BLM gets caught funneling nearly $1 million to the co-founder’s baby-daddy, Elon Musk officially becomes a Republican, and TikTok deplatforms Michael!
I’m exposing the most successful failure in government history. Stream Fauci Unmasked here: https://utm.io/ueogL
NBA star Jonathan Isaac has withstood immense pressure to conform to popular social issues. He wrote a book about his experience and it is available now: https://utm.io/ud96e
Join Michael and the Daily Wire for Backstage Live At The Ryman on June 29th. Get your tickets now: https://utm.io/uezFr
—
Today’s Sponsors:
Allform provides high quality modular sofas designed for real life. Visit allform.com/BEN for 20% off all orders.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together has known for a long time that BLM is a racket.
But even I did not appreciate just how much of a racket it is until BLM's latest tax filings came out.
We just learned that last year BLM spent millions and millions of dollars buying expensive real estate in California.
I guess that part we already knew.
We called it buy large mansions after all that info came out.
Now we have learned that BLM paid almost a million dollars to co-founder Patrice Cullors' baby daddy.
Damon Turner.
Turner received $970,000 to help produce live events and to provide other creative services.
The creative service in question, I suspect, was co-creating Patrice Cullors' baby.
The group also paid $840,000 to Cullors' brother, Paul Cullors, for providing security services, presumably securing all of that money in his bank account.
This kind of political machine would have made Boss Tweed blush.
The old Tammany Hall Democrat machine had absolutely nothing on BLM. And we can laugh at it.
And we can even be outraged about it.
But guess what?
BLM still has about $42 million in net assets on hand.
They've still got an annual operating budget of $4 million and they've got no end in sight to their donations.
The Democrat political machine is still operating at a very high level.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I'm Michael Knowles.
It's the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
I have two favorite comments from yesterday.
It was a total tie.
I could not pick just one.
The first one is from The Greco, who says the fact that Michael has to explain why harvesting spinal fluid from the young to give to the elderly is a bad idea shows just how far this world has fallen.
I totally agree with that.
And then second, I thought this was a really perceptive comment.
Brooke A. Crowe says, I believe Biden was supposed to say alt-right MAGA Republicans, but now we have the best new gaffe.
Remember the other day, Joe Biden said, the real problem in the politics is, hold on, I want to say this right, hold on, I want to say this really clearly.
Ultra MAGA Republicans.
Ultra MAGA. And you thought, Ultra MAGA, first of all, sounds kind of cool.
And second of all, you're telling me that the Democrat campaign consultants spent six months coming up with Ultra MAGA? Ultra MAGA, what does that even mean?
No, of course not.
Biden was not going off of a script here.
He was trying to come up with it.
He even told you.
He said, hold on, I want to get this right.
He was obviously supposed to say alt-right MAGA Republicans.
That was a phrase that the Democrats had workshopped for years that had been testing very well.
So he was supposed to say alt-right MAGA Republicans.
He couldn't say it.
He said ultra MAGA Republicans, stupidly.
They didn't want to admit that he made a mistake, and so now they're stuck with ultra MAGA. Here we go, baby.
We are ultra MAGA. The Democrat Party is a machine.
Right now I'm reading a wonderful biography of Chester Arthur, one of my favorite presidents.
He's not the most well-known.
He's mostly known for his mutton chops.
But I'm reading about Chester Arthur.
You know, in the 19th century, both political parties operated with machines.
Patronage, they'd buy votes, they'd...
Shake down the government workers to work for the party.
Both parties did it, but the Democrats really perfected it.
The most famous political boss in American history is Boss Tweed.
The most famous machine in American political history is Tammany Hall.
That was the Democrat machine.
The machine is still operating.
We like to flatter ourselves that all the bad stuff that people did in the past in politics, we've totally cleaned that up.
That doesn't exist anymore.
And now everything's operating above board and that's our democracy.
Our sterling stellar pristine democracy is operating just as it should.
But that's not the case.
The Democrats are still, especially the Democrats, Republicans don't really have a very well functioning machine right now, but the Democrats do.
And that would be BLM.
And it's a shakedown racket.
And they shake down the big corporations and they raise $90 million and they pay off their cronies and they pay off the stormtroopers on the street and they pay off just about everybody.
And it all operates in a way that you have the entire society working in concert to advance a political message.
The media, the news media, Hollywood, big tech, the universities, the bureaucratic government, the elected government, they're all working together.
The woke corporations.
The way they're working together is because of a coordinated, very effective machine.
The sort of thing you would have seen 150 years ago in American politics, you're still seeing it today.
It makes me think in a slightly separate way, but go with me for a second.
It makes me think of the CIA. It makes me think of some of the intelligence agencies.
We today, we all look back and we remember all the shady things that the intelligence agencies have done.
They were invading foreign countries, toppling foreign governments, performing all sorts of experiments on American citizens.
Oh my, MKUltra, all these crazy experiments.
Gosh, can you believe they did that in the past?
I bet they don't do any of that anymore, though.
Right, that's what people will say.
Yeah, you know, all of these institutions, they did a lot of shady, dodgy things in the past, but they totally don't do any of that anymore, and it's all completely cleaned up and different now.
Why?
What would ever make you think that?
That these institutions that have been doing things for a very long time just suddenly overnight stopped doing all the bad things entirely?
I don't buy that.
If we don't buy that with, I don't know, an intelligence agency or something like that, why would we buy it with a political party?
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
So the way a machine works is you've got a carrot and you've got a stick.
The carrot is when you grease the wheels.
The carrot is when you pay people off.
The carrot is when you give people favors and patronage.
The stick is when you punish people for crossing your machine.
And you're seeing that right now.
The new Democrat stick is accusing any conservative, anyone who in any way calls out their plans, of being a racist.
The worst thing that you can possibly be called in America today is a racist, and so they wield this very effectively and very loosely.
One of the most important strategies for the Democrats...
Is mass migration.
They have relied on mass migration because, statistically speaking, new immigrants and their kids and their grandkids are much more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans.
And Republicans are making huge inroads with Hispanic voters.
That's true.
And Republicans, maybe in the future, can make even more inroads.
And Republicans have long told ourselves that Latinos are Republican, they just don't know it yet.
And we say all these sorts of things.
But the numbers just don't bear it out.
Even with the massive shift from Hispanic voters to the Republican Party in recent years, it still gives a huge advantage to Democrats.
And if you say that now, if you say that Democrats are obviously using immigration policy to...
Change the electorate, change the demographics of the country in a way that they think will give them an advantage.
You're called a racist, awful conspiracy theorist.
This is what Joy Reid just said the other day.
They're exploiting the shooting in Buffalo to attack Tucker Carlson in particular because he's the most prominent conservative television host.
but really all of us, everyone who has a conservative podcast, everyone who has a conservative radio show, everyone who's an elected conservative or just down there at the grassroots level, go into your local Republican meeting.
You are being called a racist, terrible, evil, awful person who's responsible for a shooting in Buffalo because you're calling out their strategy.
No singular voice in right-wing media has done more to elevate this racist conspiracy theory than Tucker, who even with a new head writer, spends night after prime time, night, injecting the rot from the dregs of the internet directly into the veins of Republican voters.
Are Tucker's writers sourcing his show from 4chan?
These are just questions.
As the New York Times analysis last month found, in within 400 episodes, Tuckums has amplified the idea that a cabal of elites want to force demographic change through immigration.
That is replacement theory.
Tucker's not some deep thinker.
He's clearly just channeling the gross stuff his viewers could easily find online, then feeding it to Republican voters and Republican politicians as infotainment.
And that feedback loop has terrifying reach.
That murderous lowlife in Buffalo wouldn't even have to listen to Tucker.
He wouldn't have to watch him at all to get it if they are essentially pulling from the same source material.
It's terrible, disgusting, evil, false lies, propaganda, the lowest of the low kind of disinformation trash.
This idea that elite people in our ruling class are using immigration policy to change the electorate so that they can get political.
Who would ever suggest such a thing?
It seems harder and harder to ignore that the echoes of replacement theory And other racially motivated views are increasingly coming out into the open.
In a few years, we're going to be a majority brown country.
White people will not be the majority in the country anymore.
This will be the first generation ever in American history in which whites will be a minority of the generation at some point.
As of 2007, every year babies being born in this country, whites now are the minority.
In 2044, everyone is going to be a minority.
As the demographics change, as white people become the minority in the country, which is coming.
Demographics is destiny.
Demographics is destiny.
Demographics is destiny, right?
The country is changing.
I've been saying it here, other people have been saying it here for years now, even before Donald Trump.
The demographics is destiny.
The white population is declining for the first time in history in America, while the number of multiracial Americans have more than doubled.
So we live in a country where the demographics are changing, it's becoming less white.
Correct.
Okay.
You'll be announcing that we're calling the 38 electoral votes of Texas for the Democratic nominee for president.
It's changing.
It's going to become a purple state and then a blue state because of the demographics, because of the population growth.
This goes on for like another minute, okay?
This goes on and on.
And you see Julian Castro, he's like, look, and it's going to totally give us the win.
It's going to give us Texas, which was one of the reddest states, and it's because of people outside of Texas, by which we mean Mexico, by which we mean Latin America.
And then Joe Scarborough, he says, demographics is destiny.
Whoa, cool it with the racist great replacement theory there, Joe.
All right?
I don't need this much racism in my morning.
It's all the Democrats who have been spreading this, bragging about it for years.
Those are just the people on TV.
I could pull up countless articles from left-wing think tanks, from left-wing newspapers, not only observing this fact, but explaining how this fact is due to mass migration, which is a very specific policy from very specific lawmakers who are Democrats, for a very specific purpose.
They're cheering it on because they think that it will give them an electoral advantage.
And it's our fault because they told us what they were doing.
They're doing a thing to put themselves in power, they think, permanently.
Then they're telling us that they're doing that thing.
And then when we repeat to them the thing that they just told us, they call us racist for repeating it.
Doesn't make a lot of sense.
Gets my blood boiling that I'm being gaslit in this way.
And when I want to relax, you know I've got to check out my Allform.
Right now, go to allform.com slash Knowles.
You know how much I love Helix.
I adore my Helix mattress.
It's terrific.
Well, Helix has left the bedroom and started making sofas.
They just launched a new company called Allform.
They are already making the greatest sofas ever.
What makes Allform so cool?
Well, it's the easiest way that you can customize a sofa using premium materials at a fraction of the cost of traditional stores.
You pick the fabric, the color, color of the legs, the sofa size, the shape.
You make sure it's a perfect fit for you and your home.
They've got armchairs.
They've got love seats.
It goes all the way up to an eight-seat sectional.
And probably my favorite part is, let's say you're in a small apartment right now, but you know you're going to get a house at some point.
To find your perfect sofa, check out allform.com slash Knowles.
Allform is offering 20% off all orders for our listeners at allform.com slash Knowles.
The stick.
There's the carrot, which is the machine on the left pays you off and they give you all sorts of patronage.
Then there's the stick, which is they call you a racist and they ostracize you.
And they threaten you and they can run you out of your job and run you out of your school.
And the most basic way they do it is they de-platform you.
If you say things that contradict the prevailing orthodoxies of the ruling class, you can be censored and de-platformed.
That's what this fight on Twitter is all about.
That's why Elon Musk is potentially going to buy Twitter.
He's either going to buy Twitter or destroy Twitter.
Because he says conservatives are not being permitted to speak in the public square.
Big tech is the new public square.
Self-government only works when people can speak to one another.
That's how we govern each other.
So this is an existential threat to our republic.
This has hit me personally.
I have not lost my Twitter yet.
I have not lost my YouTube channel yet.
Although...
People have tried.
Although there have been some strikes on my channel when I say things that are true.
But if those true things contradict Dr.
Fauci or contradict Joe Biden, this becomes a big problem on Facebook also.
But it's not any of those platforms that I've lost.
I have been kicked off of TikTok.
I barely knew that I was on TikTok.
I started a TikTok.
I would occasionally post clips from my show to TikTok.
I did not use it because I am a grown man, but sometimes I would have members of the team post clips to TikTok because that's where the youth are.
I have not accessed my TikTok in weeks.
And just the other day, a member of my team comes running into my office and says, Michael, you've been deplatformed on TikTok.
Why is that?
What have I done?
Little old me?
Me whom everyone loves so?
I had not posted anything.
There could not have been any new offending content on there.
I didn't receive any messages to why I was kicked off.
I had previously posted videos mocking...
Dr.
Fauci, not even mocking him personally, just mocking the lies that we have been told, the contradictions from the public health establishment, from Joe Biden.
And then some weeks later, poof, I was kicked off.
So you can't find me on TikTok right now.
If you want to see me twerking and jiggling and whatever else people are doing on TikTok, I'm sorry.
You're going to have to tune into this show.
You're not going to be able to get it on TikTok.
I'm not so worried.
That was not my main platform.
Although, it does matter, actually.
I'm sort of being glib about it now.
But it does matter because TikTok is where the young people are.
And people spend a lot of time on TikTok.
There was a study that showed that, on average, Twitter users spend about three to six minutes a day on Twitter.
TikTok users, who skew much younger, spend about 52 minutes a day on TikTok.
So if you want to reach people, if you want a really powerful platform, you go to TikTok.
The fact that one can be censored and deplatformed off of TikTok...
For any reason or no reason at all, just because they don't like the cut of your jib or because you're contradicting the ruling class's propaganda of the week, that is very scary because that reshapes the way that our political order works.
If it reshapes the way we can talk, it reshapes the way our political order works.
This is why it's so important to reassert some control over Twitter.
We're going to do it any way we can.
Reassert some control over Google any way we can.
Reassert some control over Facebook and yes over TikTok.
I think it would probably be better if we in the political community, if we conservatives could get together and go in and say, no, we're going to assert our rights as Americans and take this power back from left-wing Silicon Valley oligarchs.
But we can take what we can get, all right?
If Elon Musk is the best way for us to go in and retake some of this political control, then that's the thing that we're going to do.
And maybe that means Musk buys Twitter.
Maybe that means Musk just destroys Twitter.
Maybe that means Musk never wanted to buy Twitter in the first place, and this was all a long troll to destroy the company, which increasingly it seems like it was.
Elon Musk tweeted out the other day, quote, 20% fake spam accounts, while four times what Twitter claims could be much higher than My offer was based on Twitter's SEC filings being accurate.
Yesterday, Twitter's CEO publicly refused to show proof of less than 5% bot accounts.
This deal cannot move forward until he does.
So do you see what's happened here?
All the while, we've been waiting.
All of Elon's cryptic messages, he's quoting poetry.
He's suggesting he'll maybe join the board.
He won't join the board.
He'll make a tender offer.
He doesn't need to make the tender offer.
What is he doing?
They said, if the board rejects your bid, Elon, what are you going to do?
He said, I've got a plan B. I'm not going to tell you what that is now.
Well, plan B or C or D might not even be buying Twitter.
It might just be destroying Twitter.
Because he's saying, look, I made my offer of whatever it was, $44 billion or something, based on the idea that Twitter has less than 5% bot accounts.
Now, does anyone believe that fewer than 5% of the accounts on Twitter are bots and spam?
I don't.
I'm just a regular Twitter user.
I think that number's way higher.
If you use Twitter, surely you're going to think that number's way higher.
Elon Musk uses Twitter a lot, and he looked into it enough to potentially buy Twitter.
You don't think that Elon Musk maybe thought, huh, I think Twitter's official filings on the spam body counts, they're probably a little low.
No, I think he probably suspected they were a little low.
And so he goes in and he makes the offer, and then it goes all the way along here, and then he says, wait a second.
I'm looking over your Securities and Exchange Commission filings here, and, you know, it's looking to me like you might have been dishonest on some of your filings with the government.
It's looking to me like you might be committing some fraud against your investors here.
So prove to me that fewer than 5% of your accounts are bots and spam.
And the CEO of Twitter, for now the CEO of Twitter, Parag Agrawal, said, no, we can't do that.
I wish we could, but there's no way.
We don't have any access to show.
And Elon just responded with the little feces emoji right underneath.
He said, ah, I'm pretty sure you can, but you don't want to because what it's going to show is that you guys are perpetrating a fraud.
Whatever Elon does here, whether he buys it and opens up speech for conservatives a little bit, at least to some degree, or if he just destroys Twitter, either way, that will be a positive development.
Either way, I cheer him on.
I don't know which is funnier.
I actually can't decide which is funnier.
It's a longer-term joke if Elon runs Twitter and gets to troll from Twitter.
But it is a spectacular, magnificent joke if he just does all of this to destroy Twitter for perpetrating a fraud.
He would be destroying it not just to troll them and get his kicks.
He would be doing it with a purpose.
He actually would be exposing a fraud.
He actually would be improving speech in the public square.
As I frequently say...
It is not enough to own the libs.
It's good to own the libs.
I'm pro-owning the libs, but one needs to own the libs with purpose.
You don't want to be frivolously owning the libs.
Why is Elon doing all of this?
Is he sincere?
What's his endgame?
A lot of people have pointed out that Elon Musk is a lib.
He's a Democrat.
He's an Obama Democrat.
He voted for Obama twice, I believe.
Well, now Elon says he's officially a Republican.
He tweeted out, I don't know if he tweeted this.
I don't know how much he's using Twitter these days.
But he at least stated, I have voted overwhelmingly for Democrats, historically.
Like, I'm not sure.
I might never have voted for a Republican, just to be clear.
Now, this election, I will.
He posted a meme the other day of him standing still to the left of center.
You had the left of the political aisle and the right of the political aisle.
He was left of center.
And then the leftists ran so far left, and the right didn't really move.
The right actually moved a little bit to the left, and so now all of a sudden Elon, having not moved at all, is center right.
That's what happened.
And so is Elon a Republican?
Is he being sincere?
I suspect he probably is.
I think there are a lot of people who would have called themselves liberals or leftists even or center-left who now are firmly on the right because they hold such radical positions as don't chop off little kids' genitals, such radical positions as don't kill little babies one minute before they're born.
Such radical positions as, hey, maybe a handful of woke bazillionaires shouldn't completely dominate our political discourse.
And the establishment is trying desperately to counter that narrative.
So Sonny Hostin on The View insists, no, no, Elon, you're wrong.
No, no, most Americans, you're wrong.
Actually, it's the Republicans who have moved much further to the right.
They are playing to the base.
I mean, if you look at all the studies, the Republican Party has moved further to the right than Democrats have to the left.
There's a Pew Research Center analysis that finds that on average, Democrats and Republicans are farther apart ideologically today than at any time in the past 50 years.
And that ideological divide breaks down to the Republican Party being an extremist party.
And the Democratic Party actually, as you just mentioned, Sarah, moving more to the...
But isn't the problem the primaries?
Because you can't get through these primaries unless you are extreme, especially right now in the Republican Party.
That claim that Sonny Hostin just made is so ridiculous, it almost isn't worth responding to.
I will respond to it because it's going to be a common refrain in this election.
On what issue have the Democrats moved to the center?
On what issue?
On abortion?
No.
They went from safe, legal, and rare to abortion on demand without apology up to the moment of birth and maybe afterward.
On immigration?
No.
They went from we've got to keep illegal aliens out of our country to we need completely open borders and 3 million migrants coming in per year, 2 million of whom are illegal.
On what?
On sexual issues?
No.
We went from maybe teach sex ed in high schools to we need to trans the kindergartners.
I don't think so.
On what issue?
On what issue have they become...
On free speech, no.
They went from let's tolerate free speech to let's censor all the conservatives.
They've moved radically left on all of the issues.
What about the Republicans?
Where have they moved right?
On abortion, they're basically the same.
Maybe they've moved a little bit more pro-life on abortion, but basically they're the same.
On guns, no.
They're pretty much the same on guns.
On taxes, if anything, they've moved to the center on taxes and economic issues.
On the social issues?
On marriage?
Oh my gosh.
Many Republicans have just bought a complete radical redefinition of marriage given to them by the radical left.
I don't think they're.
On what issue?
If the Republicans have moved at all, and I suppose they have, they've moved to the center.
And this is not just, well, the leftists say that it's the other guys who moved, and it's the conservatives say it's the other guys.
No, you just look at the issue by issue.
Tell me where I went wrong.
I don't think I've said anything wrong.
I'm giving specific examples.
I can prove my argument.
Sunny Hostin is just spouting platitudes because her party has moved radically to the left.
Now, we have a phenomenal new system in place such that we can talk to one another.
Not just where you write into me in the mailbag, I like that too, but where you can submit your voice mailbag.
How do you do it?
It's on the website.
You go to the Daily Wire website.
You record your voice mailbag just on your phone.
You record it, you know, just on a little phone recording app.
You scroll down on the website.
You click on the Michael Knowles Show right there on the page.
Scroll on down.
You click Mailbag.
Okay, great.
And then, ordinarily, you can just...
There you go.
You pop up that...
You pop up that email.
Okay.
Then you add your audio file.
Boom.
MP3. Boom.
Send.
And then I get to hear from you on the show.
So do that.
We're going to be doing that on Friday.
It's going to be a lot of fun.
Also, we have released a three-part docuseries called Fauci Unmasked.
Do you remember that?
Hosted by yours truly, exposing the great, exalted, most powerful politician in the country, Dr.
Anthony Fauci.
You've got to go check out that film.
Take a look at the trailer.
He's the highest paid employee in our federal government.
And beginning in the spring of 2020, Dr.
Fauci began to set national policy that affected the way that 330 million Americans lived their lives.
For goodness sakes, I'm telling you, wear a mask, keep social distancing.
There's nothing political about that.
But who is Anthony Fauci?
People who have conspiracy theories.
Those are people that don't particularly care for me.
In this short series, we will do what the establishment media have refused to do.
We will give you an unvarnished look at the career of the most powerful politician in America, Dr.
Anthony Fauci.
Don't you think it's time that you step down and let someone else who has a more effective message?
Actually, no.
So we've got the three-part series, Fauci Unmasked, We've got another documentary that I'm hosting that would be The Legacy of Roe, Choosing Death, The Legacy of Roe.
That's also available now.
Join our fearless fight for the truth by becoming a member today.
DailyWire.com slash subscribe and watch Fauci Unmasked and watch Choosing Death, The Legacy of Roe.
New members can use code Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, for 20% off your membership.
You're getting so much content.
This is an extremely good deal.
And you get 20% off with code Knowles.
We'll be right back with a lot more.
It's the conservatives who have moved radically to the right.
It's not that the left has moved radically to the left.
It's that the right wing has moved radically to the right.
Like, for instance, right now, if you object to little kids, little boys, being told that they're little girls and dressed up like little girls and being encouraged to mutilate themselves, if you oppose that in any way, that makes you a far-right extremist.
There's a mother.
Who should probably be arrested, certainly have her children taken from her, who posted a video to TikTok dressing up her little boy in dresses and encouraging him to pretend to be a girl.
You love it, and you want it, and you picked it out, but you don't want it for school.
Can you tell me why?
Because last time I wore a dress to school, everybody called me a girl.
What makes a shirt for a boy or a girl?
Nothing.
So do you want this?
You picked it out.
I do want it.
You want to wear it all the time at home, but not at school, right?
Yeah.
Tell me about that.
I want to get made fun of, and that's what they always do when I wear pink and stuff.
Do you think bright, pretty colors and dresses and sequins and jewels and golds, all the things that you always want to wear?
Mm-hmm.
Do you think that's your innermost you?
Mm-hmm.
It is.
Well, how are you going to be your innermost you when we live in a place that people think clothing belongs to particular gender?
So, the decision to dress up like a little girl, that was obviously just this little boy's personal decision, right?
He's not being coached.
He's not being coached right before our very eyes.
Hey, you love wearing sequins and dresses, right?
That's what you really want to do, right?
You want to do that thing?
Yeah, okay.
Yeah, and you, but why won't you wear the dresses to school?
Because the kids call me a girl when I do that, because I'm dressing up like a girl, and that's weird.
Yeah, and that's bad that that happens, right?
Tell me how much you want it.
Tell me how much you totally want it.
And it's not just me, a sick, very sick, twisted, pervert mother abusing her child and grooming.
That's what the grooming is, right?
When we use the phrase grooming and groomers...
People think it has only this very narrow application to adults who are trying to have sex with children.
But it has a much broader application than that.
It is adults who are inculcating a sexual sense, a sexual desire, a sexual identity, a sexual orientation in little kids.
This is why we call the teachers groomers when they were having private sexual conversations with kids that they didn't want their parents to hear about.
It's not just because the teachers wanted to have sex with the students.
Maybe they do.
I don't know.
Maybe some of them do.
But it's because it's still extremely creepy and psychologically damaging and accomplishing much of the same damage if you're just cultivating a disordered sexual identity in a kid.
Like when this mother shamelessly, abusively puts her kid on TikTok.
We censored his face.
She didn't censor his face.
When I saw this video going around the internet, I said, okay, I want to use this video.
We have to talk about this.
But don't you dare put this kid's face...
Our editors have to censor that.
Because if his parents are not going to look out for him, at least we will, to the extent that we're exposing what his parents are doing.
And she's just there with that phone.
Okay, and you like this, and you want to wear the dresses, and you want to live out whatever sick fantasies I've got in my head, right?
Says the mother...
And if you oppose that, you're the radical.
She's not the radical, because the left has moved to the center, according to Sonny Hostin.
You're the radical, if you think it's wrong to do that to little boys.
You're the radical, if you believe that babies before the moment of birth should not be killed.
That it's wrong to kill babies.
There was a pro-abortion rally at the Arizona state capitol.
Two sides here.
You've got the pro-life side quietly demonstrating, praying, being polite, being normal.
And you've got the pro-abortion side screaming until they're blue in the face.
Which side seems more radical?
*Screaming*
Code hanger dodger!
Code hanger dodger!
That means your mom stuck her, killed her, your upper hooey, and tried to get rid of you, but she failed! .
So, if you just listened to that clip, you get probably 80% of what was going on there.
And if you watched that, you get the whole thing.
You probably get about 150% of the distinction between pro-abortion side and the pro-life side here.
On the pro-life side, you get, really, the one person you can see is this normal-looking kid wearing a USA hat, like a MAGA-type hat, smiling and looking normal.
He kind of reminds me of that kid who was wearing the MAGA hat in Washington, D.C., Nick Sandman, when all the crazy screaming leftists are banging drums in his face and yelling, and he's just there kind of vaguely smiling, bemused.
That's what that kid, the pro-life kid, was doing.
And then the pro-abortion side, screaming, shrieking, saying all sorts of profanity, hideous, vile things with crazy hairdos and not looking like they've got their lives in order.
Not looking like these are the most grounded people on earth.
But we're the radicals, right?
We're the crazy extremists.
The kid in the hat, smiling, pro-America, USA, MAGA, just normal.
He's the crazy extremist.
And the people shrieking about coat hangers and how pro-lifers should be aborted and with all sorts of physical, eccentric clothing and tattoos and piercings and hair colors, they're the normal ones.
They've actually moved to the center, according to Sonny Hostin.
Who are the extremists?
It's not just these crazies on the street.
I am not just strawmanning this.
We are talking all the way up to the most elite levels of the Democratic Party right now.
Ketanji Jackson is about to become the new judge on the Supreme Court.
Ketanji Jackson has not really played a role in the court yet, obviously, but she was confirmed.
She's set to replace Justice Breyer after the current term ends.
Ketanji was interviewed by the Washington Post and asked what she thought about the protests outside of the homes of the judges after the leak of the potential opinion in Dobbs v.
Jackson Women's Health.
This is a layup.
This was an easy question.
Well, it's two questions.
One, do you condemn the leak?
Two, do you condemn protests outside of the homes of the federal judges?
Which is in violation of federal law?
And Ketanji says, you know, I just can't comment on that.
You know, I just don't know.
I don't know.
Specifically, she said, if leaking the draft opinion was a good thing or a bad thing, she said, I can't answer that.
Every judge who's given an opinion on this so far Has answered that and said this is terrible.
It's eroded the trust of the court.
This is a really awful thing.
She says, yeah, I can't answer that.
I don't know.
Yeah, maybe Brett Kavanaugh is going to F around and find out.
I don't know.
Yeah, there are people screaming and threatening his family and yelling outside in the middle of the night while his little children try to fall asleep.
Yeah, I don't know.
I can't answer if that's good or bad.
I don't know.
Find out.
I don't have any comment, she says, on the protests outside of the homes.
I can't answer whether it's good or bad that a clerk destroyed the trust of the court and leaked the opinion early and caused the protests in the first place.
Before this woman was confirmed, I put on my Noel Stradamus hat, took out my crystal ball, and I said this woman would be the most radical person in the history of the Supreme Court.
As I just looked at her record, I looked at her intellectual pedigree and her political pedigree, and I looked at the way she was conducting herself during the hearings.
She wouldn't even say what a woman was.
She laughed at the suggestion that she could define what a woman is.
I said, haha, I'm not a biologist.
I said, we haven't seen this kind of radicalism.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, even Sonia Sotomayor have nothing on this chick.
And what do we see?
What do we see?
She says, oh yeah, well you're going to protest outside the homes?
I don't know.
Well, you want me to condemn that?
I can't condemn that.
You're going to leak the opinion?
I can't condemn that.
Speaking of the court, there was a big win at the Supreme Court yesterday for conservatives, and it's not getting a ton of play.
And it actually comes from Ted Cruz, my intrepid co-host on the Verdict podcast.
Senator Cruz brought a case to the Supreme Court.
I think it's called Cruz v.
FEC. So his name is right there in the case.
And he brought this case because John McCain had a very stupid campaign finance law.
And the stupid campaign finance law Proposed to set limits on the way that big money enters into politics.
That was theoretically the idea.
That was at least what the marketing team said about it.
But that's not really what it did.
Most of what the McCain-Feingold campaign finance rules did was just to protect incumbents.
This is why the incumbents voted for it.
It's because it protected them from challenges to people going out and running and draining the swamp.
So it was a really swampy piece of legislation, and lots of it has already been struck down by the courts.
And even at the time that George W. Bush signed it into law...
Bush said, yeah, I don't really know if this is constitutional or not, but whatever, the courts can decide, which was an abdication of his duty as well.
The President of the United States has a responsibility to defend the Constitution too, so I thought that was weak stuff from George W. Bush as well.
Well, now it's been struck down.
Specifically, what was struck down here was a provision that would allow political candidates running for office to reimburse themselves for money that they had lent to their campaign.
So when you run for office, especially if you're a challenger candidate, no one knows you, you don't have any name recognition, a way to even get yourself in the running is to donate money to your own campaign.
So we're not talking about gazillionaires here.
Gazillionaires don't need to pay themselves back.
If you've got $50 million and you loan your campaign half a million bucks or a million bucks or 10 million bucks, you don't care if you ever get that money back.
It can go to the government and it doesn't matter.
And we're not talking about people who don't have any money.
We're not talking about, because they wouldn't be able to loan themselves money in the first place.
We're talking about doctors.
We're talking about lawyers.
We're talking about professionals who do well, who have money, who could make a big loan to them.
Let's say they could loan their campaign, I don't know, $300,000, $400,000.
According to the McCain rules, you can only pay yourself back $250,000.
And so it was basically just a way to cap challengers at what they were even able to donate to their own campaign, so it would be harder for them to win.
That was just struck down.
The reason I really like this case is because it's...
It's not just a left versus right or Republican versus Democrat.
This case really was a drain the swamp kind of case.
This will hurt political corruption in both parties.
It gets back to that machine politics we were talking about at the very top of the show.
This is a way to...
Well, not to get money out of politics.
Because you can't get money out of politics.
That's not possible.
And usually, like McCain-Feingold, usually the laws that purport to get money out of politics actually...
Preserve the money in politics.
Actually, because big politics always attracts big money, all that's going to happen is when you pass laws about money in politics, the money just goes elsewhere.
The money just kind of hides itself, or the money is really only accessible to a certain protected political class, like the gazillionaires who don't need to pay themselves back, like the incumbents who have huge war chests and not the challengers.
So this was a big win, good win for conservatives.
We're also now looking at the Pennsylvania Senate race, which is extraordinarily close.
I told you yesterday on the show, the Pennsylvania Senate race was going to give you a hint of what the future of the Republican Party looked like.
There were three top candidates.
Dr.
Oz, the daytime TV talk show host, who seemed like a pretty liberal candidate actually and was very recently attacking pro-life laws around the country from the GOP and has done shows promoting transgenderism and kids and all sorts of madness.
You had David McCormick, who seemed like kind of a business Republican, who's Not, you know, not the most rock-ribbed stalwart conservative, but not a total squish either, but, you know, just kind of a centrist, moderate business Republican.
And then Kathy Barnett, who was a political commentator.
She didn't have a ton of money.
We didn't know a ton about her.
She was probably the newest to the political scene, at least at the national level.
And she was the most conservative in terms of her positions.
We still don't have an exact answer on who won the race.
It was very, very close.
Kathy Barnett was a distant third.
So the rock-rooped conservative in the race really fell down.
She had surged in the polls and then she fell down.
McCormick, as election night was concluding, McCormick was leading.
Dr. Oz was in second place.
But we're talking about by tenths of a percentage point.
So knowing the way that they count the votes in Pennsylvania, it seems unlikely that they're going to instantly come out with an answer.
That battle in Pennsylvania, though, will also show you a little bit more about where the party is.
Ted Cruz endorsed David McCormick.
Donald Trump endorsed Dr.
Oz.
Some more right-wing conservative groups between Oz and McCormick seem to go for McCormick.
Sean Hannity went for Dr.
Oz, but a lot of the conservative base really doesn't like Dr.
Oz.
So you're seeing Trump has a decent record right now on the endorsements in Ohio, for instance.
Cruz endorsed Josh Mandel.
Donald Trump endorsed J.D. Vance.
J.D. Vance won.
So what's going to happen in Pennsylvania?
What you are seeing right now In these races, even if you don't really care about the Republican primaries, and even if you don't really care about 2022, what you are seeing play out is a shadow campaign for 2024.
Whose endorsements matter?
Who is going to have the right favors going in?
We haven't even talked about the endorsements that Ron DeSantis has made.
We haven't even talked about the endorsements that Mike Pompeo has made, that Nikki Haley has made, that other presidential candidates have made.
That is part of the race that's playing out right now.
Now, a huge issue in Pennsylvania is energy.
Energy is a really big issue.
And you know that the two parties have totally different views on energy right now.
What we are led to believe, you want to talk about grift, you want to talk about machine politics, you want to talk about disingenuous political rhetoric.
What we are told is, if you support fossil fuels, if you support If you in any way oppose solar, wind, green energy, renewable, electric cars, if you oppose that in any way, you are destroying the earth.
You're going to kill all of mankind within, well, it used to be nine years.
Now, it's what?
It's probably seven or eight years at this point.
It's the same kind of argument you see in Buffalo.
They'll say, If you in any way call out Democrats' immigration strategy, then you're responsible for a massacre in Buffalo.
If you in any way oppose Democrats' radical energy reforms, you're responsible for the destruction of the earth.
John Kerry, the White House climate czar, has come out and said that the United States needs to transition to electric cars.
Transition, meaning you lose your current car and you have to get an electric car.
We need to transition at 20 times the current rate.
This year we have to implement those promises, and what it means is we have to decarbonize the power sector five times faster than we are right now.
We have to deploy renewables five times faster than we are right now.
We have to transition to electric vehicles about 20 times faster than we are now.
And we have to fully transition to a resilient net-zero economy faster.
We have to do, we must transition.
You all need to go buy Teslas.
And if you can't afford, if you're a pauper and you can't afford the Model X for $96,000, well, at least you dirty peasants can get the Model S, can't you?
Isn't that one's only about $45,000?
That's chump change!
So you have to buy your Tesla, and you have to put solar panels on your roofs, and you have to...
If you don't do all of this and buy from our companies, then the world will end.
Why are they doing this?
Why are they doing this?
Are the libs promoting...
This particular segment of the energy industry, out of the goodness of their heart, or because they genuinely believe the world is going to end in seven years, or because they haven't noticed that all the predictions they've made on the climate and the environment for the last 50 years haven't happened, and they keep changing the predictions radically, sometimes to the opposite of the predictions they had just previously made.
Do you think it's because of that?
Or do you think it's because the Republicans own oil and gas and the Democrats own electric?
With a little bit of an exception of Elon Musk, who used to be a Democrat, who now seems to be transitioning to a Republican.
Everyone's transitioning these days.
What do you think it is?
I think, call me a cynic, call me jaded.
I think it might have a little bit more to do with the latter.
I don't think the Democrats really care all that much about the climate.
I don't think they're really worried about the world ending in 10 years.
Most of them, the elite Democrats.
I think it's a grift.
I think it's a regular old hustle, just like all the rest of their politics.
And I think that they've got a crooked relationship with the green energy companies.
You saw this with the scandal during the Obama administration.
There was a major environmental company scandal.
The name of the company now escapes me.
Oh, it's going to drive me crazy.
I'll Google it right after the show.
It's hard because there were so many scandals during Obama, but it was a bigger one.
It was a green energy company where the federal government was funneling a ton of money into it, and it wasn't doing anything.
It was just a grift, and it was a payoff, and it was patronage for loyal Democrats.
And you're seeing this throughout that whole sector.
The cleanest energy you could possibly have would be nuclear energy.
That would be the best way to reduce carbon.
It would be extremely efficient.
The Democrats don't endorse that because that's not part of the Democrat grift.
It's not part of the machine, so they don't get behind that.
Fossil fuels, for that matter, are extraordinarily abundant.
There are ways to use them that are cleaner and cleaner every single day.
There are ways to capture carbon, if that's really something that you want to do in your politics, if you're really so afraid of any kind of warming.
So there are ways to do that, but they don't like it because fossil fuels are for the Republicans.
If you want to understand what political debates are, Or really about, at the level of policy, you are going to have a much clearer understanding if you first look to the money than if you first look to the philosophy.
Maybe there are some philosophical considerations, too.
But if you want to understand BLM, how are you going to understand it?
Are you going to understand it simply by reading Kimberlé Crenshaw and Derrick Bell and critical race theory?
Or are you going to understand it by looking at where the money's going?
And you're looking at Patrice Cullors paying off her baby daddy.
And you're looking at Patrice Cullors paying off her brother.
And you're looking at the woke corporations paying off BLM. And you're looking at the Democrat politicians hustling and raising money to bail out the BLM criminal.
What do you think is going to make more sense?
What do you think is a greater motivator for these politicians?
There's one last story, speaking of fossils, that I have to get to.
I've been meaning to get to it for a few days.
Huge discovery in China.
China has discovered a 66 million year old dinosaur embryo fossil.
Oh my goodness.
May 8th, 2022.
Just happened, just a week or so ago.
Scientists from the Fujian Science and Technology Museum and the China University of Geosciences revealed the discovery.
In a study published in the journal BMC Ecology and Evolution, this new dinosaur embryo fossil comes from the Jiangxi province.
At least two of the eggs contain identifiable hadrosauroid embryos.
I don't know if I'm pronouncing that correctly.
Hadrosauroid?
I don't know.
Described here for the first time.
And my only question for them is, how do you know?
I guess I have two questions.
One, how do you know?
What do you mean it's a little baby hadrosauroid?
I thought it was just a clump of cells.
I have been reliably informed by the libs that until the moment of birth, life forms are just their little meaningless stupid clumps of cells.
So my first question is, how do you know what it is?
How can you identify it?
66 million years old.
You can't even identify a human baby that was conceived two months ago.
And then my second question is, well, who cares?
Who cares?
It's just a meaningless, pointless clump of cells that can just be thrown in the trash.
So why does that matter?
Hold on, you're telling me that a 66 million year old clump of cells from a dead lizard is more important than...
A human baby?
A little human baby?
That you're also calling a meaningless clump of cells?
I think they're kind of giving away the game a little bit, folks.
I think the logic is falling apart.
Now, whether the extremely effective political machine will fall apart as easily as their logic, that is another matter.
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.
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.
Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2022.
Hey there, this is John Bickley, Daily Wire editor-in-chief and co-host of Morning Wire.
On today's episode, Democrats push controversial new domestic terrorism laws following the Buffalo mass shooting, the House Intelligence Committee holds a public hearing on UFOs, and a key trial stemming from the Durham investigation begins.
