying, okay, this will save one person and one more person will die, one fewer people will die.
No.
First of all, in this shutdown, there's an irony here because they locked down to allegedly save a lot of lives.
That's what Andy Cuomo said.
And yet, there's no evidence that the lockdowns have saved any lives.
The point is, don't overwhelm the healthcare system and buy time for a vaccine.
None of those happened.
So, no evidence you saved any lives.
Lots of evidence that the lockdowns have cost lives.
There's evidence it's going to cost millions of lives.
But even in the United States.
So I don't think you always need to make that calculation.
But even if you did, the way to think about politics is not as just this cold, sterile, mathematical calculation.
It's about people.
And it's about eternal questions.
What do we want?
What kind of society do we want to live in?
One with families or one with autonomous individuals working for the widget factory?
What kind of...
How do we best achieve that?
How do we view ourselves as just mere consumers of goods or as citizens?
Who do we want to rule us?
Some international trade institution or we ourselves?
We, the American citizens.
What do we want?
It ties into open borders, right?
The same people that are pushing this liberal global economic utopia are the ones pushing for open borders because, of course, borders wouldn't matter.
Of course, national loyalties wouldn't matter.
All that matters...
Is that we continue to exist as consumers in this kind of nation-free world?
That's one vision.
And then there's another vision.
Those are the questions of politics, not just tabulating things on a spreadsheet.
You know, before we go, I've got to get just a little bit.
There's too many things to get to, but I've got to get to this transgender case.
I'll tell you a little bit about it today.
We'll get into it more tomorrow.
The ADF, the Alliance Defending Freedom, these guys are so great.
They filed a lawsuit against the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference on behalf of three girls who were runners and they were forced to compete against boys in girls sports because the boys identified as girls.
This is the problem when it comes to sporting.
Of transgenderism, right?
Is that boys compete against girls and boys are stronger than girls, so boys win.
And then, therefore, there's no more girls' sports.
So they file this lawsuit.
The judge in this case, he decides to hear the case, but he says, hey, you can't refer to those boys as boys.
You have to refer to the boys who identify as girls as girls.
Or as transgender girls or whatever.
But of course, that's the problem.
It's actually about the premises.
If you begin the case by saying those boys are really girls, well then the plaintiffs have already lost the case.
You're already saying, I believe that you are in the wrong here.
I'm going to rewrite the meaning of sex in Title IX. I'm going to redo that myself as a judge.
We'll get a little bit more into that case tomorrow because it's a very important story.
But...
This is the way the deck is sort of stacked against you in the language.
This is the way the language matters so much, the Chinese virus or the European virus.
They're trying to win at the game of politics before the debate even begins, before the case is even heard.
Now, finally, before we go, this story, I just couldn't pass this one up.
This from Slate, which teaches us so much about our relationships.
I love my boyfriend, but want a girlfriend.
This is what a woman is writing into Slate.
He doesn't want to open up our relationship.
My partner is the most compassionate, loving, and respectful partner I could ask for.
He has supported me through difficult times, weight fluctuations, questioning my gender, changing my name, and sobriety, among other things.
Yikes.
I'm incredibly attracted to women.
Oh man, this guy...
So you question your gender while you're dating this guy.
He sticks with you.
You change your name.
He sticks with you.
You change your appearance a lot.
He sticks with you.
You've battled addiction.
He sticks with you.
But now you say, I'm incredibly attracted to women.
And so you want to sleep with other people.
He knows this.
We've talked about opening our relationship.
However, he's on the spectrum of asexuality and is only interested in having sex with me.
I don't know, you might have missed it in all the jargon.
That's just a term for monogamy.
There's the spectrum of asexuality.
Asexuality, I guess, means you don't want to have sex.
So if you are having sex, if you do have sex sometimes, then you're not asexual.
You might not be a nymphomaniac or something, but you're not asexual.
But he's only interested in having sex with me, meaning he's my boyfriend.
He didn't used to have to explain what that term meant.
The thought of me having sex with other people makes him deeply uncomfortable as we both relate to sex in different ways.
We have had this conversation a few times in the year that we've been together, but with no solid plan or outcome.
I respect and appreciate our relationship more than my desire to sleep around, but I'm worried that I will be missing something.
I'm only 20, and I know that feelings change, but he's an incredible domestic and sexual partner.
Yikes, man, that's like a damning with faint praise.
That's what you say about the love of your life.
He's a very good domestic and sexual partner.
And I would like to be with him for a long time.
Not forever.
Not endless love, but you know, for a long time.
Is there a way to figure this out?
Or will this core incompatibility be what breaks the support?
What's the incompatibility?
He wants to date you and you want to cheat on him.
That's the incompatibility.
I actually sort of feel for this girl.
She's obviously very confused.
And she's being encouraged in her confusion by a very confused culture.
She said she's young.
And we're told that the whole purpose of life is to get as much pleasure as we can.
That's the only point of it.
And so if you're young and you're not sleeping with a ton of people all the time, then you're missing out on life.
Because we're told that monogamy and commitment and marriage is bad and we should delay it and put it off.
I was told this for much of my life, certainly by the popular culture, but that's kind of the culture we're living in.
And we're told that, you know, sleeping around and all that sort of stuff is really ultimately fulfilling, which if anyone's ever tried it, you find out in the end it's not ultimately all that fulfilling.
Is there a way to figure this out?
Yes, here's the way.
To don't sleep around.
Simple as that.
Don't view your partner as an instrument for your own pleasure.
View him as a real-life human being with flesh and blood and a soul that you are not just taking from, but that you are giving yourself to.
It comes down a lot to these political questions that we're talking about.
We're not just here looking at our fellow Americans and seeing them as instruments for our own pleasure and our own benefit.
We're not just looking around at our politics that way either.
We are citizens.
First of all, we're members of families, and we're members of communities, and we're members of states, and we're citizens of this country.
We have loyalties, we have duties, we have affections.
The media doesn't know that.
The media has totally sold out their country, and now they're shilling for our number one geopolitical adversary.
They have no understanding of this at all.
They're willing to go to the highest bidder, whoever's going to buy them off.
Like China.
That's one version of the world.
Not all that different from the way this chickie is thinking about life either.
But that's the wrong way.
It ultimately will not be particularly gratifying.
You will find much more satisfaction in gratitude.
Your babies are not just an instrument for your pleasure and you shouldn't be paid to raise your own children.
You will find much more satisfaction in gratitude.
In a position that views the world with some gratitude, with some humility, with some loyalty, and with you having a real role in it rather than this total alienation willing to be bought off by the highest bidder, like our sad, pathetic That's our show.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
I'll 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 Ben Davies and directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boren.
Supervising producers, Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Technical producer, Austin Stevens.
Assistant director, Pavel Widowski.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Audio mixer, Robin Fenderson.
Hair and makeup, Nika Geneva.
Production assistant, Ryan Love.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
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.
