All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 4, 2021 - The Michael Knowles Show
48:44
Ep. 693 - The Earthly Elect

John Kerry has no choice but to fly around in private jets, the DOJ encourages Yale to discriminate against white and Asian students, and Marilyn Manson’s sex scandal exposes the central political debate of our age. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Climate Czar John Kerry is dedicating his every waking moment to saving the Earth, saving mankind.
And while he's doing that, he's polluting a lot.
He's polluting much, much more than basically anybody else on Earth.
But it's very important that he do that so that he can save the Earth.
He has no choice.
On that issue, pollution, I understand that you came here with a private jet.
Is that an environmental way to travel?
If you offset your carbon, it's the only choice for somebody like me who is traveling the world to win this battle.
I negotiated the Paris Accords for the United States.
I've been involved in this fight for years.
I negotiated with President Xi to bring President Xi to the table so we could get Paris.
And I believe the time it takes me to get somewhere.
I can't sail across the ocean.
I have to fly to meet with people and get things done.
But what I'm doing, almost full time, is working to win the battle of climate change.
And in the end, if I offset and contribute my life to do this, I'm not going to be put on the defensive.
I absolutely will not.
It's the only choice for somebody like me, you mongrel.
You think I'm going to step foot in a Toyota Yaris?
Do you think I'll step foot in a G4, for goodness sakes?
I'm not in the middle class.
G6 or bust, I have no choice, insists John Kerry.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back.
He has no choice.
My favorite comment yesterday from Olivia V, who says, AOC encouraged the BLM rioters, instructed them on how to avoid arrest.
That's all true.
So she needs to stop her whining about the Capitol rioters.
Well, there's certainly a glaring double standard there.
Maybe we could learn something from the left.
Maybe we'll get to that in just a little bit.
first we have to prepare ourselves to even see what the left is doing.
And I, you know, I've just realized all year long, I have to be prepared.
That's why I have ReadyWise.
ReadyWise is the leader in emergency food supplies.
Their emergency meals include freeze dried fruits and vegetables for convenient on the go nutrition and new adventure meals for hiking, camping, and other outdoor activities.
ReadyWise products are proudly made in the USA and they make being prepared simple and affordable.
Order online and have nutritious meals shipped directly to your doorstep.
When preparing ReadyWise meals, all you need is four cups of water, The water does not even need to be hot.
You simply pour the food into the water.
You stir.
You cover.
15 minutes later, the meal is ready.
Some meals can even be prepared directly in the pouch, eliminating the need for additional supplies.
If 2020 and early 2021 has taught you anything, it should be that it's good to be prepared.
Be prepared.
It's peace of mind.
This week, my listeners can get 10% off at ReadyWise.com when entering Knowles 10 at checkout or by calling 855-453-2945.
ReadyWise has a 30-day, no-questions-asked return policy.
There is no risk in taking the initiative to get you and your family prepared today.
That is ReadyWise, R-E-A-D-Y-W-I-S-E dot com.
Promo code Knowles10 to get 10% off.
Go prepare yourself, prepare your family for any sort of emergency.
Go to ReadyWise.
John Kerry has no choice.
You see, he is on this salvific mission, sort of a divinely ordained mission to save the earth.
And so he's, look, maybe he's going to pollute a lot, a lot in the process, and he's going to get to enjoy lots and lots of luxuries that he wants to deprive everyone else from having.
But it's all for the greater good, because he He is just so wonderful that he gets to play by a different set of rules.
This is a new hierarchy.
He says, I don't think it's hypocritical at all.
I'm more special than you are, and so I deserve certain special privileges.
And these new hierarchies we're seeing crop up all over the place, particularly with regard to left-wing identity politics, particularly in the realm of race.
There was this guy Umair Haqq.
Don't know who that is.
He's the director of the Havas Media Lab.
He blogs at the Harvard Business Review.
He's the author of the New Capitalist Manifesto, Building a Disruptively Better Business.
And he's some blue checkmark leftist who mouths off on Twitter.
He had a tweet that was a little bit radical.
I say only a little bit radical.
Even by left-wing standards yesterday, he said, quote, F off already, white people.
You enslaved and murdered whole continents.
You have yet to make any amends, and even the good ones among you, this grammar's not top-notch, even the good ones among pretend that's okay.
We are still living in that world, and it makes the rest of us so, so sick and weary and disgusted with you.
Now, of course, nothing, not one single thing that he said there is true.
He is disgusted.
I don't know what has disgusted him, probably his sick ideology.
But this is very wrong, and a sensible society would ostracize this person.
Since we're now in the business of deciding who ought to have this sort of public speech on Twitter and who ought not to, right now we're in a world where the duly elected sitting president can't be on Twitter, but this guy can.
That's crazy.
It should be the opposite.
This guy should be ostracized.
He should not be permitted in polite company anywhere.
But We now live in this world in which we're not permitted to make any comment whatsoever about race unless, of course, it is to attack whiteness, which we are told on the one hand is a social construct, and on the other hand we're told it is so real that it is sort of the dominant force and evil in the world.
This is, of course, the glaring example as to why things like white privilege or white supremacy are just ridiculous, because there is only one racial group that you are not only allowed to condemn publicly, but you're actively encouraged to condemn publicly, and that, of course, is white people.
Doesn't sound very supreme or supremacist or whatever to me.
Now, you see increasingly...
Liberal white people spouting this same kind of nonsense.
There was a guy who went viral on TikTok explaining what a terrible oppressor he is because he's white.
Yes, exactly!
I am the oppressor.
I am racist.
Oh my god, he just said he's racist.
It shouldn't be this hard, you guys.
If you live in America, went to school, participate in the socioeconomic structures, participate in any sort of system, education, business, entertainment, what have you, and you are white, you are indoctrinated, you are oppressive, and yes, you are racist.
It is something that we have learned, either consciously or subconsciously, all of us as white Americans.
And what we have to do is unlearn that.
I'm trying to do the work.
Part of doing the work is pushing against dangerous narratives that are counterintuitive to that unlearning, like white people are also oppressed by racism.
We're not.
We are the oppressors.
That's the point.
You should be doing the unlearning, too.
Do the work.
Do the work.
He has all of the...
It's almost like a parody.
He has all of the various characteristics of a sort of liberal caricature.
My first reaction listening to this guy is...
Why should I pay attention to a word he says?
He's a vile racist.
He's a terrible oppressor.
Well, if he really believes he's this terrible oppressor, how dare he mouth off in public?
He needs to sit down.
He needs to go away and let other people who are of the more blessed races or whatever come out and tell people what to think.
He continues to oppress me with his words.
My second thought, of course, is that this kid couldn't oppress his own cat.
You know, he'd Doesn't seem particularly intimidating to me.
But he is showing us something that the left talks about a lot, which is that you'll hear the left describe conservative women as having internalized misogyny.
So yeah, they're women who contradict the leftist feminist narrative, but we shouldn't listen to them.
We should completely ignore what they have to say because they are victims of their own false consciousness.
This is a Marxist category, a Marxist concept that has existed for a very long time.
You see the same thing with race.
You'll say, well, we shouldn't listen to Ben Carson.
We shouldn't listen to Clarence Thomas.
We shouldn't listen to Tom Sowell.
We shouldn't listen to Any black person with whom we disagree here on the left because they have internalized racism.
And this is usually used in a very cynical way.
However, you know, it's so preposterous that someone like this kid could be more conscious, more aware, have higher faculties of reason than Clarence Thomas, you know, one of the greatest jurists of his age, or Ben Carson, one of the most brilliant physicians in history, you know, First guy to successfully separate twins conjoined at the head.
But no, these liberal idiots, they know so much more.
They're so much more conscious.
However, there is a little something to it, which is that this guy is a white guy, but he hates that he's a white guy.
He hates his identity because of his skin, because of this sort of happenstance of his birth.
He hates himself and he feels bad and he And he is clearly in a lot of angst.
That's a big problem, and it is now being encouraged with the force of the state.
You know, there is one example of legal racial discrimination in the country.
There's only one, and it's called affirmative action.
And it disadvantages white and Asian applicants to universities, and it gives an advantage to black and Hispanic and some other applicants to universities.
A group of Asian students sued Harvard over this, and the suit didn't really go anywhere.
So during the Trump administration, the DOJ filed suit against Yale.
Yale has the exact same practices, and they discriminate against white and Asian students.
And it's funny, because we live in this society where the only racial group that you're allowed to castigate in public is white people, usually this issue is framed differently.
On the Asian side of things.
But the DOJ suit against Yale did focus on them and said, you're not only discriminating against Asians, you're also discriminating against white applicants too.
So now that we have a new presidential administration, the Biden DOJ came in, they dropped the case.
They said, yeah, you know, whatever Yale is doing to white and Asian students, forget about it.
It doesn't matter.
And for a moment, let's Let's focus on the Asian students, you know, because I understand that whiteness in America evokes all of these images because it's so in our popular culture.
But focus again, like we were doing with the Harvard suit, focus again on the Asian aspect of it.
You now have some admissions officer at Yale who's going to call up some Vietnamese immigrants and say, I'm sorry, Mrs.
Pham.
I know you've been working very, very hard since you immigrated here, and I know you've made very low wages and you've been slaving away in some menial job, and your son has been working very, very hard to do well on his SAT to get into Yale, but sorry.
His spot has to go to someone else.
Maybe that other student is richer.
Maybe that other student has had more advantages.
Maybe that other student comes from a more stable background.
But he's got the favored skin color.
And your student, Mrs.
Pham, has a disfavored skin color.
And so he doesn't get to go to Yale.
Sorry, that's the way things work.
Obviously deeply unfair.
We can all recognize that as unjust.
Anyone who is in the sensible middle all the way to conservative can recognize that.
And yet, that is not just in the popular culture.
That is not just something we're going to overcome by winning back the culture.
That is in the law.
That is a legal system of discrimination that we have in the country.
Some people are the elect.
Some people get to play by a different set of rules.
Some people get special advantages, like John Kerry.
You know, that white kid screaming at all of us while he talks about how white people are oppressors, it does kind of remind me of John Kerry a little bit.
Listen, listen, you can't, I don't, don't listen to those oppressors, just listen to me, me, John Kerry.
Goodness gracious, do you think John Kerry has ever worked on his own car?
I don't think he has.
Not a chance, right?
However, you can work on your own car.
You can get your own auto parts.
And you can save a whole lot of money doing so.
Head on over to Rock Auto.
That was a pretty good segue.
I liked that segue.
Rockauto.com is so much easier than walking into a store and someone demanding quick answers to things.
Like, hey, is your...
Buick, the XP5 or the 7Z3? I don't know.
I just don't know any answers to those questions.
I think they only ask them to intimidate me because they can tell by the cut of my jib I'm not the most familiar with auto parts.
Then they go in the back.
They go online.
They don't have the part, right?
So they go online.
They order the part, probably from Rock Auto.
Then they charge me twice as much.
You can skip that hassle.
You have access to rockauto.com at your desk or in your pocket.
The rockauto.com catalog is unique.
It's so unique.
Easy to navigate that even I can do it.
They have reliably low prices.
They have a phenomenal selection.
They are a family-run company serving auto parts customers online for 20 years, which, by my calculation, is the entire history of online shopping, just about.
So you can really trust these guys.
Go to rockauto.com right now.
See all the parts available for your car or truck.
Then write Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, in their How Did You Hear About Us box so that they know we sent you.
Head on over.
Great family company.
Great way to get auto and body parts.
We love them.
Go to rockauto.com.
Speaking of the official weight of the federal government, Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, continues every few days at least to get one sort of slightly challenging question.
And one that keeps coming up is on Joe Biden's Catholicism because Joe Biden says that he's Catholic, but he doesn't act like he's Catholic.
This is why he was denied the Eucharist at a mass in North Carolina not so long ago.
So, they said, okay, hold on.
This guy, Joe Biden, he's promoting all these crazy gender theories.
He's promoting abortion.
How is he Catholic?
Jen Psaki gives the standard answer.
He described him as a devout Catholic.
Will he use his faith to guide him in any policy decision making?
He does attend church nearly every weekend.
That's something that's important to him personally and to his family.
He's talked about the impact of his faith on healing and everything he's been through as a human being.
So certainly it's a guide to him as a human being.
What a creepy and weird answer.
Simple question.
Does Joe Biden's faith guide him in his public life?
Yes, he goes to church.
It guides him when he's at church.
Yes, he does that.
Right, but religion is not just about what happens from 8 to 9 a.m.
on Sunday morning.
Religion is supposed to infuse your entire life.
It is supposed to orient what you do.
Everything you do has this ultimate goal of knowing God and enjoying him forever, to quote the catechism.
And she says, yes, in this portion of his life, in his private, in his personal, he's very Catholic, but in his public life, he's a complete degenerate.
Yes, Sunday morning, he's a good little boy, but the rest of the week, he's a complete derelict.
And this gets to a story that we touched on a little bit yesterday, Marilyn Manson's sex scandal.
And I know it seems just like a kind of lurid Hollywood story.
Marilyn Manson's sex scandal...
And the kind of answer that Jen Psaki just gave on religion, it actually gets to, I think, the central political question that we're all debating on the left and the right and even within the right, which is what is liberty?
What does liberty look like?
So Manson, he's accused of abusing women.
And most of the accusations against Manson, by the way, are not that he, you know, went down a back alley and ravaged some poor woman.
It's that he was dating these women.
He might have been engaged to a woman, but his behavior was nevertheless quite abusive.
There was an old guitarist who toured with Manson who said, quote, I'm sorry to everyone on this podcast right now who doesn't like this, but that guy, he's amazingly talented, but he's effed up and he needs to be in check and he needs to get sober and he needs to come to terms with his demons.
He is a bad effing guy.
I don't know if Marilyn Manson did the things he's accused of or not, but, you know, there are multiple stories, and he is the nation's highest-profile Satanist, so, you know, seems plausible.
Now you've got this guitarist who's saying it, too.
Very important.
He says, look, he's very talented, but, look, he's an addict.
He's an alcoholic.
He, you know, he's not totally in control of himself.
He has demons, and he needs to come to terms with that.
He's a bad guy.
Yesterday, when we were talking about this, we described how there are goods that are higher than consent.
How in kind of modern liberal society, we just say, well, you know, look, if people consent to something, they can do whatever they want.
Then it's totally hunky-dory.
They can consent to do the grossest, filthiest, apparently most sinful things in the world.
But as long as they consent Then we're all good, right?
But the Marilyn Manson stuff, actually the Me Too movement generally, raises some questions here.
Because the kind of abuse that Marilyn Manson's ex-girlfriend was describing, where he's like tying her up and beating her and yelling horrible things at her, she consented to it, I guess, right?
She said, okay, you can tie me up and do whatever.
They did it a lot of times.
However, it's still wrong.
Even if they consent to it, it's still wrong.
So where this brings us is to this central political question.
What is liberty?
You've got the kind of modern lib version of liberty where they say liberty is just being able to do whatever you want.
You can do the grossest, filthiest, most sinful things in the world.
Your ability to be able to do that, that is liberty, right?
Our founding fathers disagreed with this.
They made a distinction between liberty and licentiousness.
They said, yeah, it's not liberty to go look at porn.
It's not liberty to go do sinful things.
But the modern lib view is, yeah, it's just do whatever you want, right?
The Christian view of liberty and the classical view, even non-Christian view of liberty, is completely different.
The Christian view is that the man who sins is a slave to sin.
The Christian view of liberty is that if you do whatever you want, if you even do sinful things, not only is that not liberty, that actually destroys your liberty.
That actually makes you a slave.
And the non-Christian classical view, the sort of ancient Greek view, talked to old Uncle Aristotle, is extraordinarily similar, which is...
That we attain liberty by practicing the virtues.
That's why we educate ourselves.
This is where the term liberal education comes from.
You have to make sense of your liberty.
You have to tame your base passions.
You need to stop practicing vice.
You need to start practicing virtues.
And only then will you be fully in command of yourself.
You're not a slave to all your passions and you can be free.
The classic example of this, the perfect example, is the drug addict, right?
Let's say you've got a heroin addict, right?
According to the modern lib view of liberty, his perfect freedom is to be able to shoot up a bunch of heroin, right?
However, if you think about a heroin addict who's jonesing for a fix, do you think that guy is free?
I don't think so.
I think if you go up to that heroin addict who's really jonesing for some more heroin and you ask him to do anything, he'll do it.
Because he has compromised his free will.
He just wants the heroin.
He's not in his right state of mind.
He's not in control of himself.
If you hold the classic sort of Christian or even classical pre-Christian view of liberty, then this modern obsession with consent doesn't make any sense.
Because, and actually this is something the Me Too movement kind of understands.
They don't know that they understand it, but they're kind of touching on it.
When someone like Evan Rachel Wood, Marilyn Manson's ex-girlfriend, or some of these other women, or other women in the Me Too movement, when they say, sure, I consented to have the guy tie me up.
I consented to have him beat me.
I consented to have him scream terrible things at me.
I consented to go to Harvey Weinstein's hotel room.
I consented to do it again and again and again.
But he manipulated me.
He controlled me.
He brainwashed me.
He tempted me with Hollywood movie roles.
He, I wasn't, even though I consented, I wasn't in control of myself.
I wasn't in possession of full liberty.
Right.
Right.
This to me is the key.
This to me is the admission.
Even by liberals and leftists who don't know that they're admitting it.
That the kind of modern, fashionable, liberal view of liberty is just BS. Because they're admitting, they're saying, no, in order for me to be truly free, I need to not be addicted to heroin.
I need to not be following my base passions.
I need to not be degraded in this way.
I need to be practicing virtues, not pursuing vices.
I need to be in full possession of my liberty.
Good.
I'm glad.
I hope conservatives, while we're kind of skeptical of a lot of the Me Too excesses, I hope we can take that lesson and point it to the left and say, right, exactly.
The conservative version of liberty is the right one.
And that is why you don't get to do all your crazy things that you want to do.
That is why during the pandemic, during COVID, we should close the drug shops in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
We should close the marijuana dispensaries and keep the churches open.
What we've done is the opposite.
What we've done is keep all the head shops open and close the churches.
But no, we can't do that.
That's not what liberty is.
That is not in the American tradition.
That is not going to lead to flourishing.
Even you liberals are admitting it right now.
This question of free will keeps coming up and up and up.
You'll hear this so much from the Biden administration.
You'll hear this so much from really any liberal government, I think, moving forward, at least for the foreseeable future, is they're going to say, look, we're not implementing crazy new policies.
We're not transforming America.
We're just going back to normal.
We have no choice.
We are following progress.
You hear this when they mention the right side of history.
We are riding progress.
We can't control progress.
Progress is moving in a predetermined direction.
And you're either on progress or you're standing against progress.
We have no choice.
We have to pass all these pro-abortion laws.
We have to do it.
It's progress.
We have to grab much more power for the federal government.
It's science.
Science is the other part of it.
It's kind of the same thing, but different words.
The science dictates you have to give up all of your liberties.
I have no choice.
I'm just like John Kerry with the private jet.
I can't do the things that are absolutely 100% demanded of me by history and by progress and to save the world.
Unless we follow this radical leftist agenda.
Joe Biden is making this point explicitly.
You know, he's been signing, what, 40 some odd, maybe more at this point, executive orders.
He's making this point explicitly from the Oval Office.
He's saying, I have no choice.
You know folks, when we want to take back the culture, you've got to engage.
You've got to participate in conservative institutions.
If you participate in the liberal institutions, you are going to be Following the liberal policies.
Don't do that.
Break free of that.
Join Daily Wire, okay?
You can get 25% off a new Daily Wire membership with code RHF. That is fading fast, so you've got to sign up today.
Watch our first feature film, Run, Hide, Fight.
Run, Hide, Fight.
is opening the door into the entertainment ventures that we're making.
The critics absolutely hate it.
The audience absolutely loves it.
That's the kind of ratio that I want.
Head on over 25% off your membership.
This promo is only available through the weekend.
This is your last chance.
RHF for 25% off.
Join the Daily Wire today.
today.
We'll be right back with a lot more.
Joe Biden is not making new law.
Joe Biden is fixing bad policy.
What does that mean?
Absolutely nothing.
But Joe Biden says it with a straight face.
I want to make it clear.
There's a lot of talk with good reason about the number of executive orders that I've signed.
I'm not making new law.
I'm eliminating bad policy.
What I'm doing is taking on the issues that 99% of them, that the president, the last president of the United States, issued executive orders I thought were very counterproductive to our security, counterproductive to who we are as a country, particularly in the era of immigration.
I'm not making new laws.
I'm eliminating bad policy.
As though the country is governed by progressivism and liberalism.
And then accidentally, this guy Donald Trump managed to make it into the White House.
And that was wrong and that was illegitimate.
And he had all these sort of illegitimate bad policies there that Joe Biden is now going to undo.
Well, that's not making a new law because the law, the true law, is liberalism and progressivism.
The illegitimate thing was what Trump did.
So he, look, 42 executive orders?
No, it doesn't matter.
That's nothing.
He's just eliminating bad policy.
Obviously, that's a meaningless statement.
If you change the policies from the previous administration, you change them when you go into office, you are effectively making new law.
Now what he's saying is, look, laws, they're made in Congress, and then I'll sign them, and there's that process.
I'm just doing executive orders here, but I'm not making new laws, and I'm fixing the policy.
Well, more and more of our laws are made out of the White House, and the reason for this is that The actual institutions that govern our country on a day-to-day are the administrative institutions, which are executive agencies.
So this is why I defend executive orders, actually.
I don't defend his stupid executive orders, his bad executive orders, but I do defend good executive orders because if you want to harness the groups that are actually governing the country, right now, the way to do that is through executive order, certainly more so than in Congress.
Because Congress is an absolute clown show.
You know, I called this yesterday.
I called this yesterday.
You know how much I hate to say I told you so.
But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez came out and she made these big claims.
She's been calling Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley murderers because she said they sent insurrectionists to come murder me at the Capitol Hill riot.
And she said, you know, I'm a victim of sexual assault.
This is the first time we'd heard of this.
And when I heard all these people coming for me, I, you know, this was very traumatic and Cruz needs to resign now.
And you say, no aspect, no connection here between these random thoughts follows logic or is persuasive in any way.
But I said, look, I wish that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez were the kind of person that I could believe, but she is such a pathological liar.
She has been caught lying not just about massive political questions, but even about her own biography.
She lied.
She pretended to have been raised in the Bronx.
She wasn't.
She was raised in a very fancy suburban town.
I know this because I grew up in the town right next to her, the poorer town next to her at the same time.
I just can't believe her.
Maybe she could say a true thing, but there is no reason to assume that anything she says is true.
So, turns out I was right.
She said, AOC, that she was nearly killed during the Capitol riot.
People were yelling for her, banging on doors, coming down the halls.
Turns out, the person who was yelling for her and banging on the walls and on the door was a police officer who was there to protect her.
Here is the harrowing moment.
I immediately realized that I shouldn't have gone into the bathroom.
I should have jumped in the closet.
And so I opened the door when all of a sudden I hear that whoever was trying to get inside got into my office.
And then I realized that it's too late.
That it's too late for me to get into the closet.
And so I go back in and I hide back in, in the bathroom behind the door.
And then I just start to hear these yells of, where is she?
Where is she?
And I just thought to myself they got inside.
They got inside.
They're here now.
We know.
We've seen on Twitter that they've been around the Capitol.
And so now they've gotten inside.
Now, how do we know that this person was a rioter?
Or was not a rioter?
Why should AOC have known that the person who was knocking on her door was not a rioter?
Well, that's because she wasn't in the Capitol.
AOC. How did I not realize this at the time?
AOC was not even in the Capitol when the rioters entered.
She was in an office building down the street.
And I should have known this.
You know, members of Congress spend most of their time in office buildings that are not at the Capitol.
They're down the street.
They're like a, you know, five to seven or eight minute walk away from the Capitol.
Now, I figured, well, joint session, maybe she was in the Capitol.
But we'd heard maybe they were evacuated.
Maybe AOC wasn't even there at the time.
Who knows?
She was not there when they entered.
She was not there for any of it.
Completely made up.
And she's been saying now, for weeks, that she first said that almost half of Congress was killed, even though no members of Congress were even injured.
Unlike, say, the congressional baseball game when the Bernie bro almost killed Steve Scalise.
She said she feared for her life.
She had her life flash before her eyes, all these sorts of things.
She has been insinuating, if not outright saying, I haven't followed every statement she's made, but she's certainly been heavily insinuating, and I guess implying, you know, necessarily she's implying that she was at the Capitol, that she would have been there, and she wasn't.
I understand that vanity and dishonesty are occupational hazards of politics.
This is especially true of members of Congress.
However, this chickie is a stone-cold liar.
She lies like a sociopath.
I've never seen anything like it.
Even, you know, Joe Biden is another one like this.
Joe Biden tells lies like they're nothing.
This is why he had to drop out of the 1988 presidential race.
Because it's not even the kinds of lies he told.
Joe Biden never went on TV and was crying and saying, this senator tried to murder me.
And he didn't do that kind of thing.
But it was unsettling, not because of the quality of the lies, but because of the ease with which he told them.
Joe Biden will lie about anything.
Like, it's second nature to him, and it's second nature to AOC, too.
There is no reason to believe anything she says.
You know, I know a good number of politicians, and if some politicians want to bend the truth or they want to put some spin on, which, you The vast majority of them that I've known have not wanted to outright lie.
That's always a rule.
Don't lie.
Don't lie.
Because maybe you get caught in the lie.
AOC doesn't matter.
She will lie about anything.
Which brings us to a question that the left-wing media are really trying to gin up and make the central issue.
I don't even want to address it because I think this is a trap.
I think this is a complete op by the liberal media.
And I think it's so dishonest that I don't want to address it.
So I'm going to speak hypothetically here.
Let's say, hypothetically, and you can read between the lines.
Hypothetically, there's some kooky Republican congressman who says things that are pretty kooky, kind of crazy sometimes, right?
And This congressman is a total backbencher, really has no power whatsoever and is not a thing.
And the only reason that anybody would even maybe have heard this congressman's name is because CNN and MSNBC and the Democrats and left-wing commentators keep trying to make a big deal out of the kooky things this congressman has said.
Do we think it is wise, prudent, in the interest of the Republican Party or the conservative movement or the country to take the bait and make a big deal out of this person?
I don't think so.
Whatever kooky, crazy, disreputable things this Republican hypothetical congressman might have said, Pale in comparison to things that AOC has said, or Ilhan Omar, or Rashida Tlaib, or Maxine Waters, or Hillary Clinton, or Nancy Pelosi, or Kamala Harris.
All these people who have actively encouraged violence, who have told people, actually my favorite comment from yesterday mentioned this earlier.
We discussed it in the show.
AOC told people how to avoid getting arrested when they would go riot.
Maxine Waters told people to commit violence against Republicans.
Kamala Harris bailed out violent rioters from left-wing riots.
We never see the left doing this sort of thing.
We never see the left taking the bait, focusing in on their own people, wringing their clothing and rending their garments and gnashing their teeth over their own Major political figures to say nothing over their minor political figures.
It would seem that this is only a big deal because the left is trying to make it a big deal.
And let's say, hypothetically, there's some kooky, crazy congressman.
And we get rid of that congressman.
You know, we totally come out again.
We take the bait.
We make a big deal out of it.
Do you really think that the left won't just find somebody else and make us do the same thing to them?
There might be some practical politics we can learn here from the left, which wields political power much more effectively in this country than conservatives do.
We might be able to learn some political tricks without having to compromise our principles or compromise our integrity or compromise our morals.
Maybe we could just get a little bit better at politics.
John Kasich, that's enough of my hypothetical, very hypothetical scenario here.
John Kasich, who is a liberal Republican, whose chief strategist was John Weaver, just mentioning that.
John Kasich is now going on CNN. His job is to tap dance for the liberal establishment.
His job is to play the court jester in the kingdom of liberalism.
He went on CNN recently and said...
That the GOP will die if it remains the party of Donald Trump, rather than, say, the party of liberal squish John Kasich.
I did so many things down there that were conservative, and now these guys are off on some...
I don't even know where they are.
They're on some crazy tangent here to get themselves power.
But that's the point.
They are the Republican Party now, Governor.
They are...
House Republicans are very much representative of a very large chunk of the GOP, and until they, you know...
Unless they do something to say these views are not okay, and yes, they're speaking out, but take action about it, then talking about conservative fiscal responsibility and all those things, you know, it gets drowned out, don't you think?
Dana, I agree with that, Dana.
But here's the thing.
This gets back to what's going on inside the party.
You know, is it a Trump party?
Is it not a Trump party?
I will tell you this.
If it stays a Trump party in the long term, it will not be successful.
It will begin to die.
Frankly, it's been dying already because a lot of people have left the party.
This coming from John Kasich, who you'll recall defeated Donald Trump in the 2016 primaries and then defeated Hillary Clinton and became president, right?
Is that what happened?
Oh, no, it's not.
Trump beat Kasich and then Trump beat Hillary.
We were all told, remember, that no Republican was going to beat Hillary.
We were told Hillary was going to win 99% with 99% certainty by some analyses when Trump got it.
But even Kasich, does anybody really believe that John Kasich would have won in the general election?
No, of course not.
But we're told if we don't ditch Trump and the sort of things that Trump said and stood for and the kind of attitude that Trump had, then we're going to die.
We're already seeing people flee the party.
Donald Trump did better among many, many voters than Mitt Romney did.
Well, part of the evidence of this is that Romney lost and Trump won.
But even in 2020, when you look at those exit polls, remember we were told, Trump is going to get blown out by the white suburban women.
They're fleeing.
I don't know.
All the white suburban women I know really like Trump.
But we were told, oh, the white suburban women, and he's going to lose among black voters, he's going to lose among Hispanic voters, and he's going to lose among this and lose among that.
What happened?
Do you remember from the exit polls?
Trump gained with every single voter identity group, except for white dudes.
Totally the opposite of what we're hearing from the GOP establishment.
And listen to what CNN says to their gelded little Republican, John Kasich.
They said, look, John, your awful party If we want to get back to fiscal responsibility discussions, that will permit.
But we can't have Trumpism.
We can't discuss...
Immigration, or manufacturing jobs, or bioethics, or patriotism, or anything that actually matters.
John, it's perfectly fine for you little castrati Republicans to discuss fiscal policy and tax cuts, but you are not allowed to talk about things that actually matter to people that the left doesn't like.
This gets down to a battle for who is going to lead the Republican Party.
We've discussed over the past week or two weeks that there's a fight right now for GOP leadership in the House.
The person who is in GOP leadership, even though it's a small role to chair the Republican caucus, is Liz Cheney, daughter of Dick Cheney.
Liz Cheney voted to impeach Donald Trump.
This was a very stupid vote.
By the way, I have to clarify because Trump was impeached two times.
Both were preposterous, but the second one was even more preposterous than the first.
They impeached him for inciting an insurrection.
Obviously, he didn't do that.
We have it on tape.
Before, during, and after the insurrection, he's saying, be peaceful.
Don't insurrect.
But because there was a riot, they impeached Trump for this.
The left...
Actually incited riots and encouraged riots and bailed out the rioters, prominent leftists, one of whom is now the Vice President of the United States.
That, nope, no impeachment, no removal, no censure, but Donald Trump doesn't do any of that.
And this lady, Liz Cheney, decides to vote to impeach him.
Okay, stupid vote, but whatever.
That's her conviction and she's got the courage to carry it through.
This is a very unpopular position in the Republican Party, and yet she's demanding to remain in leadership.
So there were big threats to this.
Matt Gaetz was flying around the country saying we need to boot Liz Cheney out of leadership.
She's managed to cling to leadership.
There was a vote last night.
The vote was 145 to 61 House members voted to keep her in leadership.
Now, the key here is it was a secret vote.
It was not a public vote.
And this was the trick that was always going to permit Liz Cheney to remain in leadership.
I said this days ago.
I said Liz Cheney is probably going to stick it out, but it doesn't bode well for the Republican Party.
If this had been a public vote, do you think Liz Cheney would have won?
No, no way.
Because congressmen would have had to go on the record and say, yes, I want the politics of Impeaching the Republican president over nothing.
I want the politics of rolling over for the left.
I want the politics of returning to the time when Republicans lost and lost and lost and frankly didn't even care about most of the issues that the base cares about.
That vote would have been unacceptable to a huge portion of the GOP base.
There would have been a lot of primaries.
And so that's why they had to conduct a secret ballot because now we don't know who voted for and who voted against.
I bet if you took Republicans and trotted them on, Republican members of Congress, and trotted them on the Sunday shows and asked each and every one of them, did you vote to keep Liz Cheney in leadership?
You'd see those numbers change dramatically.
You'd see numbers at least flip, I think.
You would not have 145 Republican congressmen coming out and saying, yes, I support Liz Cheney.
But they've kept her in this position and this is only going to allow the divide to fester.
A lot of it getting down to the things we've been talking about.
What is liberty?
Are we going to be a party that just stands for nothing?
You know, we have no substantive vision.
We just stand for do whatever you want.
And the only thing we can all agree on is tax cuts, but otherwise we can let the left impose their moral vision on the country.
That's kind of the old way of the last 20 years.
It's not even the old way of the last 50 years.
Conservatives used to have a backbone.
They used to stand up for this sort of thing.
Last 20 years, they kind of lost their gumption.
Or are we going to be the party that has a substantive moral vision, that has an actual political plan for the country and that's willing to wield power?
If we can't resolve that question, if we can't resolve it in the right direction, then the left is just going to keep on keeping on, and they're going to be glib, and they're going to be shallow, and it's going to be the party of Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, but they are going to continue to govern.
It's going to be the party of Joe Biden, where he says, I'm not doing anything new, I'm just...
Returning to normal and progress is going to move forward.
You saw this, Jen Psaki said this the other day.
She was asked a question about Space Force.
This is a branch of the United States military that was announced under President Trump.
Obviously, Trump didn't come up with the plan for Space Force.
This had been in the works for many years.
And Jen Psaki was asked, hey, what's going on with Space Force?
And her answer was to giggle and just make a glib comment deriding this entire branch of the military.
May I ask whether the president has made a decision on keeping or keeping the scope of Space Force?
Wow, Space Force.
It's the plane of today.
It is an interesting question.
I am happy to check with our Space Force point of contact.
Am I sure who that is?
I will find out and see if we have any update on that.
Wow.
Oh, look at the list of this guy.
He's talking about Space Force.
Next, he's going to be asking about the Navy.
I don't know.
Hey, when I handed you guys all out the list of questions that you were permitted to ask me, Her Royal Highness, that wasn't on there.
So get a load of this guy.
Yeah, no, whatever.
It's kind of an interesting question.
I'll circle back because I don't have the answer to anything.
So this didn't play very well, even among Democrats.
This was a little bit too far.
So Jen Psaki was asked to apologize.
And of course, she did not.
The top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee is asking you to apologize for some of the comments that you made yesterday in the briefing room about the Space Force.
Will you apologize?
I did send a tweet last night.
You may not all be on Twitter.
Maybe they're not on Twitter.
That said, we invite the members of Space Force here to provide an update to all of you on all of the important work they're doing, and we certainly look forward to seeing continued updates from their team.
Big picture here.
I mean, does the Space Force have the full support of the Biden administration or is the president at some point perhaps going to try to get rid of it or in some way diminish it?
They absolutely have the full support of the Biden administration and we are not revisiting the decision to establish the Space Force.
The desire for the Department of Defense to focus greater attention and resources on the growing security challenges in space has long been a bipartisan issue, informed by numerous independent commissions and studies conducted across multiple administrations.
No apology, of course.
Just this kind of slightly toned down but still similar glibness.
Yes, we've invited the Space Force.
They can give us an update if they want.
Yes, it was in the works for years.
It's absolutely fine.
No, I'm not going to apologize because I am...
Going to play by a different set of rules.
I am the elect.
Listen to me.
How dare you?
How dare you ask me to apologize?
How dare you ask me to apologize for my private jet?
Don't you know who I am?
I have no choice.
The arrogance, the absolute evasion of accountability, that is government by the anointed, at least as far as they see it.
But it's not inevitable.
We do have a choice if we can figure out what exactly our free will, what exactly our traditional American liberty is, what it actually means, and how to use it.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
We'll see you tomorrow.
We'll see you tomorrow.
The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Our technical director is Austin Stevens.
Supervising producers, Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Audio mixer, Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup by Nika Geneva.
And production coordinator, McKenna Waters.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Today on the Ben Shapiro Show, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez was not in the main Capitol building during the January 6th riots, but her story is still the one leading the news, and the fact-checkers are defending her against all adversaries.
That's today on the Ben Shapiro Show.
▲
Export Selection