Ep. 851 - Tell Democrats Child Sacrifice Is Still Evil
House Democrats vote to legalize abortion nationwide up until the moment of birth, House Republicans vote to make women sign up for the draft, and the Biden administration admits it released at least 10,000 illegal aliens into the country last week.
My new book ’Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds,’ is now available wherever books are sold. Grab your copy today here: https://utm.io/udtMJ
Subscribe to Morning Wire, Daily Wire’s new morning news podcast, and get the facts first on the news you need to know: https://utm.io/udyIF
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In just the past week, House Democrats have voted to legalize abortion up until a point of birth, spend $3.5 trillion that we don't have to entrench their own power, and make women sign up for the draft.
In fairness to Democrats, on this last point, 135 House Republicans joined the Democrats in preparing America's daughters to strap on combat boots.
The Biden administration has admitted to releasing at least 10,000 illegal aliens into the country in just the past week.
And that's the number they're admitting.
So the real number is almost certainly higher.
And even the liberal media are admitting that the Capitol riot, supposedly the gravest insurrection in U.S. history, was orchestrated, at least in part, by the feds.
I never believed the lying leftists or the naive squishes who insisted that the Biden administration would govern in a moderate way, that it would represent some kind of return to normalcy.
But this degree of radicalism is shocking to even the most hard-nosed conservatives.
And the biggest gut punch of all is how many self-styled conservatives are helping to push the agenda along.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
My favorite comment on Friday is from Jeff the Hokie, who says the Border Patrol needs to say these aren't horses.
They identify as cows.
Wow, what a genius strategy.
Because the Biden administration is now saying that the Border Patrol can't use horses.
Even in the areas where the cars can't get to, they can't use horses because they don't want them to actually arrest the illegal aliens coming over.
So that's fine.
They're not using horses.
They're using cows.
They're using equine beings that identify as Volvos.
Great idea.
Really good idea.
You know, when you want to protect the most basic rights that we've got, when you want to protect the most basic right to life, I would strongly recommend you check out 40 Days for Life.
When the topic of abortion comes up, the left has a lot of talking points.
Some of them are morally confused.
Some of them are factually confused.
They're just simply not true.
If you are struggling on what to say or how to say it when abortion is the topic of the conversation, you need to check out a recent book.
It's called What to Say When, the complete new guide to discussing abortion.
Since its release, it has already been a number one Amazon new release and a number two Amazon bestseller.
It's already on its second printing.
It's an easy book to use.
It tells you what to say, what not to say, and its proven arguments have worked with just about everybody.
People on the fence, abortion supporters.
These arguments have even worked on Planned Parenthood workers.
Go check it out today, What to Say When, the complete new guide to discussing abortion, how to change minds and convert hearts in a brave new world.
You can go to Amazon, or you can get it directly from 40 Days for Life at 40daysforlife.com.
With Republicans like the ones we've got, who needs Democrats?
Who needs Democrats when you've got Republicans who are Much more radically left-wing or much more inclined to go along with radically left-wing ideas than even the Democrats were five or ten years ago.
Key example here.
The House of Representatives just passed a $768 billion defense bill.
This comes up all the time.
It's the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act.
And it's always somewhat controversial because it's very expensive and some of the money is going to some wars that we're in or some aspect of the military that the Libs don't like or that the conservatives don't like.
Okay, that's fine.
And then they always argue about it and then they end up passing the NDAA every single time.
This year was a little bit different because this year the NDAA included a requirement for women to register for the military draft.
181 Democrats voted for this bill.
Okay, I'm not surprised about that.
The logic of the Democrats is such that they are going to make women, the daughters of the United States, sign up for the military draft, be drafted into war to go die to protect the men.
I don't know.
I don't know what they're thinking.
But the most scandalous and dispiriting part of it Is that 135 Republicans voted for this as well.
This is absolutely unacceptable.
Absolutely unacceptable.
I understand.
I have some sympathy for the Republicans who thought this is a tough vote in my district.
They're going to run ads saying I don't support the military.
Oh, who cares?
It's not a big deal.
Oh, women are going to have to sign up for the draft, but they probably won't be drafted.
Hey, actually, it's equality.
Men and women are exactly the same.
It's no big deal.
Don't It's a huge deal.
It's a huge deal.
This is absolutely unacceptable.
This is evidence of very, very poor judgment on the part of these Republicans.
Thankfully, there were some Republicans who recognized this, notably Chip Roy, who tends to be correct on a whole lot of things.
Chip Roy explained why, despite the many attractive features of voting for this bill, he just couldn't do it.
I thank the gentleman from Louisiana.
I thank the chairman.
I thank my colleagues for joining us here today.
You're going to hear a lot over the next coming days from our Republican colleagues about why we should all be in lockstep in supporting the NDAA. Now, everybody here on this stage, certainly speaking for myself, we support our men and women in uniform.
I represent Port Sam Houston.
I represent the Army Futures Command.
I represent about 80,000 veterans.
I stand alongside our men and women in uniform, whatever the pay raises and whatever material supplies that they need in order to carry out their job.
But what I do not support is blindly supporting legislation that is critically flawed at its core because of, oh, we're in the minority.
Look, right now today, if you vote for the NDAA, you are voting to draft our daughters.
There is no other position you can take.
The current law of the land does not have a requirement that our daughters be drafted.
Okay?
If this NDAA is passed and signed into law, then our daughters will be required to sign up in selective service and make themselves available for the draft.
That's it.
That's it.
To me, this is a line in the sand.
There are a lot of Freedom Caucus members there with him.
You'll notice Marjorie Taylor Greene is standing to his right.
I know people say, well, Marjorie Greene, she's said kooky things.
She acts in sometimes an eccentric way.
Yeah, that's sure.
That's totally true.
I agree with that.
She has said kooky things.
At least Marjorie Taylor Greene recognizes that it's unacceptable to draft your daughters.
And a lot of fancy Republicans who went to really fancy schools and they're very urbane and they're very witty, a lot of them think it's perfectly fine to draft your daughters.
So if you're asking me who's the real kook here, I'm going to have to go with the people who think it's a good idea to make the Daughters of America strap on combat boots.
And actually I think Marjorie Greene is the reasonable one here.
Absolutely.
If you don't stand up for this as a conservative, I don't know what you stand up for.
I don't know what you represent.
I don't know what your values are.
Insane.
And by the way, I've heard a line of argument on this where they'll say, sometimes you'll hear this from kind of cheeky conservatives, they'll say, look, the feminists want equality, well that's equality, okay?
Hey, what, we're going to totally, look, this is going to totally own the libs, because what's going to happen is, they said they wanted equality when it comes to pay, and when it comes to certain political rights, and when it comes to professional life, but now they need equality when they need to go get shot at overseas.
That'll show them.
I don't want to show them.
What?
Come on!
But that's what they wanted.
I don't care what they wanted.
Since when do I care what feminists want?
Since when do I care what radical leftists want?
I don't.
I care about what's right and wrong in our public policy.
And this is wrong.
And I don't think it's a wise idea to give in to the libs on the thing that they're clamoring for just to show them down the line when our daughters are being strafed by jihadis that it's actually bad.
Let's just stop it right now.
Let's just have some...
Spinal fortitude here and maybe some other anatomical type of fortitude here to say no.
Contrary to popular propaganda, men and women actually are different.
And a nation that sends its women to war to fight and die for the men is a sick nation.
That's not just.
That's not right at all.
Speaking of women's issues, the House on Friday passed legislation that would make abortion a national right.
Now, I know that abortion is already legal.
At the national level, but that's only because the Supreme Court invented a pretend imaginary constitutional right to abortion in Roe v.
Wade.
It was affirmed in Planned Parenthood v.
Casey.
But it's not actually a law.
So because now there are these wonderful work around pro-life laws in Texas, there's one coming up in Florida, there are going to be others, I hope.
The House Democrats passed a law saying that, and look, this law is so preposterous, I don't see any way in which it's upheld.
Unless, of course, the libs just really clamp down on their power.
They throw logic out the window, which they've been known to do before.
But what they're saying is that now there's a national right to an abortion up until the moment of birth everywhere in the country.
Okay, this is called the Women's Health Protection Act.
It doesn't protect the health of the female babies who are being slaughtered, roughly half of the babies, but it's the Women's Health Protection Act.
It was approved by the House 218 to 211, so this at least was more of a party line vote.
It faces tough odds in the Senate.
I don't think it's going to go anywhere in the Senate, but who knows?
You know, it's up in the air.
The way that they're thinking about this law is more interesting than the law itself because the measure states that healthcare providers have a statutory right to provide and patients a right to receive abortion services without these limitations.
Okay, so this is from the bill.
Since 1973, the Supreme Court repeatedly has recognized the constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability and to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability where it is necessary, where it is necessary, in the good faith medical judgment of someone whose job it is to kill babies, of the treating healthcare professional for the preservation of the life or health of the person who is pregnant.
Not of the woman, because it's not women anymore.
It's the person who is pregnant.
The good faith medical judgment of someone whose job it is to kill babies.
I don't think they have a lot of good faith.
What this does in practice, even though it says there might be some limits on that, in practice it says there is no limit.
Because if the mother says, you know, I might get a little depressed if I have to have this baby, then you can kill the baby up until the moment of birth.
Second part, many abortion-specific restrictions do not confer any health or safety benefits on the patient.
Well, it confers some benefits on one of the patients, namely the baby who's being killed.
And third, this is the craziest part.
I know.
That's saying quite a lot, given how crazy the rest of the bill is.
It says, Congress has the authority to enact this act to protect abortion services pursuant to, A, its powers under the Commerce Clause of Section 8 of Article 1, and its powers under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment.
Okay, so the reason this is so crazy is...
Congress should have no right to do this.
This is not an interstate matter.
This should be a matter for the states, right?
At least according to the Commerce Clause.
But they're saying, well, because abortion exists in multiple states, it's interstate commerce so we can regulate it.
But then the craziest part is they cite the 14th Amendment, equal protection under the law.
What about the equal protection of the babies?
Actually, the 14th Amendment makes a strong argument for banning abortion nationwide, but they don't care.
This is the radicalism that we are talking about.
This would have been unthinkable in the Democratic Party even, I don't know, four or five years ago.
It would have been unthinkable.
But that's how far the country's moved to the left.
And they've done it with some mild opposition from Republicans, but largely they've done it with the tepid support of the so-called conservatives and Republicans.
You know...
When you want to protect your country, your community, your life, and your identity, especially your identity, I would strongly recommend you check out LifeLock.
Do you feel safe when you're browsing the internet?
You should not.
If you do feel safe, if you don't realize there's even a problem, then you especially should not, okay?
Just to use one example, payment apps like Venmo, Cash App, and others.
They make payments easy, but you might want to adjust those privacy settings to prevent them from sharing your personal information.
A recent report found that payment apps share user data with third parties, including banks, fraud monitoring services, some even share it with marketing firms.
It's very important to understand how cybercrime and identity theft are affecting our lives.
Every single day, every second almost of every day, we put our information at risk on the internet in an instant.
A cybercriminal could harm what's yours, your finances, your credit, your reputation.
Good thing there's LifeLock.
LifeLock helps detect a wide range of identity threats, such as your social security number for sale on the dark web.
You've got access to a dedicated restoration specialist if you become a victim.
No one can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses, but you can keep what's yours with LifeLock by Norton.
Join now.
Save up to 25% off your first year at LifeLock.com slash Knowles.
That's LifeLock.com slash Knowles for 25% off.
There's a really touching story that's come out of New York, and it's a really touching story that I think shows us a new angle on one of our biggest national problems.
Here's the story.
Two newborn twins were abandoned in an alleyway, wrapped in brown paper bags, and killed in a rat-infested alleyway in the Bronx.
Really, really sad story.
Cops found the babies.
They just came out, just newborn babies, abandoned in an alleyway.
This does happen more often than people would recognize.
And so what the cops decide to do, around 20 cops in New York, they held a funeral for the babies.
They did this at Eternity Funeral Service in the Williams Bridge section of the Bronx.
They named the babies Zeke and Zane.
Zeke, short for Ezekiel, means God's strength.
Zane means God's gift.
And it was a really beautiful ceremony, okay, where these two babies had a funeral.
Not by the parents, obviously, who were degenerates and killers, but by these cops.
You know, we're told the cops are very evil, you know, and they're racist and vague.
Well, this is a beautiful, beautiful scene.
And one of the lieutenants says, I've never seen a case like this.
These were two newborn babies who were full term and then put in garbage bags and thrown in a rat-infested backyard.
Their little bodies had fractures.
This has weighed heavy on every detective that has worked on the case.
Wow.
Yeah, it's a horrific case.
Horrific case.
But it's not particularly horrific.
The reason it's not particularly horrific is that this happens every single day in this country.
And it doesn't just happen once a day in this country.
It happens, on average, 2,362 times each day.
The little newborn baby abandoned in the alleyway and killed.
What do we say?
One day after birth?
Maybe on the day of his birth?
If that baby had been killed...
A few hours earlier, that would have been not just tolerated, that would have been not just protected by law, that would have not just been conducted in a medical facility with some guy who has an MD doing the butchery, it would have been lauded and celebrated as a woman's right, as reproductive health, as a beautiful, wonderful expression of liberty and freedom and emancipation and gender equality.
If you want to think about the abortion issue, because I know that there are apparently a lot more squishes in the Republican Party, and they're a lot squishier even than I thought that they were.
Just recognize that abortion is this.
Abortion is...
It's not even throwing your kid into an alleyway in the Bronx.
It's worse than that.
At least those kids got to breathe the air and live a little life for, I don't know, an hour or so.
With abortion, you don't even get that.
You get, with the true, to use a popular phrase, banality of evil, you get a medical doctor in a fluorescent lit room performing the butchery to the adulation and applause of the population.
Really puts that in perspective.
2,362 times per day.
And the cops, the cops can't get over this.
These are, you know, this is their job is to see awful, terrible things, the underbelly of society.
And they see this crime in particular and they say, oh my God, this is so heinous that we're going to throw a funeral.
We're going to actually take our time and our money and go out and recognize that we need some ritual mourning for this.
That's how bad this crime is.
Happens almost 2,400 times a day.
Speaking of kids, the New York Times.
Oh, the New York Times.
The New York Times has a kids section.
This is news to me.
I do not read the New York Times.
I don't make a habit of that.
Fewer and fewer people read the New York Times each day.
So they have a kids section.
And it's got a little cartoon of a kid on there.
And it says, and by the way, it's not a kids section like it's for adults to read about kids.
It's the New York Times for kids.
You know, adults, don't read this section.
It says, what school is actually like this year, according to 29 kids who they interviewed?
And on the cover, it's got this kid, his name is Arnov, alleged, it's a cartoon, his name is Arnov, he's 13, he's in Pennsylvania.
And the quote coming out of his mouth says, I think the COVID-19 regulation should be stricter.
Cases are already rising.
Do you think that this is what the students of America are saying?
Do you think?
No.
This is such pathetic propaganda.
Pravda in the Soviet Union could not have done better.
Could not have done a more ridiculous job of propaganda.
It's like, the New York Times reports from our nation's classrooms, kids want more homework.
Oh, yes.
No, we've been talking to all of the kids, and they want more homework.
And they don't want dessert or recess anymore.
Yes, yes, that's what our...
No, I don't think so.
I think the kids hate the stupid masks.
I think they hate the vax mandates.
And I think that they have, in many ways, a justified resent of their teachers and administrators and even parents who are going along with this stuff.
Okay?
But the New York Times...
Just showing the left-wing impulse to exploit children for their own political gain and how heinous that is.
I've called that out for a long time.
Called it out on television one time, too.
And the left doesn't like it when you call them out on that sort of thing.
Now, speaking of the New York Times, the New York Times has a little piece out here that is probably not going to be noticed by a lot of people, but it should be noticed because it gives away the whole game.
It's a piece acknowledging that on January 6th, the worst insurrection in American history, that event was coordinated, at least in part, by the feds.
Do you remember there was the Justice for January 6th rally?
That happened a week or two ago.
And the only people who showed up were the press and undercover feds.
It was really the FBI picnic, is what I referred to it as.
There were no actual people there, you know?
So, here's the headline from the Times.
Among those who marched into the Capitol on January 6th, an FBI informant Gee, you don't say.
You don't say.
I mean, anyone with two brain cells called this, basically from the very beginning.
They said, you know, I bet the feds were involved in this.
This seems like a total setup.
A member of the far-right Proud Boys texted his FBI handler during the assault, but maintained that the group had no plan in advance to enter the Capitol and disrupt the election certification.
You're seeing images come out now, videos of the way that the alleged insurrectionists entered the Capitol.
It was actually, in many cases, somewhat orderly.
In many cases, they were actually let into the Capitol.
We know that the chief accusation against the Capitol rioters that day was that they killed a cop.
It just didn't happen.
Even the New York Times later had to admit that that was a lie.
So, yes, this is what happens.
The feds do this sort of thing.
And to me the story here is not that the New York Times is admitting this.
It's not that the feds actually were involved in this.
I think sensible people already knew that.
To me the real story is...
What are they not telling us?
If they're going to acknowledge this degree of Fed coordination, what are they not acknowledging?
What's the next shoe to drop?
What's out there?
It seems to me that almost every, not everything, but almost everything we were told about January 6th was a lie, was a lie and just was not true.
And speaking of that day, I've got to get to my absolute Would I say my favorite or my least favorite of the squishy Republicans?
The squishy Republican court jester conservative par excellence, Liz Cheney.
Liz Cheney just did an interview on 60 Minutes.
Now, I will sum up most of the interview.
Because it was a long interview.
It touched on a broad array of topics.
It touched on, oh my gosh, it touched on gay marriage.
It touched on transgenderism.
It touched on all these various issues.
The main thrust of the interview was this.
The Capitol, January 6th.
That was basically, I just saved you a long time of watching that interview.
But just to show you, How much further it goes than that?
They then get to the question of marriage.
Now, Liz Cheney very famously supports the traditional definition of marriage.
The definition of marriage that has existed everywhere, at all times, everywhere on earth, throughout all of human history.
Until about five minutes ago here, in the West.
Now, Liz Cheney says, absolutely not.
She was wrong.
Your sister's gay, she's married, she has children...
And in 2013, you came out against same-sex marriage while your father went the other way.
And it was looked upon as courageous when he did that.
How do you defend what you did?
I was wrong.
I was wrong.
I love my sister very much.
I love her family very much.
And I was wrong.
It's a very personal issue and very personal for my family.
I believe that my dad was right.
And my sister and I have had that conversation.
Wow.
I was not expecting that.
You weren't expecting that?
I'm waiting for her to adopt every other lib position too.
What Liz Cheney did just here is so much worse than just changing her position on this issue because she is implicitly, not so implicitly, condemning Republicans for holding the normal view on this issue that everyone's held everywhere else.
It's just one more bit of evidence.
That the Republican Party is rotten to the core, which we'll get to in one second.
First, though, you've got to check out Ben's show today.
Ben's going to be talking about how Biden's got all these awful budgetary issues and his awful slander against the border patrol.
Also, you've got to subscribe and start listening to Morning Wire on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen to your podcast.
Leave a five-star review.
If you like what you hear, we'll be right back with a lot more.
Liz Cheney just came out on 60 Minutes to say she was wrong about redefining marriage, that when she's, she opposed redefining marriage to include same-sex monogamous unions.
Her father even supported redefining marriage.
And, you know, it was a contentious issue in the Republican Party.
And her sister is a lesbian.
And so this is, that complicates things.
And she just said, I was wrong.
I was wrong.
I love my sister.
This is personal.
I was so wrong.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
This is so much worse than just advocating for defining marriage.
Because what Liz Cheney is doing here is buying into the lie that people who believe that sexual difference has something to do with marriage, maybe a lot to do with marriage, are somehow irrational or bigoted.
This is so much worse than saying, look, we have a difference of opinion on this.
I think even though marriage has always meant one thing, I think we should radically redefine marriage, and here are my reasons why, and I understand that you have your reasons why, but here's why I think I'm right.
What she's saying is, no, I was wrong.
Oh, I was so wrong.
My dad was right.
I love my sister, and what I did was, implicitly she's saying, what I did was hateful toward my sister.
It was cruel to my sister.
It's not.
It's not.
Opposition to gay marriage or same-sex marriage or redefining marriage is not...
Grounded in people hating gay people or an irrational animus, as some judges have said, it's based on a simple conviction held by all people everywhere that marriage as an institution, whatever it's going to mean in whatever social context,
with polygamy even in some cultures or without polygamy or with the toleration of divorce or without the toleration of divorce, whatever variation on it you're going to say, that sexual difference The difference between men and women has something to do with that.
That's not irrational.
That's not bigoted.
That's not hateful.
That is quite simple and quite obvious, if you ask me.
Now there's this new idea that has arisen in the last 40-50 years, very slowly, that men and women are not different, that men and women are, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same.
And so as a result of that logic, you get movements like second-wave feminism, you get movements like the gay marriage movement, and you get movements like transgenderism.
And I see how those movements arise out of the claim that men and women are exactly the same.
But we disagree with that claim.
And it's not hateful, and it's not bigoted, and it's certainly not irrational to pretend that men and women, or to acknowledge that men and women are not the same.
Frankly, I think it's irrational to suggest that they are the same.
Okay?
So Liz Cheney has not just changed her opinion on a political issue.
She has gutted the central core of, in any way, a reasonably conservative view of the world.
And she is smearing her fellow Republicans, as she is wont to do.
But she goes even further, by the way.
At least she has the integrity to go further.
She follows this radical idea to its radical conclusion, which is she seems to be upset that Republicans are not embracing radical transgender ideology, too.
This is an issue that we have to recognize as human beings, that we need to work against discrimination of all kinds.
In our country, in our state, we were at an event a few nights ago and there was a young woman who said she doesn't feel safe sometimes because she's transgender and nobody should feel unsafe.
Freedom means freedom for everybody.
What?
Does anybody understand what that word salad means?
She goes, we need to fight all forms of discrimination.
Including transgender discrimination.
Because some people feel unsafe.
I have no idea what that means.
They feel unsafe and that's why we need to abolish the legal distinction between men and women and let men go into the women's bathroom.
What about the women who feel unsafe when men go into their bathroom?
What about the little girls who are at the changing room at the public pool who feel unsafe when grown men walk in there?
Well, but the grown men feel like women.
And they are women.
And we need to...
Freedom means freedom forever.
What about the freedom of the little girl to not change in front of a grown dude?
What about that freedom?
Is that a freedom?
No.
It's only freedom in the liberal, leftist direction.
This is...
Behold your principled republicans.
This is what we're told.
That the Liz Cheneys of the world and the Squishes, the Squish Caucus, they are the principled, dignified Republicans in the traditional Republican.
not this crazy, irrational Trump kind of Republican way.
They're the rational ones who think that men and women are exactly the same.
They're the rational ones who spend all of their time attacking fellow Republicans.
And they're the rational ones who are stumping for Joe freaking Biden, the most radical presidential administration we've ever had in our country's history.
Because they're so dignified and rational.
They're the true conservatives.
With Republicans like this woman and the people who support her, we don't need Democrats.
There's no difference.
It's like men and women are the same.
Republicans and Democrats are the same when you look at people like this woman.
Pathetic.
And you'll always hear that it's the Marjorie Greens of the world who are the kooks.
They're the threat to the republic.
I don't know.
At least Marjorie Green recognizes we shouldn't draft women.
Liz Cheney, by the way, voted to draft women.
Of course she did.
Of course she did.
She just admitted there's no difference between men and women in her view.
Her mistaken view.
Pathetic stuff.
Pathetic stuff.
To use a phrase from Ronald Reagan, this is a time for choosing, folks.
Which way, Western man?
Which way, American?
Are we going to go the Liz Cheney route, or are we going to preserve any semblance of political opposition to radical, liberal agendas?
Jen Psaki.
Speaking of feckless Republicans, Jen Psaki is accusing Republicans of not offering any solutions to To the immigration crisis.
Yeah, they're really good at criticizing Joe Biden over the border, but what are their solutions?
There are a lot of Republicans out there giving speeches about how outraged they are about the situation at the border.
Not many who are putting forward solutions or steps that we could take.
So we're a little tired of the speeches.
We'd like to partner on solutions and working together to address this problem that has not been partisan in the past.
Where are your solutions, Republicans?
Come on, give me one.
Name me one.
Okay, build the wall.
Uh, okay, well give me two.
Um, alright, uh, deport the illegal aliens.
Uh, okay, Republicans, well give me three.
Um, uh, Stop giving them government IDs.
Stop giving them government benefits.
Tax their remittances.
Maybe even revoke birthright citizenship.
Maybe defund sanctuary cities and sanctuary states.
Maybe require refugees to apply for asylum in the first safe country that they enter rather than just going through those countries to the United States.
I don't know.
How many more?
What is that?
That's like seven, eight concrete policy ideas.
How many more do you want?
Well, what?
You just don't...
Give me a real one, though, guys.
Come on, give me...
I think we're the only people who are proposing any solution to the border, and I think the people who are not proposing solutions are the Democrats, and they're doing so not merely because they're incompetent, but because they don't want to solve the problem at the border.
Actually, the open border is their solution.
It's a solution to a political problem that Americans don't want these foreign nationals flooding over here, among other aspects of their radical agenda.
So the solution is flood the country with people who are much more likely to vote for us.
Total projection.
As is often the case, the left will accuse the right of the things that the left is doing.
The most transparent example of this is colluding with the Russians, right?
The left has spent 100 years in this country, just about, colluding with the Russians.
Let's be fair.
Let's call it, I don't know, 70, 80 years.
Taking the side of the communists in Russia.
And then 2016 rolls around.
They say the Republicans are colluding with the Russians.
You're the ones.
You're the people.
And actually, really, it does go up to 100 years.
Do you remember the Russian reset from Hillary Clinton?
Do you remember Barack Obama making a shady deal that was caught on a hot mic saying, don't worry, I'm going to go soft on Russia.
I just got to get through my election.
I got to lie to the American people.
So it is.
It does go almost exactly 100 years.
But you, Republicans, are colluding.
They do this all the time.
And they're doing it here.
You have no solutions on immigration.
We're the only people with solutions.
I just rattled off, just here very quickly in the show, seven, eight solutions.
If you gave me ten more minutes, I could probably give you another half dozen solutions.
But they don't want any of them.
And they're deflecting not just on what are our solutions, they're deflecting even on Joe Biden acknowledging the problem.
Peter Doocy, one of the few journalists remaining in America, asks Jen Psaki, hey, is the president, you know, at the midst of this intense border crisis, is he considered, like, going down there and looking at it?
Why hasn't President Biden ever visited the southern border?
What would you like him to do at the southern border and what impact do you think that would have on the policies?
Why doesn't he want to go?
I don't think it's an issue of wanting to go.
I think it's an issue of what's most constructive to address what we see as a challenging situation at the border in a broken immigration system.
And his view is the most constructive role we can play It's by helping to push immigration reform forward, helping reform the broken policies of the last several years, and listening to his team of advisors who have been to the border multiple times about what the path forward should look like.
So why is this the one crisis, then, that he thinks he can manage better from here, without having seen it, than going to the southern border?
I can assure you the president is well aware of what the challenges are in our broken immigration system, something he watched closely over the last four years.
So he's watched this problem closely for the past four years.
That's not quite true.
It's partially true.
He's actually watched this problem closely for the last 50 years.
Joe Biden has been in the government at the national level now for almost exactly 50 years.
And the problem has gotten worse and worse and worse and worse, as have most problems since Joe Biden has been in office, in the Senate, than the Vice President.
Now, apparently the President, we don't see him very much.
So he's not going to go down there.
He knows what we need to do.
Okay.
What is it?
You just said you don't have any answers.
And then you tried to deflect and said the Republicans don't have any answers.
He's not going down there because he's trapped between a rock and a hard place.
The radical left-wing base, the arch-progressives, want to keep the border open because they hate America and they don't think America deserves to be a nation.
The Democratic operatives want to keep the border open because they think they're flooding the country with their future voters.
And very likely they're right, depending on which country we're talking about.
And then you've got the more moderate types who broke for Biden in some places.
They want to seal up the border.
But he can't appease both of those groups, so he's going to, or all three of those groups, so he's going to back away.
This is why he gave Kamala Harris control over the border.
Do you remember?
It was one of the most vicious things I've ever seen a president do to a vice president.
He said, you're in charge of this now.
He's setting her up completely for failure, because obviously those two do not like each other very much.
She opened her presidential campaign by accusing Joe Biden of being a racist.
Okay, I don't think there's any love lost between those two.
And what has Kamala Harris done?
She hasn't gone down there either.
Because the Democrats are intrinsically incapable of solving the problem at the border.
Because the incentives are too screwed up.
They can't possibly do it.
All of the incentives are aligned for them to do nothing.
And in as much as there is an incentive to do one thing or the other, it's to keep the border even more wide open.
So there is nothing that a Democrat can do.
Meanwhile, you know things are bad because the administration is admitting that they're releasing at least 10,000 illegal aliens just last week into the interior of the country.
Of the 17,400 that weren't deported back or didn't return on their own to Mexico, how many of them either, well, first, how many have been released into the U.S.? They're released on conditions, and approximately, I think it's about 10,000 or so, 12,000 have been released.
Yes.
And of the 5,000 that are still in process?
We will make determinations whether they will be returned to Haiti based on our public health and public interest authorities.
So are we talking about a total of 12,000 or could it be even higher?
It could be even higher.
The number that are returned could be even higher.
What we do is we follow the law as Congress has passed it.
So that's the most egregious lie we've heard all show.
What we do is follow the law.
No, if you followed the law, you'd deport all of these people.
But you're not following the law at all.
You would enforce the law.
You wouldn't punish your border patrol for enforcing the law.
I actually love this question from Chris Wallace.
He says, how many people?
Mayorkas, the head of Homeland Security, says 10,000 to 12,000.
Chris Wallace says, that's the total?
10,000 to 12,000?
Or could it be a little higher?
Well, yeah, it could be a little higher.
It's just like the New York Times saying, yeah, there were some feds involved in January 6th.
If the head of Biden's DHS is telling us that he released 10,000 to 12,000 into the interior of the country, you know that the real number is much, much higher than that.
Probably multiples higher than that.
Speaking of numbers, the Democrats, in addition to drafting women into the military with the help of Republicans, and in addition to legalizing or attempting to legalize abortion up until the moment of birth nationwide, They're also about to spend $3.5 trillion on some budget madness.
This is an unpopular type of bill, but it's so complicated that people probably are not going to be paying a ton of close attention to it.
It used to be that when Congress would pass bills, they were relatively narrow bills and they would pass a lot of them.
But now, because Congress doesn't really govern in a particularly direct way, they just give a lot of money to the executive agencies and then the agencies create all the rules that govern us.
You know, all the alphabet agencies and all those, the FDA and OSHA and all of these various regulatory groups.
So what they do is they just pass one big bill.
So this is one of these gigantic omnibus bills.
It's a $3.5 trillion budget bill.
Pelosi asked about this on ABC, and she gave an answer that is shocking to many, but I actually think it was brilliant.
She said, don't worry about the numbers, worry about the values.
This will be paid for.
So when some say, oh, well, what about inflation?
It will be paid for.
And that's the beauty of it, by having those in our economy and society who have not paid their fair share paying their fair share.
So again, the Senate and the House, those who are not in full agreement with the president's rate, let's see what our value...
Let's not talk about numbers and dollars.
Let's talk about values.
So, when she says that the bill's paid for, that's just a lie.
I mean, that's preposterous.
Not even the rosiest sort of optimism on the way these numbers are going to shake out will suggest that it's paid for.
But put that aside for a second.
That's just typical left-wing lying about budget bills.
What she says here...
Let's see what our values...
Let's not talk about numbers and dollars.
Let's talk about values.
That is brilliant and that is right.
And Republicans should take notes.
Republicans, lawmakers, especially the confused ones that just voted to draft women, take out your pen.
Watch Nancy Pelosi take some notes.
You should not be talking about numbers and dollars and cents.
You should be talking about values.
The Republicans who went along with that...
Defense Authorization Act.
I know what they were thinking.
They were thinking, well, look, overall, 99% of this defense bill is fine and, you know, the numbers shake out pretty well and we got to pay our troops and we don't want to be accused of not giving a raise to our troops and that won't look good and then I might dip in the polls for a little bit and that might not be nice and there will be a campaign.
You're thinking in dollars and cents, folks.
Think in values.
Think in values.
If the situation had been reversed, I know this is a silly hypothetical, and it's an overused one, but I actually think it's kind of illuminating here.
If the situation had been reversed, I think what the Democrats would have done is they would have renamed this National Defense Authorization Act, they would have renamed it the Draft Women, Make Women Die in Combat Act.
And they would go on TV and they would have the protection of the mainstream media and they would say, yeah, Republicans are trying to make us vote for the Make Women Die in Combat Act.
And we think that's a bad idea so we're going to oppose it.
And they would have made the battle about values, about right and wrong, about justice.
They wouldn't have made it about the little itty-bitty details of the defense authorization bill and raising the money here and this and that.
They would have made it about values and they would have won.
But we don't win because we don't understand that.
Because you've got the left, which is offering an actual moral vision.
It's an immoral vision for the country, but it involves moral arguments.
And then you've got some right-wingers, we try to do it on this show, who try to put politics in those terms as well.
And then you've got, I would say, probably the majority of elected Republicans.
Not the majority of Republican voters, but the majority of elected Republicans.
Who just think in these utilitarian terms, like eggheads with a spreadsheet.
Who say, well, actually, you know, but if we cut taxes, that'll increase receipts to the federal government.
But actually, who cares?
Who cares?
I don't care about that.
I don't care about that when the actual business of the government right now is sending women into freaking combat.
You idiots.
You myopic, narrow-minded, materialist, We're craven idiots.
Democrats would not have made this mistake.
I don't even know if it's a mistake.
You want to talk about values?
Before we go, I have to get to this.
PETA. The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals...
An ironically named group because they actually kill a lot of animals.
They are involved in the killing of animals, but that's neither here nor there because there aren't enough people to take care of them.
Anyway, neither here nor there, at least for this ad.
The people for the ethical treatment of animals are...
I just put out a video...
The video was trying to persuade people that if you go vegan, you'll have a better sex life.
It's better for your blood flow or whatever.
And so the video, I mean, we've only got about a minute and a half left here, so if you've got young children watching, listening is fine, but watching, maybe close their eyes for a second.
It's a video of people molesting fruit.
Take a listen.
It says, want to spice things up in the bedroom?
These people would like a kiwi and a pepper.
Chili peppers will have you hot and heavy in no time.
And a squirt of OJ can increase blood flow to important organs.
I'm going to look away from this.
Get a load of the zinc to increase your libido.
Avocados.
Well, this is disgusting.
Will give you the stamina to keep going.
Go vegan.
Your partner will thank you.
Sounds like molesting a cantaloupe.
And now someone lay this.
Stop it.
Turn it off.
This is the values that we're looking at now.
First of all, it's not very persuasive to me when we're told to adopt our ethical system And we're being told that by people who are molesting fruit.
That doesn't seem like I want to adopt their ethical system.
But this is a lot.
This actually has to do with the political strategy of the left.
What the left is doing.
They always make these jokes.
Like, well, if you oppose our views, you probably don't have enough sex.
You're an incel.
Or you have small genitalia.
Or you pick up enough chicks.
Or you don't...
I don't know, whatever.
It always comes down to sex.
And the reason they do this...
It's because their view of liberty is one of licentiousness and it just comes down to lust and, you know, whoever you can sleep with and just doing a bunch of weird sex stuff to appease your own appetites.
That's their view.
I mean, that's what they do.
They enslave people by...
By enslaving them to their own lusts and getting them out of their rational mind so that they can think that a video of someone molesting fruit is somehow persuasive.
What we are looking for is a higher form of liberty, okay?
And that's a lot different.
You're not going to get to that exalted spirit of freedom that Edmund Burke talked about if you are merely some egghead idiot looking at a spreadsheet and making some craven calculations.
Listen to Nancy Pelosi.
Please take notes.
You've got to talk about values.
You've got to talk about justice.
You've got to talk about true and false and right and wrong.
Otherwise, we're all going to end up like Liz Cheney.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
See you tomorrow.
If you enjoyed this episode, 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.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Our technical director is Austin Stevens.
Supervising producer, Mathis Glover.
Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Associate producer, Justine Turley.
Audio mixer, Mike Coromina.
And hair and makeup by Cherokee Heart.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Today on the Ben Shapiro Show, this week marks three big budgetary issues for Joe Biden.
He's got a problem on every single one of them.
Plus, Joe Biden continues to slander Border Patrol.
