Joe Biden demands Democrats rewrite our election laws; Ted Cruz corners the FBI on its involvement in the Capitol riot, and USA Today tries to normalize pedophilia.
Sign the petition to stop Biden’s vaccine mandate. Head to https://dailywire.com/donotcomply
DW members get special product discounts up to 20% off PLUS access to exclusive Daily Wire merch. Grab your Daily Wire merch here: https://utm.io/udZpp
My new book ’Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds,’ is now available wherever books are sold. Grab your copy today here: https://utm.io/udtMJ
Andrew Klavan's latest novel When Christmas Comes is now available on Amazon. Order in time for Christmas: https://utm.io/udW6u
Matt Walsh is now a self-acclaimed beloved children’s author. Reserve your copy of his new book here: https://utm.io/ud1Cb
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
The Democrats are trying to federalize our elections.
Right now, the states run the elections per the Constitution.
But the problem with that system is that sometimes Republicans win those elections, which the Democrats don't like very much.
So they have made it their number one legislative priority to end the filibuster, which will allow them to take over the elections and give themselves a major, if not a permanent, electoral advantage.
They don't have many very good arguments as to why we should do this, beyond their naked desire for power.
So, instead of making an argument as to why we need to completely upend our election system, they are resorting to the tried and true tactic of accusing anyone who opposes them of racism.
How do you want to be remembered?
At consequential moments in history, they present a choice.
Do you want to be on the side of Dr.
King or George Wallace?
Do you want to be on the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor?
Do you want to be on the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis?
This is the moment to decide to defend our elections, to defend our democracy.
Are you some sort of racist?
You want to be on the side of my good friends Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd, the exalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan?
Whoops.
I mean, if you don't want to completely upend our election system and give the ruling class in Washington, D.C. the ability to permanently enthrone itself in power, according to Joe Biden, then you are a vile racist.
Worthy of ostracism.
But unfortunately for Joe Biden, Biden is very old and he's been around for a very long time.
Since George Wallace was governor, in fact.
And back in the old days when he was palling around with those actual segregationists and Klansmen, Joe Biden used to make the opposite sort of arguments that he's making now.
And unfortunately for Joe Biden, we've got the video.
I'm Michael Knowles and this is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
My favorite comment yesterday is from UKish Enzir, who says, I'm 16 and my parents don't want me watching YouTube anymore because they think that you are misinformation.
They refuse to actually watch your show.
I can see that you're showing more of the experts than what the mainstream media does here in New Zealand.
Well, thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
I'm not surprised that your parents don't want you to watch the show.
Because they've never seen the show before.
So they have this vision of what a right-wing conservative show is like, and they don't want you to watch it.
If they actually did watch it, I suspect they would watch the show themselves, because we spend a lot of our time exposing the lies of the media that they are actually consuming.
You're clearly an intelligent person, curious, think for yourself, seek out the truth.
You should always seek out the truth, no matter what the authorities in your life tell you to do.
But you should also honor your father and mother.
So how do you reconcile these things?
Well, it's very simple.
If your parents say, I demand you, son, you cannot watch YouTube anymore because I don't want you watching that nasty Michael Knowles.
You can say, all right, mommy and daddy, I understand.
I am obedient.
I'm a good son.
And then just go download the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify or Stitcher or Google Play.
Maybe you go over, check it out on dailywire.com.
There are a lot of places you can get this show.
And then you honor your father and mother, but you make sure you get the truth as well.
And someday when your parents figure that out, this will be a kind of funny memory.
Hopefully by that time they'll already be full all-access subscribers.
And you can remember that wonderful memory.
When you want to cherish your memories forever and ever and ever, I would strongly recommend you check out Paint your life.
The simplest thing that you can do to your home to improve your day-to-day life, it's one thing, and a lot of people overlook it, put beautiful art on the walls.
We are...
Human beings, we have artistic longings.
We love beauty.
Put beautiful things on the walls.
It's going to make your life a lot better.
What if those beautiful things could be cherished memories from your life?
A cherished person, a pet, a place, some great picture that you all had.
With Paint Your Life, you can get that.
You can get a professional hand-painted portrait.
Created from any photo or multiple photos at an incredibly affordable price.
You can combine the photos.
They will work with you.
These world-class artists will work with you until every detail is perfect.
I had one made a year or two ago of my mother.
I bugged this artist until kingdom come about.
Well, I think the background should maybe be like this.
I know it's not like that in the picture, but this...
And they come out beautifully.
The art is incredibly beautiful.
I love it.
At PaintYourLife.com, there is no risk if you don't love the final painting.
Your money is refunded, guaranteed.
Right now is a limited time offer.
Get 20% off your painting.
That is 20% off in free shipping.
To get this special offer, text the word Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, to 64,000.
That's Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, to 64,000.
Paint Your Life.
Celebrate the moments that matter most.
Terms apply.
Available at PaintYourLife.com slash terms.
Again, text Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, to 64,000.
The Democrats, this is a two-part process, so I understand why it's a little bit confusing.
The Democrats want to take over the elections.
They can't take over the elections right now because even though they have a majority in the Senate and in the Congress, they only have a very slim majority.
So, in the Senate, because there's something called the filibuster, you need more than just a slim majority.
You need 60 votes to be able to actually push these really radical proposals through.
So, the Democrats need to end the filibuster.
Filibuster, long-standing Senate tradition.
But Joe Biden says it doesn't matter.
However you got to do it, this is our chance to really grab some power.
So, whatever you got to do, you need to end the filibuster.
Here's Joe Biden in his own words.
We should make no mistake.
This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power.
It is a fundamental power grab.
By the majority party?
Oh, whoopsie daisy, that was 17 years ago.
Sorry, that was back when Joe Biden was a senator and was arguing against getting rid of the filibuster because he said it was a naked grab of power, it was a threat to American democracy, would turn us into a banana republic.
But that was then and this is now.
That was when the Republicans were in power and wanted to do it.
And now, because the Democrats are in power, it's a completely different story.
Today, I'm making it clear, to protect our democracy, I support changing the Senate rules.
Whichever way they need to be changed to prevent a minority of senators from blocking action on voting rights.
When it comes to protecting majority rule in America, the majority should rule in the United States Senate.
I make this announcement with careful deliberation, recognizing the fundamental right to vote is a right from which all other rights flow.
Biden in 2005.
It's very important that we don't have simple majority rule.
That's not the way America is governed.
This is a bare naked power grab.
This is terrible.
This is a threat to our democracy.
Joe Biden in 2022.
We absolutely need bare majority rule in America.
If we don't have bare majority rule, as we haven't ever, if we don't change that all right now, then that would be a threat to our democracy.
That would be a terrible naked power grab.
And so, okay, right.
Joe Biden is not making any good faith arguments here.
He is, as he described 17 years ago, just trying to take power.
And he's using a lot of mealy-mouthed euphemisms to do it.
This is my favorite one that you're hearing right now from Democrats.
They say, we need action on voting rights.
We need action right now on voting rights.
What action do we need?
And why do we need that action?
What they mean by the action that we need on voting rights is we need to take away voter ID laws.
We need to make it easier for illegal aliens, for foreign citizens to vote in our elections.
We need to make it easier for Democrat operatives to cheat because they're just going to send out unsolicited mail-in ballots to everyone who's ever registered anywhere.
And you're going to have multiple ballots going to people at different addresses.
This is what happened in California just during this recent recall election.
People such as My colleagues here at the Daily Wire moved out of California.
Many of us said, do not send me a ballot.
What happens?
They send you a ballot anyway because widespread mail-ins are totally open to fraud.
Even Barack Obama admitted this just a few years ago.
Before the Democrats pivoted on it and tried to do it.
So they're pushing for specific actions that will not protect the right to vote but actually weaken the right to vote and weaken integrity in our system.
Don't forget, every time an ineligible voter votes, they're taking away a vote from an eligible voter.
So that's the what.
And what's crazier than the what is the why.
Why do we need action on voting rights?
Is there anyone in America right now who is an eligible voter who can't vote?
Who?
Show me the person.
It has never been easier to vote.
Frankly, it's a little too easy to vote.
That's really the problem.
You don't only need to vote on election day.
Virtually everywhere in the country you can vote on multiple days.
You can send in mail-in ballots if you want, if you request a mail-in ballot.
These days you can just get a mail-in ballot without even requesting it.
You'll have vote harvesters showing up to your door to take your ballots in many cases, certainly in Democrat precincts.
Who can't vote?
Show me the eligible voter who can't vote.
They can't do it.
And so they have to use these ridiculous euphemisms.
We need action.
It's a crisis.
What they're suggesting is that the Klan is outside of every polling place intimidating black voters.
Doesn't happen.
Doesn't happen anywhere in the country.
In fact, the only recent evidence of voter intimidation that we've seen was about 10 years ago during the Obama administration when the new Black Panther Party was showing up with guns outside of polling places.
So it was voter intimidation from the left.
You're not seeing it from far-right, fascist, neo, you're not seeing any of it.
That just doesn't exist.
So it's a completely made-up problem.
And then Democrats, through their propagandists in the media largely, are promoting that made-up problem so that they can come in with a solution, which is to give themselves a whole lot more power.
This reminds me a lot of what they've done with COVID.
Namely, they have set up a fantasy that justifies their policies, policies that might actually be justified if the premise were true in the first place.
If there were, Americans drop it perfectly Perfectly healthy, ordinary Americans dropping like flies.
It's not just very specific groups of people that we need to protect from the virus that we can protect, but everyone, all young people, healthy people, they were dropping like flies.
800,000, 900,000, a million, 100,000 kids on ventilators like Sonia Sotomayor said.
If that were true, that would justify a much more aggressive reaction to COVID. The problem is none of that's true.
It's just completely made up.
And so...
Their policies are not justified.
If millions and millions of eligible voters in America were being unjustly kept away from the polls, then that would justify action on voting rights.
But that's not happening.
It's just completely made up.
And so it doesn't justify that.
If we had a system of government in America that was supposed to be simple majority rule, then I guess that would justify protecting simple majority rule.
But that's not what we have in America.
We have an elaborate constitutional system of government that has a separation of powers and has checks and balances and has elements of...
It has elements of aristocracy.
It has elements of monarchy, for goodness sakes.
It has elements that are extremely democratic.
It has elements that are much less democratic.
It has an executive, a legislature, and a judiciary.
It has federal power, state power, which the feds are now trying to completely take away, and power that is reserved by the people.
And you've got a ruling class clumped in the feds, in the federal bureaucracy and in the federal government, that's trying to take all the power away from all of the other branches and all of the other power centers in the country.
And they might get away with it.
The only thing I've gotten away with recently is I've had the opportunity to get auto parts at a really reduced price, which is why I would strongly recommend you check out Rock Auto.
New year, everyone's busy, we gotta get back to work.
You probably are a little tight on time.
So do you want to spend your time...
Hanging with your family, getting your job done, fixing up things around the house?
Or do you want to spend your time waiting in line at the brick-and-mortar auto parts store?
Driving over there, waiting in line, getting peppered with a thousand questions about your car.
The guy goes in the back.
He doesn't have the part because there's too many parts these days to stock.
He comes back out.
He tells you you've got to order it.
You wait two weeks.
No, you don't want that.
You want to go to rockauto.com.
Right now, you go to rockauto.com, you see all the parts available for your car or truck.
The website is so simple to use.
Eve and I can do it.
You can get the same prices for pros as for do-it-yourselfers.
You're not going to have a ton of gimmicks all over the place.
Oh, you log in on Tuesday morning and you'll save 12%.
No, it's always reliably low prices from a family business.
Rockauto.com.
See all those parts available for your car or truck.
Then write Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, in there.
How did you hear about us, Box?
So they know that we sent you.
You want to talk about a Fed power grab.
You want to talk about a charade.
Let's talk about January 6th.
I'm not making any accusations.
I'm sorry, I didn't say it right.
Let's talk about January 6th.
The worst insurrection and terror attack in the history of the United States.
January 6th.
So, what we're told is that These Trump supporters showed up and they killed a bunch of cops and they nearly took down the government.
None of that was true.
The worst they did was cause some property damage and the horn hat guy danced around the Capitol.
But now we're learning the feds may have had an active role in promoting the riot at the Capitol.
Senator Ted Cruz yesterday was grilling the FBI in a Senate hearing, and he had a very simple question.
This should not be complicated.
It should have been a very simple answer.
Did any FBI agents or FBI informants commit acts of violence on January 6th?
Ms.
Sandberg, I want to turn to the FBI. How many FBI agents...
Or confidential informants actively participated in the events of January 6th?
Sir, I'm sure you can appreciate that I can't go into the specifics of sources and methods.
Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of January 6th?
Yes or no?
Sir, I can't answer that.
Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of violence on January 6th?
I can't answer that, sir.
Did any FBI agents or FBI informants actively encourage and incite crimes of violence on January 6th?
Sir, I can't answer that.
Sir, I can't answer.
But notice, the way she didn't answer changed.
And this does remind you, I don't say it just because he's a friend of mine and we host a podcast together, does remind you that Cruz is a very good lawyer.
Because you would think that the first question he would ask is, did the FBI have any involvement in January 6th?
That's the basic question to establish, but he doesn't.
The first question he asks is, how many feds were involved?
He's sort of talking past the sale here.
He's assuming that the feds certainly were involved, and then he's saying, so how many?
He says, how many FBI agents or confidential informants were involved in January 6th?
And what is her answer?
She says, sir, I can't reveal sources or methods.
So she's accepting the premise that the feds were involved in January 6th.
Because if no feds were involved, if the FBI really did not have its fingerprints on January 6th, then she could have just said we weren't involved.
That's fine.
That doesn't compromise any agents in the field.
That doesn't compromise any informants.
That's a very simple answer.
She certainly can give that answer.
We were not involved.
But she doesn't.
Because he assumes that they were, and she allows him to get away with it.
She allows him to play that trick, because he had a good hunch and he was right.
So she says, I can't reveal sources or methods.
He goes, okay.
Then he goes back.
He says, were there any involved?
Humming up, humming up, humming up.
I can't answer that.
Yeah, you can't answer it because you were involved.
That's why.
It's a big yes.
It's a big, fat yes.
So the question then becomes, what was the FBI's involvement?
Was the FBI's involvement just to gather some information?
That's a totally legal law enforcement tactic.
Or was the FBI's involvement to incite violence?
Was the FBI's involvement not just to gather information about what was already happening, but was the FBI's involvement to actually cause these events to happen in the first place?
Because the FBI is not allowed to do that.
No law enforcement agency is allowed to do that.
Slight parenthetical here.
I know Senator Cruz got in a lot of trouble last week because he used a dumb talking point from the Democrats to describe January 6th.
And a lot of people wrote in to me and they said, Michael, when are you going to toss this guy overboard?
When are you going to call out your friend Ted Cruz?
When are you going to go after your friend Ted Cruz?
And I haven't really, I certainly haven't on the show.
I was on C-SPAN over the weekend and I addressed it because I was asked about it on TV. But I'm happy to address it here, which is...
I generally don't endeavor to throw my friends under the bus.
I don't think anyone should endeavor to throw their friends under the bus.
There are some occasions where someone is doing something that is so bad that you've got to call them out for it, or if they're unrepentant, or if they're going down a really bad path.
Of course, then you have an obligation to justice to say, hey, this is wrong, and maybe you do it privately at first, but then you can do it publicly afterward.
But if someone makes a mistake and then recognizes it was a mistake and the wrong thing to do and then acknowledges that publicly, I don't think that conservatives or anyone else has the obligation or even really should just throw someone under the bus in a graceless way.
Because my argument at the time, I thought, look, not just because the guy's a Ted Cruz has been a good senator.
He's been one of the most stalwart, one of the most conservative, one of the most effective senators we've got.
So if he says a dumb thing and he acknowledges it and he says, yeah, whoops, I shouldn't have done that.
That was dumb.
We're just going to...
Throw them overboard?
That, to me, doesn't seem like a very effective political strategy.
If that's the new standard, that any time any of our fighters out there do anything dumb or bad or make any mistake, that we're just going to say, okay, you're gone, outer darkness, wailing and gnashing feet, see you later, then conservatives are never going to be able to practically accomplish anything.
But I don't know.
I thought, okay, am I just being too nice to my friend here?
Am I showing too much grace here?
Has Ted Cruz suddenly become a huge squish and he's just completely useless and he's Liz Cheney in a wig or something?
And then just a few days later we see, no, the guy is still one of the most stalwart, right-wing, effective conservatives in the Senate.
And how did he do it?
Because he nailed the feds on the January 6th thing, specifically on that issue.
And then he brought up a very important name.
This is a name maybe you've heard about him on Twitter or on some of the message boards or maybe some conservative news outlet.
But it's not a name that's gone mainstream.
Ted Cruz asked, who is Ray Epps?
Who is Ray Epps?
I'm aware of the individual, sir.
I don't have the specific background to him.
Well, there are a lot of people who are understandably very concerned about Mr.
Epps.
On the night of January 5th, 2021, Epps wandered around the crowd that had gathered, and there's video out there of him chanting, tomorrow, we need to get into the Capitol, into the Capitol.
This was strange behavior, so strange that the crowd began chanting, fed, fed, fed, fed, fed, fed.
Ms.
Sanborn, was Ray Epps a fed?
Sir, I cannot answer that question.
The next day, the next day, on January 6th, Mr.
Epps is seen whispering to a person and five seconds later, five seconds after he's whispering to a person, that same person begins to forcibly tear down the barricades.
So, Ms.
FBI lady, is Ray Epps a Fed?
Sir, I cannot answer that question.
Yeah, I bet you can.
Well, I bet you can.
I think you just don't want to.
Cruz goes on.
He explains another really strange fact, which is that in the days after January 6th, the FBI puts this guy, Ray Epps, on a most wanted list.
His picture there says, if you can find this person, if you can, you know, there were a number of other people on the list as well.
If you can find them, any information leading to their arrest, please send it over.
And then when they discover one of these people, they slap a big label, arrested, we got him, right?
Except for Ray Epps.
Ray Epps suddenly disappears from the FBI website.
Ray Epps disappears from the FBI website just a day or two after a right-wing media outlet, Revolver News, publishes a report suggesting that Ray Epps is a Fed.
All of a sudden, Epps is gone.
He wasn't arrested.
If he had been arrested, there would have been a big sign that said, arrested right on him.
He just disappears.
Suspect.
Is Ray Epps a Fed?
I don't know.
Regardless of whether he is or not, the FBI has a lot of explaining to do.
They're now in total damage control mode, by the way.
The January 6th committee and the two squish fake Republicans, Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, are trying desperately in these extremely lawyered, carefully worded, parsing every single syllable statements to insinuate that this guy is not a Fed.
The testimony does not seem convincing.
Representative Thomas Massey pressed Attorney General Merrick Garland on the same question.
He said, hey Buster, there's a lot of strange behavior with this Epps guy.
What's going on?
Is he one of you?
As far as we can determine, the individual who was saying he'll probably go to jail, he'll probably be arrested, but they need to go into the Capitol the next day, is then the next day directing people to the Capitol.
And as far as we can find, this individual has not been charged with anything.
You said this is one of the most sweeping investigations in history.
Have you seen that video or those frames from that video?
So as I said at the outset, one of the norms of the Justice Department is to not comment on impending investigations and particularly not to comment about particular scenes or particular individuals.
I was hoping today to give you an opportunity to put to rest The concerns that people have that there were federal agents or assets of the federal government present on January 5th and January 6th.
Can you tell us, without talking about particular incidents or particular videos, how many agents or assets of the federal government were present on January 6th, whether they agitated to go into the Capitol and if any of them did?
So I'm not going to violate this norm of the rule of law.
You don't need to violate any norms if you weren't involved, Buster.
It's very simple.
If you guys didn't have your fingers all over it, then you can say we weren't involved.
But you did.
You obviously did, which is why it would violate your norms and compromise your sources and your agents and your informants for you to get into the details.
Because we already have the answer to the basic questions.
Were the feds involved in January 6th?
100% of the evidence says yes.
Talk about corruption in our federal government.
Talk about doing the same thing over and over and over again.
Do you know what Ben's show is about today?
It's about how Hillary might run for president again.
Can you imagine that?
She might run.
I hope she does.
I hope she does, just so we get the pleasure of beating her again.
A whole lot more coming up.
Don't go anywhere.
I'm Michael Knowles.
We'll be right back.
So Cruz, Representative Thomas Massey, other people Representative Thomas Massey, other people have presented a lot of evidence that the feds were involved in January 6th and the Capitol riot.
What does this show us?
One, I think it's safe to assume that that is the case.
I think the FBI testimony and Attorney General Merrick Garland's testimony basically proved it.
Because if they hadn't been involved, they could have just said so.
So it shows you that a whole lot of American politics is a charade.
It's political theater.
What it shows you is a lot of the political battles that we think define the way our government and society work, they're actually just a distraction.
And you can look at the BLM riots, or the Capitol riot for that matter, and you think, okay, our big national battle, it's between Antifa on one hand and the Proud Boys, or the Oath Keepers, which I think is just a completely made-up organization.
Yeah, it's between them.
That's where the real fight's going on.
No.
I don't think that's quite right because the current occupant of the White House and his vice president were supporting, indirectly and directly, the Antifa and BLM rioters.
Kamala Harris raised money to bail them out of prison.
Bail them out of jail, rather.
The federal government seems to have been inciting the right-wing rioters at the Capitol.
They certainly were involved to some degree, according to all the evidence available to us.
So, both sides of that alleged battle are really just kind of being orchestrated out of Washington, D.C. by the ruling class.
Huh, that's weird.
The Republicans versus the Democrats...
Very often it seems that no matter who you elect, you get the same bad policy.
The same exact sort of bad policy.
The country keeps going in the wrong direction no matter who you...
That's weird.
It's almost as if much of our...
Mainstream political battling is just fake.
It's just a show, while the actual business of government takes place behind the scenes, usually with all of those alleged belligerents working together.
We do not have...
powerful, organized, institutionalized opposition in this country to the liberal establishment, to the ruling class.
You want to see a great example of this?
Jake Tapper on CNN just expressed his outrage, his dismay that the CDC seems to have misrepresented data on the coronavirus.
The hospitals are still stretched thin because of this, so I'm not trying to take away from that.
But if 40% in some hospitals, 40% of the people who have COVID, don't necessarily have problematic COVID, they're there because they got in a car accident, they're there because they bumped their head, and they're being included as in the hospital with COVID, that number seems kind of misleading.
We're two years into this, and we need the clearest picture possible.
If somebody's in the hospital with a broken leg and they also have asymptomatic COVID, that should not be counted as hospitalized with COVID, clearly.
I can't believe you.
How dare you, CDC? How dare you, government officials, just present this data in a misleading way?
Where were the journalists?
Where were all the journalists to ask you these questions two years ago?
When we all just believed, oh wait, that's right, I'm a journalist.
Oops.
Right, I was supposed to be the one asking those questions.
I'm glad that Jake Tapper is either outraged or pretending to be outraged now because the establishment and the ruling class was lying to us for two years.
Some of us, by the way, I hate to say I told you so, some of us were calling this two years ago.
But I'm glad Jake Tapper has caught up now.
He should have been doing that the whole time.
That's what an actual journalist would have done.
That's what someone who's really speaking truth to power and asking the hard questions, that's what they would have done.
But that's not what happened with our corporate media because our corporate press are not actually investigative reporters and journalists and fighting back against the entrenched power.
They're part of the entrenched power.
They're the same thing.
The progressives in our government, the hardcore progressives are not there fighting against and sticking it to the big corporations.
They're working with the big corporations.
They're all on the same side.
They're not getting asked the questions of the media and they're not having their premises questioned by the intellectuals in the academy, the people who are doing research on their own, the scientists and the other sorts of scholars who are also speaking truth to power.
No, they're all just working together.
They're all just part of the same thing.
And whenever they appear to be in opposition, that's almost always just political theater.
The question is now, why is Jake Tapper suddenly changing his tune?
Well, it's not just Jake Tapper.
It's the whole ruling class.
Do you think it's a coincidence that CNN is now taking a more skeptical, more, I don't know, calm, more reasonable approach to COVID? Do
you think that's just a coincidence?
That all of these various facets of society, many of which are supposed to be pitted in opposition to one another, are just all of a sudden changing their tune at the same time because why?
Because that is now in the interest of the ruling class, which has many different facets to it.
That's why.
Because there are diminishing political returns for the lockdowns and forcing everyone to get the constant jabs and harping on COVID forever and ever and ever.
They've already seized the power that they wanted to seize.
They've already upended our society.
They've already taken away a lot of our liberties.
And so they're all going to pivot and move on to the next thing.
And they're going to do it in concert with one another.
And the most offensive part of all is they're going to pretend that they're actually fighting one another the whole time.
They are going to relieve themselves on your leg and tell you that it is raining.
Rarely, very rarely, do you see a politician or a leader in any of those facets of our power structures in America, whether that's the media, whether that's the universities, whether that's the corporations, rarely do you see a leader buck the trend, buck the party line.
And you are seeing that a little bit right now, With Ron DeSantis.
Ron DeSantis has just come out with a number of proposals for the new legislative session.
His proposals include a major clamping down on immigration.
Now, Ron DeSantis, as a governor, he's not the president, so he's a governor, he can't do very much about legal immigration.
That's going to be said at the national level.
But he can do a lot about illegal immigration.
And what he's proposing is to ban state and local agencies from doing business with any company or non-governmental organization that helps facilitate illegal immigration across Florida.
So he's going to use his power to force the state to pressure companies and NGOs to stop using illegal labor.
He is going to require every county in Florida to enter into a contract with ICE, the Immigration Enforcement Agency, as part of a federal program that streamlines getting illegals arrested and deported.
He is going to prevent cooperation between ICE agents and law enforcement agencies.
He is going to, or rather he's going to stop people from law enforcement from working with ICE.
He is going to implement an emergency order that bans the issuance or renewal of all state licenses to companies or NGOs that provide services to unaccompanied alien children in Florida.
So this is really tough stuff on the issue of immigration.
And this is going to irritate not just Democrats, but some Republicans as well.
I'll give you an example.
It would be the Chamber of Commerce.
Chamber of Commerce.
There are many Republicans who support the Chamber of Commerce and many Republicans.
Republicans who the Chamber of Commerce supports has just come out and said they want to double legal immigration into the United States.
They want to double it.
The CEO of the Chamber of Commerce, Suzanne Clark, says that the Chamber's official position is to double illegal immigration from $2 million From around 1 to 2 million, what it is now, to 2 to 4 million legal immigrants every single year.
That would be bringing in an annual foreign-born population that is six times the size of Boston.
Every single year.
Now there have been surveys on this issue of immigration and in recent years the American people have suggested, I'm thinking of one Harvard-Harris poll in particular, that they don't want to increase the level of legal immigration.
They actually want to drastically reduce both legal and illegal immigration by 50-60% because we're just taking in too many people.
This is the largest movement of human beings ever in the history of the world, in recorded history.
But the Democrats and many Republicans support it.
There are many Republicans who say, yeah, illegal immigration, really bad.
We've got to secure the border.
But we want more legal immigration.
Oh, legal immigration is great.
We love it.
Even Donald Trump, who is the most immigration hawk president we've probably ever had, certainly had in recent decades, he famously said, I want to stop illegal immigration, but I want more legal immigration than ever.
Why?
Yes, illegal immigration is a particular problem, but immigration generally is the problem right now.
We just have too much of it.
It's no knock on the immigrants.
We just have way too much.
We're not assimilating people.
It's keeping wages down for low skilled or low income workers, which is, by the way, why the Chamber of Commerce loves it.
It's why...
The woke corporations love it.
It's why the semi-right-wing corporations love it.
The whole ruling class is in on this thing.
No matter who you elect, you get more immigration, even though the majority of Americans want dramatically less immigration.
Seems like a rigged game.
It seems like a big charade.
On this issue, DeSantis is totally right.
The Chamber of Commerce is totally wrong.
And...
I think the candidates who are going to do really well in 2022 and 2024 are not going to be echoing the left-wing line of more immigration legal and illegal.
They're not going to be echoing the Chamber of Commerce line, or even the Trump line for that matter, which is no illegal, but lots of legal, lots more legal.
I think that the candidates who really see where the future of the American right and the conservative movement are going will say, we just need less immigration, period.
Because most Americans want it.
We've got to defend majority rule in our democracy, according to Joe Biden.
Because we can't assimilate this many people this quickly.
And because a nation that doesn't have borders and doesn't respect the people of its country is no nation at all.
Speaking of accompanying children, this is going to be the creepiest segue I've ever done.
Please forgive me.
The USA Today, USA Today Life in particular, got in a little bit of trouble yesterday because they published an article and a tweet thread that appeared to try to normalize pedophilia.
Some of us on the right, you know, hate to say I told you so, have called it for years that the left is inevitably going to try to normalize pedophilia.
Not just because they are degenerate perverts.
That's not why, actually.
That's not the only reason why.
But because the logic of the left on the sexual revolution requires them to normalize pedophilia.
And that's exactly what this USA Today piece did.
The article title was, What the Public Keeps Getting Wrong About Pedophilia.
You know that much put upon minority pedophiles?
You know them?
There was a professor who was just fired for trying to normalize pedophilia.
Tried to redefine pedophiles as maps.
Minor attracted persons.
So here's what USA Today says.
What we think we know, we think we know what a pedophile is.
There's a lot of misunderstanding.
In recent decades, the science on pedophilia has improved.
One of the most significant findings is that pedophilia is likely determined in the womb, though environmental factors may influence whether someone acts on an urge to abuse.
The evidence suggests it is inborn.
It's neurological, said James Cantor, a sex researcher and expert on pedophilia.
Could you imagine being an expert on pedophilia?
That's...
It's not the kind of expertise you want.
When most of the public thinks of pedophilia, they assume it's synonymous with child sexual abuse.
A pedophile is an adult who's sexually attracted to children, but not all pedophiles abuse kids.
And some people who sexually abuse kids are not pedophiles.
Pedophiles may not have control over the fact that they're attracted to kids, but they are responsible for what they do or don't act on, says Ann Salter, who's another pedophile expert.
USA Today deleted this thread.
They kept the article up that they retitled it.
They got a lot of backlash.
And they got a lot of backlash from conservatives.
Somewhat justifiably because they clearly are trying to normalize pedophilia.
But I actually think conservatives reacted a little too quickly here.
Because I think that the principle that USA Today is describing is actually extremely conservative.
And I think the principle that USA Today is describing actually undermines not just the left's argument on extremely creepy sex stuff like pedophilia, but the left's whole argument on the sexual revolution.
What USA Today has done in this article, almost certainly unwittingly, is defended sexual repression and conversion therapy.
There were two kinds of backlash, I think, to this article.
The only one we really saw was the conservative backlash.
But think about what USA Today is saying here.
They're saying pedophilia is natural.
Natural meaning it's with you from the moment you're born.
It's not something that's learned necessarily, but it's a sexual orientation.
That's the difference between a sexual desire that maybe you develop over time and a sexual orientation that's with you from the moment of birth and you can't change it.
Now, is pedophilia...
Inborn, natural, a sexual orientation, I don't know.
Maybe, maybe not.
That's kind of secondary to the point.
What USA Today is saying is, even if a sexual desire is inborn, even if you're born this way, which was the left's entire argument on the LGBT movement and ultimately why they redefine marriage, you still should repress some of those desires.
But hold on, we were told if you have a sexual desire from birth and you can't change it, it's immutable, then you should not repress it.
That it's very harmful and unhealthy to repress that desire.
That it's immoral to ask someone to repress that desire because they're born this way.
Now the conservative argument was always, look, people are born with all sorts of desires, it's a fallen world, and some of them you've got to repress.
But the left said, no, that's awful, that's retrograde, that's terrible.
Now they seem to be endorsing it.
Furthermore, they're saying these pedophiles need to go to therapy to try to mitigate their desires, to try to change their desires.
Conversion therapy isn't a real thing.
It's a slogan that the left has put on various psychological and spiritual programs to try to get people who have unwanted sexual desires to be able to repress them somewhat or to mitigate them or to change them.
But they're endorsing that now for the pedos.
Well, why?
Well, because pedophilia is especially bad.
Okay, sure.
But I thought the argument that you were making is that it is immoral and unjust to force someone to repress their urges and to force someone to try to change their urges when you can't change those urges, by golly, because they're immutable and it's a sexual orientation.
So you told me it was wrong to do that, but now you're saying it's right to do that in some cases.
Why is it right to do that in some cases?
Well, because certain sexual desires are simply wrong, Michael.
Is what they're saying.
Huh.
Interesting.
Because that's not the...
And by the way, I'm not just picking on the homosexuals here.
Or the transgenderists or whatever.
I'm talking about the whole sexual revolution.
We were told we weren't alive.
I wasn't alive back then.
But you can see it in the literature.
In the 1960s, 1970s, that all sorts of sexual urges need to be indulged.
You're urged to have sex before marriage.
You're urged to have sex with multiple people.
You can't stifle a man.
It's free love.
Come on, just let it out.
Otherwise, you're going to explode.
No.
No, that was never true.
And only because we're taking this issue to the most logical extreme here, Do we see why that's not true?
I kind of like the article.
I know.
Sorry.
I don't think USA Today meant the article to be liked by conservatives such as us, but I think they make a very conservative point.
Speaking of impulses that should be repressed, multiple states now are discriminating against white people in COVID treatment.
According to reporting from the Washington Free Beacon in New York, racial minorities are automatically eligible for scarce COVID therapeutics, regardless of their age or underlying conditions.
In Utah, a Latinx ethnicity, that's the new word for Mexicans and Guatemalans and those sorts of people, account for more than congestive heart failure in a patient's COVID-19 risk score.
state's framework that then allows for treatments.
In Minnesota, health officials have devised their own ethical framework that prioritizes black 18-year-olds over white 64-year-olds, even though the white 64-year-olds are at a much higher risk of severe disease.
Where does this come from?
Not just from the radical left-wing states, it comes from the FDA.
The FDA says that there is an emergency use for these treatments for people who are at high risk, and then it goes further and defines minorities as being high risk just by virtue of the color of their skin.
This is another reminder that white supremacy is not only absurd, it's the opposite of reality.
Okay.
White people are one of the only groups that you can legally discriminate against.
Asians also you can discriminate against in college admissions.
And white people are the only racial group that you can socially condemn and insult and that that is acceptable and it's actually encouraged and it's carried out by many prominent people.
What we are told by the ruling class, namely that this is a white supremacist country and whites have all the privilege, that isn't true.
It's not only silly, but if you just look at our law and the way that our laws are enforced, the opposite is true.
By design.
And in practice, that's happening right now.
Speaking of racial politics, I have to get to this story because it's so silly.
There's a new series called American Women Quarters.
They're going to put women on the back of quarters.
And they've just announced the first American Women Quarter.
And so you're going to be able to get these.
You're going to go out.
There are going to be lots of different women on the back of these quarters.
The problem with the women quarters, of course, is that they're only worth 19 cents.
75 cents on the dollar.
And so if you do the calculations, only about 19 cents is what the quarter's worth.
I assume.
I don't know.
The first quarter that's here is the Maya Angelou quarter.
Maya Angelou, who is a terrible poet.
She's this poet.
You've probably read her in school because a lot of English teachers really like, a lot of left-wing English teachers really like presenting her horrible poetry.
You probably heard this one.
You may write me down in history with your bitter twisted lies.
You may trod me in the very dirt, but still, like dust, I'll rise.
Not exactly Wordsworth, okay?
Not exactly Shakespeare, but this has become very popular.
And now she's going to be on the back of quarters.
Really, she's only on the back of quarters because she's a black woman and she had a role in left-wing politics and styled herself a civil rights leader.
And that's not just me saying that.
That's what all the people who are promoting this, all the blue checks, all the people in government are saying.
It's so wonderful because she's a black woman.
So they're making it all about her identity.
This is literal tokenism.
They are making her a token, like an actual physical token.
And it debases everyone involved.
It debases the people who tokenize It debases the people who are betokened.
It debases poetry because this stuff is really bad and a fifth grader could write better poetry.
And it debases our country to look at one another this way.
It's just flesh and blood and just a color rather than looking a little bit deeper as to what we really are.
But it shows you the difference between the propaganda that comes out of our rulers on what this country is and the way things are actually being done right now.
And they look like they could be getting...
A lot worse.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
I'll 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 2022.
Today on the Matt Wall Show, Harris and Biden have gone off to slay the fictional dragon of voter suppression.
Meanwhile, as they argue that it's racist to require an ID to vote, more and more Democrat-run cities are requiring IDs to do literally everything else in life.
Also, Ted Cruz questions the FBI about its role in the January 6th riots.
Their answer, I would argue, confirms our worst suspicions.
And Alec Baldwin continues to make himself the victim of the fact that he shot and killed a woman.
His case becomes even more outrageous when you compare it to another recent accidental shooting.
Plus, USA Today runs a piece arguing that we must de-stigmatize pedophilia.
