Ep. 1068 - Quadruple-Jabbed Pfizer CEO Gets Full Blown COVID
Click here to watch the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueR8M
The quadruple-vaxxed Pfizer CEO catches COVID, the effort to recall a Soros-installed prosecutor fails in LA, and the new Minneapolis teacher union contract stipulates that white people get laid off first.
Become a DailyWire+ member today to access movies, shows, and more: https://utm.io/ueMfc
—
Today’s Sponsors:
With thousands of satisfied customers and an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau, Birch Gold can help you protect your savings. To get your no-cost, no-obligation, free information kit text "KNOWLES" to 989898.
Get 10% OFF Your Will! Use Promo Code “KNOWLES” at EpicWill.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In the latest post-death blow to the credibility of the public health establishment, the quadruple vaccinated CEO of Fauci-Ouchi manufacturer Pfizer, Albert Bourla, has just come down with COVID. Now, lest you conclude...
The failure of the shots to stop him from catching the virus would in any way suggest that the jabs are useless or dumb or an obvious scam.
The CEO of Pfizer wants you to know that he's very happy to have taken the shots because he totally would have gotten COVID way harder or something had he not.
Now, unlike most of the liberal automatons who recite their fealty to the jab every time they catch COVID, the CEO of Pfizer, ironically, seems to have been skeptical of the shots from the beginning.
The Wall Street Journal reported just six weeks ago that well into the pandemic, as late as March of last year, Borla had to cancel a trip overseas because he hadn't taken both his shots in time.
When that awkward news broke, the CEO tried to spin his reluctance to get his own vaccine as an opportunity to encourage those with vaccine hesitancy later on.
Uh-huh, sure.
He didn't want to get it.
And I don't blame him for not wanting to get it.
It's a bizarre experimental technology injected directly into people's veins without any long-term data to stop a virus that isn't all that bad for most people.
And the shot didn't even end up doing what it was supposed to do.
I don't blame the Pfizer CEO for avoiding the shot.
I just blame him for demanding that all the rest of us get it.
I blame him for pretending that the three or four shots that he's gotten since then have worked out great, even after he caught COVID. I blame him and our entire ruling class for urinating on our legs and telling us that it's raining, for playing us all for fools, and for thinking that we were so stupid that we'd never catch on.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
My favorite comment yesterday was from Holly Green, who says, I was listening to Rush Limbaugh before he passed, and he said that no president has ever or ever will be arrested.
That's a really great observation from Rush Limbaugh and a great hope from Rush Limbaugh.
And unbelievably, Rush didn't die all that long ago, but so much has changed even since Rush died.
And now we're on the brink of Andy McCarthy, former federal prosecutor, says that seven chances out of ten, Donald Trump gets indicted after that phishing expedition that the FBI launched on Mar-a-Lago just a few days ago.
That would be...
Difficult to come back from.
If Biden's corrupt DOJ actually arrests Donald Trump, actually indicts Donald Trump, it would seem to me that is crossing the Rubicon.
That phrase gets used a lot.
You know, we've crossed the Rubicon.
I think arresting former presidents and current political rivals to the incumbent.
I don't see how you come back.
From that, will Biden do it?
I don't know.
The Democrats have blown through every other standard and norm.
Wouldn't be surprised.
Could that be the beginning of the death of our republic?
Very well could.
But speaking of death, you've got to check out Epic Will.
Right now, head on over to EpicWill.com.
Use code Knowles.
The left's persistent and loud attack on truth is aimed not just at Trump, not even just at you.
It's aimed at your children, the public school system, mainstream kids' entertainment, social platforms.
Pretty much all of our country's cultural institutions have been infiltrated by the left's, quote, not-so-secret agenda to indoctrinate your kids with anti-religious, anti-American thoughts and beliefs.
There are a lot of ways that you can protect your kids from these not-so-secret agendas.
You can homeschool, you can get them involved in your church.
One of the easiest and simplest ways to do it is to take five minutes tonight to write a will with Epic Will.
A will gives you the power to say who will raise your kids should something happen to you and your spouse.
It can, in certain cases, be the only legal defense standing between your kids and the persistent indoctrination attempts from the left.
Epic Will is an online will platform, costs less than your next trip to Target, and They can set you up with a will in as little as five minutes, starting at just $119.
Plus, you save 10%.
When you go to EpicWill.com, use code Knowles.
Take five minutes tonight, write a will, ensuring that your kids will be raised the way that you intended in the event that something happens to you.
Go to EpicWill.com, use code Knowles today.
Speaking of getting shot...
Los Angeles, not doing so great right now.
One of the reasons LA is not doing so great, one of the top reasons why LA is not doing so great is because they have a DA named George Gascon.
He is a George Soros-funded, radical, pro-criminal DA. George Gascon was put into his position to let criminals off the hook.
Because the libs believe that...
I'll give you the most charitable take.
The most charitable take is the reason that the criminals commit crimes is because they get punished and because society has failed them.
And so if society goes really easy on the criminals, then they'll stop committing crimes and we'll all live in a wonderful, happy utopia.
That's the really charitable take on why the libs do this.
The less charitable take, or maybe the more realistic take, let's call it, is that the libs realize that they benefit greatly from chaos and disorder in the streets.
This is a concept known as anarcho-tyranny.
The idea that the crazier things get, the less order you have in society, the easier it is for the libs to go in and take power.
And so, uh, The more power they take, the more they encourage this kind of disorder, and it's a cycle that really allows them to amass quite a lot of power.
Whatever it is, that's the situation we've got right now in Los Angeles.
And so there's an effort underway, or there was an effort underway, to recall George Gascon, because he's driving that city even further into the dirt.
You saw a similar effort with the Soros installed prosecutor, Chesa Boudin.
Chesa Boudin, whose parents, both of his parents, were domestic terrorists.
They were weather underground terrorists, and the apple didn't fall far from the tree.
And this schmuck up in San Francisco caused even more chaos and mayhem and violence and let even more criminals off the hook.
And the almost universally liberal voters in San Francisco chose to recall him.
It was put up to a ballot measure.
They recalled Boudin.
He's out.
There's a new sheriff in town.
They were going to do the same thing in Los Angeles.
And then something really weird happened.
The effort to recall the DA, George Gascon, failed to qualify for the ballot.
And the reason is, they went out, they got signatures on their petition.
They only needed 566,857 signatures.
The recall effort got the 566,000.
Actually, the recall effort got 715,000 signatures.
That's great.
Well past the margin that they need to win.
And yet, the Libs managed to disqualify Almost 200,000 signatures.
So that brought the number down to 520,050 signatures that they said were valid, just under the threshold requirement.
Now, people challenge signatures in all sorts of petition efforts.
That is just a fact of politics.
The Republicans do it, the Democrats do it.
That's the way it goes.
So you need a healthy margin beyond the official number that is required for any particular petition effort.
To disqualify 200,000 when the threshold is only 566, 567,000, that's pretty unusual.
It's also pretty unusual that the libs would disqualify all of those signatures at a time that we are told, don't check signatures.
Just mail out ballots to anybody, widespread, unsolicited.
How dare you?
If you in any way try to verify that the person voting is actually the person who's supposed to vote, you're a racist.
That's anti-democratic.
And yet the libs seem to have done that.
They seem to have gotten pretty aggressive with that.
When it comes to the recall effort for George Gascon.
And what are the odds?
What are the odds that the Libs would be able to disqualify that many signatures to bring you just right below the threshold and keep George Gascon in power?
This right after the San Francisco DA unexpectedly was recalled.
It's just, wow!
Really boggles the imagination, doesn't it?
Almost as though there are some shenanigans going on with our votes.
Almost as though the libs sometimes rig things.
Or at the very least, they encourage election procedures that make the elections vulnerable to fraud.
This is not just me saying this.
This is not just the tinfoil hat, crazy, wild, right-wing conspiracy theorists, the insurrectionists, the threat to our democracy.
The liberals admit this, too.
My absolute favorite story of the last several weeks.
Starbucks.
About as liberal a corporation as it gets.
Starbucks just asked the National Labor Relations Board to suspend mail-in ballots for their union elections because Starbucks says the mail-in ballots allow for fraud.
Gosh, is Trump running Starbucks now?
After he left the White House, did he become the CEO of Starbucks?
Is some crazy, radical right-winger running Starbucks?
No, it's a very left-wing corporation.
They're just willing to admit when Trump is not at issue, when a potential Republican president is not at issue, they're willing to admit that mail-in ballots are obviously open for fraud.
Barack Obama said that 10 years ago, for goodness sakes.
So, Starbucks accuses the NLRB I'm secretly coordinating with the union organizers in the Kansas City area.
This is a dispute over unionizing a store in Overland Park, Kansas.
And during the union vote, they allowed mail-in ballots.
And then what happened?
Listen, I actually don't know whether Starbucks' accusation is legit or not.
It sort of doesn't matter.
Starbucks, a very liberal corporation, is making the claim that the mail-in ballots leave elections open to fraud, which obviously they do.
Now, if we're willing to enforce...
Election integrity.
When it comes to the unionization efforts for one store, for one coffee shop, in coordination with the NLRB, don't you think it might be wise to implement, at the very least, those same basic security measures when it comes to electing the President of the United States?
Oh, but if you say that, you're a conspiracy theorist.
You're undermining our democracy.
You're a Trumpist stooge who's a clear and present danger.
You're a domestic terrorist.
If you're a Starbucks executive, that's totally fine.
You're normal.
If you're Barack Obama, when he says the same thing, that's wonderful.
You're actually, you're trying to defend our democracy.
You're trying to defend one man, one vote.
And yet when you say the exact same thing as a conservative, you're a threat to democracy.
I've mentioned this phrase a couple times in the last month or two.
This is what Mike Anton, who's the author of the Flight 93 essay, a great conservative intellectual, he calls this the celebration parallax.
A parallax being the different vantage of a single point from different points of view.
The different position of a point from different points of view.
When it's the liberals talking about mail-in ballots...
For their own benefit.
Then we've got to get rid of all the mail-in ballots because they're terrible.
They're open for fraud.
When Republicans say exactly the same thing about mail-in ballots, no, that's horrible.
That's a terrible threat to democracy.
And speaking of labor relations, we are seeing a real radicalization of labor relations, especially in Minneapolis, where a teacher union just decided to fire a bunch of white people on the basis of their race.
Things are getting crazy out there when you want to protect your assets, especially if you're in fear of getting fired.
You should definitely check out Birch Gold.
Right now, text Knolls to 989898.
The Consumer Price Index has reached yet another 40-year high, and the latest GDP numbers confirm We're good to go.
Text NOLS, K-N-W-L-E-S, to 989898.
Birch Gold will send you a free information kit on how to transition an IRA or eligible 401k into an IRA in precious metals.
Birch Gold will even help you hold gold in a tax-sheltered account.
For decades, investors have relied on gold and silver as a hedge against inflation.
Now you can too.
With an A-plus rating, with the Better Business Bureau, countless five-star reviews, and thousands of satisfied customers, secure your future with gold.
From Birch Gold now.
Text NOLS to 989898.
Get real help from Birch Gold today.
That is NOLS. Text it to 989898.
Claim your free, no-obligation info kit on how to protect your hard-earned savings with gold.
The Minneapolis Teachers Union has just renegotiated its contract.
As part of the negotiation, the union has stipulated that white teachers will be laid off or reassigned before any educators of color in the Minneapolis public school system if MPS needs to reduce staff.
This is after the Minneapolis Federation of Teachers and the Minneapolis public schools struck a deal with To end a strike.
This was a few months ago.
Now we're seeing the details of this contract.
White teachers laid off first.
Why?
Why?
What is the argument for that?
The argument for that, from the libs, is white people bad, black people good.
Or the argument from the libs is white people have privilege and Black people are oppressed, and that's why we need to create a new racial hierarchy where black people get all the privileges and white people are oppressed.
That's basically the answer.
Now, I think every reasonable person listening out there of every race, of every background, in every state listening to this show would say, this is a terrible thing.
This is an absolutely terrible thing.
We don't want these kinds of racial hierarchies.
We don't want one race of people to be targeted for discrimination.
We don't want other races to be given an advantage at the expense of the other race.
This is really, really terrible.
Who's pushing this?
I bet you the people really pushing this along are the white liberals.
Because of a sense of white guilt, because they bought into all this ridiculous racial propaganda, because they bought into things like critical race theory.
This is really bad.
I don't, if you in any way believe that this sort of thing is acceptable, you have no business calling yourself a conservative or even a normal person.
Okay.
And I know the thing, you know, the libs are going to go with this because the racial identity politics has benefited them to some degree in the past.
Don't.
The squishes are the ones.
You're going to hear from the squishes.
The conservative case for racial quotas against white people.
Here's the conservative case for not allowing white people to get into Harvard or for forcing white people to be fired first in Minneapolis.
Here's the conservative.
Well, actually, guys, when you really think about it, don't do it.
Don't squish.
It's too clever by half.
Don't buy all of this stuff.
It doesn't work.
It's not helping anyone.
Some people believe that they're really pandering to different racial groups.
Even that I'm not sure works.
Sean Maloney, who's the head of the DCCC, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
Sean Maloney says this stuff really is not resonating with voters on the ground.
It might work in the faculty lounge.
It might work in the beautiful penthouses of Black Lives Matter and the rest of the kind of corporate-funded libs.
But it doesn't work with voters on the ground, whether they're conservative or whether they're liberal.
Maloney says, I think sometimes we're really clear on our own priorities.
This is in an interview with the New York Times.
And we don't ask, what are the priorities of the people we represent?
If I've had any success in the Trump district, it's because I try to take seriously the priorities of the people I represent, not just tell them about my own.
So, Sean Maloney, I've actually known Sean Maloney since before he got elected, because Sean Maloney...
Now represents my home district in New York, the place where I grew up.
He's now the representative.
And I was one of the aides for the person that, unfortunately, he defeated after a redistricting campaign.
So I've been on the campaign trail with Sean Maloney.
This guy...
He's right about this.
He's absolutely right.
The district is sort of, I guess it went for Trump, but it's only because there are very liberal areas of the district and very conservative areas of the district as well.
And Sean Maloney says, quote, He doesn't use the word rubric.
He doesn't talk about the first generation folks working in Newburgh.
The first generation folks working in Newburgh don't use the word Latinx.
Most people don't understand who are cisgender, why they need to put pronouns in their email signature.
He's absolutely right about this.
And what Maloney is trying to say to convince his Democrats to stop being so weird is he's saying, look, Democrats have good and valid reasons for why we believe the things and care about things.
I just find that we need to spend a little more time building a relationship with voters that is more respectful and more patient with where they are to enroll them in the changes that we want to make.
Maloney makes this point.
Maloney is a homosexual.
He's adopted kids.
He really lived in Manhattan.
I think he probably still does live in Manhattan, but at least finally now he has a house at least within his district.
This is a guy who spent his whole career as a political operator.
He worked for the Clintons.
I think he worked for Elliot Spitzer, or David Patterson, one of the corrupt governors of New York who's a Democrat.
This guy is...
This guy is not what you would imagine as a kind of moderate, just blue-collar, hard-working Democrat.
And yet he realizes if he wants to be viable, especially in this moment in American politics, the Democrats need to speak to normal people, not weirdos who use the word Latinx and try to trans their kids and do all sorts of weird stuff.
He realizes that the kind of extreme racial and sexual identity politics that the Dems have been playing, that the Minnesota Dems are playing right now, trying to overtly discriminate against white people, that's not going to play among normal, ordinary people. that's not going to play among normal, ordinary people.
I love this word he uses.
He says we have to build a relationship with voters.
We need to make it clear if you want to get anything done in politics, you can't just focus on your own abstract pie in the sky, completely disconnected agenda.
You've got to meet people where they are and bring them along with you and get to know people and have people like you.
I'm not exactly best friends with Sean Maloney, but I did spend some time with him on the campaign trail.
I will say he's very good at this.
He's very good at creating a rapport with people.
And talking to people like they're really human beings.
And he's not just a total robot who's pushing his own agenda.
I mean, I think the guy is just awful in politics.
I'd love to see him defeated.
But he's making a very good point that Democrats certainly need to listen to.
But Republicans should learn from this as well.
This is why Trump is so effective.
There are a lot of reasons Trump is effective.
He's a celebrity.
He's extremely entertaining.
He offered a different set of policies than his Republican opponents in 2016.
But one other thing here, and I think it probably gives him an edge over his prospective opponents in 2024.
He's got a real relationship with people.
People feel a real personal loyalty to him.
This guy is a billionaire from New York who was born rich and got richer and lived as a playboy and slept with supermodels and flies around on a gigantic airplane.
And yet he's so relatable.
People feel like they have a real relationship with him.
And the same cannot be said for...
I'm pretty much any other Republican in my lifetime.
Certainly not to the extent that it's true of Trump.
And so that's why Trump is leading in 2024.
And make no mistake, Trump, as of today, is running for president in 2024.
People can bury their heads in the sand.
They can say, no, no, I prefer this candidate or that candidate or this other guy would be better.
Yeah, sure, maybe.
I don't know.
All I'm telling you is, as of today, Trump is running.
The man just released a campaign commercial.
We are a nation in decline.
We are a failing nation.
We are a nation that is begging Venezuela and Saudi Arabia for oil.
We are a nation that surrendered in Afghanistan, leaving behind dead soldiers, American citizens, and $85 billion worth of the finest military equipment in the world.
We're a nation that allowed Russia to devastate a country, Ukraine, killing hundreds of thousands of people, and it will only get worse.
We're a nation that has weaponized its law enforcement against the opposing political party like never before.
We've never seen anything like this.
We're a nation that no longer has a free and fair press.
Fake news is about all you get.
We are a nation where free speech is no longer allowed, where crime is rampant like never before, where the economy has been collapsing, where more people died of COVID in 2021 than in 2020.
We are a nation that in many ways has become a joke.
But soon we will have greatness again.
It was hard-working patriots like you who built this country, and it is hard-working patriots like you who are going to save our country.
This ad goes on for, I think, three and a half or four minutes, and it's all amazing.
I don't have time to play the whole ad here, but I think you get the flavor of it.
That guy is running for president, and I don't care if you are the most hardcore Ron DeSantis, Ted Cruz, Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, whoever is going to run for president, you might be the most hardcore supporter of those people.
You cannot deny that is a powerful campaign ad.
And so I'm not saying this to say Trump should run for president or he's the best nominee or anything.
I'm just telling you, it is a fact that as of today, he at least believes that he is running.
It's going to be very hard to stop him.
Even if the Libs arrest him, even if they throw him in jail, the man still could run for president.
And so when we're thinking about other candidates or how to run the campaign or what 24 is going to look like, You've got to look at it from that perspective.
Right now, far and away in all the polls, Trump is the leading candidate.
Now, I'm very excited.
This coming Friday, we've got my favorite time of the week.
That is going to be the voicemail bag brought to you by Pure Talk.
A lot of people have written in.
They've asked, hey, how do I submit questions for the voicemail bag?
The way to do it is you just go to my show, regular place.
You go find my show on the Daily Wire website, and you'll see it says you can Submit something to the mailbag that's going to open up an email.
Just attach whatever audio file you want with your voice mailbag.
You can record it on your phone or on your computer or wherever.
Try to keep it to less than a minute.
Sometimes people send me these manifestos that are 12 minutes long.
I don't have time to play that on the show.
But keep it to less than a minute.
Mail it in.
We will hear your wonderful comments and questions in the voice mailbag.
Not to drive this point home too hard.
But I think it's really important for the Republicans now who are arguing over 2024.
You have to grapple with the fact that Trump is the presumptive nominee.
Doesn't matter if they raid his home.
Doesn't matter if they indict him.
Doesn't matter if he's sitting in jail.
You can run for president while you're in jail.
It's already happened, and the guy who did it got a lot of the vote.
Eugene Debs, who was an actual socialist, the most prominent socialist in American history, that guy ran for president from jail in 1920, and he got 6.8 or nearly 7% of the vote, I think.
And you don't think Trump would do that?
You don't think Trump would run wearing an orange jumpsuit from the prison yard?
You know he would.
You absolutely know he would.
And so, if the Republicans want a different nominee, they're going to have to undertake some kind of Herculean effort.
Because right now, especially after the raid on Mar-a-Lago, I don't see how you beat that guy.
Unless 75 years of McDonald's finally gets him, and I don't think so.
I don't think it will.
I think he's very energetic.
He's very, very vibrant.
I don't see, unless he chooses not to run, I don't see how you stop him from getting the nomination.
Especially the more information that comes out from this raid.
The latest, I don't know if you caught this headline, the latest is that the FBI goes in there and they keep changing the justification for why they had to raid Trump.
It was, he had nuclear secrets.
Oh no, actually, maybe he had classified information.
Well, that doesn't really matter.
He had binders of photos.
They took photo binders of his.
And then we just find out the FBI stole his passports.
This is according to Trump.
In the raid by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago, they stole my three passports, one of which was expired, along with everything else.
What happens?
Immediately, you hear from the libs, this isn't true, Trump's lying, even you see some news reports, it's no, the FBI didn't steal his passports, and they've returned them.
Hold on, wait, what was that second part?
Yeah, the FBI is total fake news.
Trump is lying as always.
The FBI did not steal Trump's passports and it's not a big deal because they returned them.
How do you return something that you didn't steal?
Oh, okay, well now the FBI has admitted and the DOJ have admitted that they did take Trump's passports and they have returned them.
Why did they do that?
Why?
Why would you take the man's passports?
Why would you take random binders of photos if you were going in to get the nuclear codes or whatever?
Because the purpose of this raid, the predicate for this raid, was extremely vague.
I mean, we have the search warrant.
We've talked about the search warrant on this show.
It's very, very vague.
We have no idea what this raid was really about.
Warrants are supposed to be pretty specific.
And especially when you're talking about raiding the home of a former president, completely unprecedented.
It should be real specific, and it wasn't.
Why?
Because they weren't looking for anything in particular.
This was a fishing expedition.
And you don't even necessarily have to blame the FBI itself, because the person who called for the raid was Joe Biden's political appointee, Merrick Garland, who's the Attorney General.
Do you really think that this was about the nuclear codes, and that's why they waited 18 months to go get it, and that's why they waited three days after the warrant was even issued to go get it, and that's why the judge who gave them the warrant gave them two weeks to undertake it because of the nuclear codes?
No.
You think it was because of classified information?
No.
Trump says it was declassified, and he, as president, had the right to declassify whatever he wanted.
It's not about any of that.
It's just about going in and trying to find some crime.
They have a mark here, okay, and they're trying to find a crime to pin on him, just as they've been doing for six or seven years.
Okay.
And no matter what you think about the guy, no one's denying that Trump has faults.
No matter what you think about it, when you look at that, it makes you more likely to support him.
Because you say, man, if these guys are so freaking desperate to take him out, if they're willing to upend the entire history of American standards and norms, There must be a reason.
This guy must really pose a threat to them.
Speaking of political attacks, you've got a race right now for Senate in Pennsylvania.
The race is between two people.
Dr.
Oz, who, as far as I can tell, is half a Democrat, at least, and was just on radio attacking pro-life bills very, very recently until he decided he wanted to become the Republican nominee for Senate and was castigating pro-lifers.
And I've never heard the man articulate any particularly conservative point of view in my life, but he won the nomination.
For that seat.
And unfortunately, with Trump's endorsement.
So you got Dr.
Oz as the Republican candidate.
And you got this guy, John Fetterman, who is the Democratic nominee.
John Fetterman is one of the goofiest candidates I have ever seen on the campaign trail.
Just to give you a little flavor, if you haven't watched too much.
Here's Fetterman.
And you can count on us...
To eliminate the filibuster, if you come out and step with us, we will be able to stand with you in D.C. I gave away the lieutenant governor governor in Pennsylvania, the only lieutenant governor in the history to do that.
And let's get some stuff done for America.
Who would ever think that I would be John Fetterman makes Joe Biden look lucid.
John Fetterman makes Joe Biden look like a Rhodes Scholar.
This guy, not a whole lot going on between the ears.
John Fetterman, I'm not sure that he's ever earned a dollar in his life through actual work.
It just came out.
That this guy who positions himself as a working class hero, he's the working man's candidate.
He wears hoodies.
He's got his little goatee thing.
He's a cool, tough, working guy from Pennsylvania.
Turns out this guy's basically never worked an honest day in his life.
He was getting an allowance from his parents to subsidize his political career and the money that he was bringing in.
When we talk allowance, when I was a kid, I got $1 a week allowance.
Sometimes, and I didn't even get it all the time.
John Fetterman was getting over $50,000 a year from his parents.
This guy is such a cartoonishly bad candidate.
His policy positions are absolutely terrible when they're coherent at all.
His health is not all that great, so he's been off the campaign trail for a long period of time.
When he comes back on, frankly, he was doing better when he was off the campaign trail.
This should be a slam-dunk win.
And here is how Dr.
Oz is attacking John Fetterman.
Here is the campaign ad that Dr.
Oz just posted from his own personal account.
Now that John Fetterman claims to be recovering, let's pull back his hoodie and examine what's in his head.
Looks like he has some screws loose.
What's this?
Fetterman wants to release one-third of all prisoners.
That's crazy!
Spend more tax dollars, everything will cost more.
That's nuts!
Slow energy production, gas prices will skyrocket.
That's ridiculous.
Socialized medicine?
Where do you get these crazy ideas?
Now it makes sense.
Better close it up!
John Fetterman is crazier than you think.
That is, and I don't think I'm exaggerating here, the worst political ad I have ever seen.
And I've seen a lot of political ads.
Remember I Am Not a Witch, Christine O'Donnell?
You remember the Demon Sheep ad?
There have been so many terrible advertisements.
I don't know that any of them have ever been worse than that one.
Because that ad...
It makes me more inclined to support John Fetterman.
That attack ad makes John Fetterman look better than he actually is.
It just makes him seem kind of silly.
It just makes him seem kind of, oh, he's got those big googly eyes.
That's kind of fun.
No, the guy's very, very dangerous.
His policies would be absolutely terrible for Pennsylvania.
Absolutely terrible for the United States.
He should not be trusted with power.
He's not who he says he is.
He's a liar.
He's deceitful.
No, no, he's just a wacky waka waka.
And then what?
Then half of the ad is just silly little marionettes and puppets of AOC and Bernie Sanders.
Who cares?
What are you talking about?
It should be about Fetterman and how terrible he is.
John Fetterman is a much worse candidate than AOC or Bernie Sanders.
Bernie Sanders has been in American politics for half a century.
Bernie Sanders is a fairly popular candidate, actually.
Even AOC, she's a pretty shrewd politician.
Why on earth would you take the attention off of him?
Is Dr.
Oz getting a payoff from the Democrats here?
I don't know.
I don't know what to make of it.
It's really, really unfortunate, though.
John Fetterman, this just came out from Washington Free Beacon.
He voted to free a convicted murderer who killed an 18-year-old for heroin money.
He's very frequently the sole Pennsylvania Board of Pardons member to vote for freeing murderers.
Put that in a campaign ad.
Don't put AOC as a jack in the box.
What is wrong with these people?
Not a good way to win a race.
Maybe Dr.
Oz is just there to lose the race.
I don't know.
I don't know what he's doing.
Unfortunate.
Speaking of competition...
This story is going to get me in trouble, but I don't care.
I've got to speak the truth, even if it's unpopular.
There was a clip that was going around last week from the Little League World Series.
I remember when I was a kid, when I would play in Little League, I would watch the Little League World Series.
It's very nice.
Actually, the kids are pretty impressive athletes, given their age.
There was a clip that went viral, though, not because anyone cares about Little League or baseball, but because a pitcher beamed the batter in the head And then the pitcher took it very personally, and the batter...
Well, the batter did something unexpected.
You see, beams the kid in the head, helmet goes flying, poor kid goes down.
Luckily, the ball almost kind of hit him where the helmet wasn't even covering.
Kid's okay, so then the kid goes to first.
Kid takes his helmet off, and then throws his helmet down, and he starts walking to the pitcher's mound.
And you think, uh-oh.
Are the dugouts going to empty?
Is the kid going to wallop this guy?
And then the kid gives the pitcher a hug.
Because the pitcher was very upset.
And I don't know.
I assume the pitcher didn't try to beam the kid in the head.
So the kid goes and hugs the pitcher.
And this is supposed to be a really sweet moment.
And you can hear the commentators saying, this is really, really sweet.
I'm sure these are really good kids.
That's really good.
In a way, this is very heartwarming.
Nevertheless, that was not the right thing to do.
You're not supposed to hug your opponents during active play in baseball or any other sport.
It's like a league of their own.
There is no crying in baseball.
That's true, even down to Little League.
The reason that we have a little league, the reason that we have junior sports leagues, is to teach kids the lessons of sports.
I'm not exactly a varsity football player myself.
Okay?
Though I actually did play in Little League for a very long time.
Wasn't the greatest batter.
It was kind of like Don Baylor.
I would just lean into the pitches and then it would hit me and I'd get on base.
But the reason that you have kids participate in this is it teaches you things about competition, about leadership, about sportsmanship, about grit, about toughness.
You're not supposed to hug people during active play.
Certainly not your opponent's.
Reminds me of Ecclesiastes.
There is a time to every purpose under heaven.
There's a time for war.
There's a time for peace.
There's a time to embrace.
And there's a time to refrain from embracing.
And in active competition, you are supposed to refrain from embracing.
I hope those kids go out and get a soda pop after the game.
I hope they all get some ice cream and talk about what a great game it was and they're very sportsmanlike.
But during the competition, that's not what you're supposed to do.
There are a lot of lessons here for politics.
Forget about the Little League for a second.
Sometimes conservatives start hugging during active play.
They start hugging our opponents during active play.
We grant the liberals so much.
We give away the game.
We even sometimes attempt to lose with dignity.
We're so sometimes ashamed of our own side.
We say, no, guys, come on.
We pull a Liz Cheney.
We say, I'm with you.
I'm really with you.
I'm one of the good ones.
I'm a conservative, but not that kind of conservative.
No.
We want there to be a good political order.
We want to get along with even our political opponents.
We want to be able to have a thriving country.
We do have to live with these people.
But there's a time to every purpose under heaven.
There's a time for war.
There's a time for peace.
There's a time to embrace.
There's a time to refrain from embracing.
Speaking of embracing, there is a new conservative dating app out there.
This headline just came out.
Kayleigh McEnany's sister.
President Trump's press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, has just launched a right-wing dating app.
People have written in here.
They write into the Daily Wire all the time.
They say, hey, why won't you guys start a dating app?
You've got a razor company.
You've got kids' books.
Why wouldn't you start a right-wing dating app?
Because all of us are having trouble out there in the dating world, and we don't want to date a bunch of weirdo libs.
So Kayleigh McEnany's sister has come out and done this.
But it raises the question, obviously I have not tried the dating app, I don't intend to try that or any other dating apps, but it raises a question, can there even be such a thing as a conservative dating app?
You know, while the radical gender ideologues decry the harms of sex-exclusive bathrooms, you know, single-sex bathrooms, comedy specials, and dead-named celebrities, kids are the ones suffering.
Just recently, We must expose and defend the truth.
Such!
As was done in Matt Walsh's wonderful documentary, What is a Woman?
With over 5,000 audience ratings on Rotten Tomatoes, What is a Woman?
is pushing back against the left's dangerous narratives.
Help us keep the momentum going by watching and sharing the movie, What is a Woman?
Go to whatisawoman.com.
Whatisawoman.com.
Conservatives are about to get our own dating app.
Here is the young Ms.
McEnany to explain.
Hey guys, I'm Ryan.
I've gotta tell you about something I am so excited to announce.
A dating app for all of us conservatives.
It's called The Right Stuff, and it's launching this September.
What I love most about it is that it's invite-only, so not just anyone can join.
First of all, it's free to use.
And for my ladies, you'll never have to pay because we all get premium subscriptions for simply inviting a couple friends.
Gentlemen, if you want access to premium, that's on you.
And by the way, those are the only two options, ladies and gentlemen.
The Right Stuff is all about getting into the right dating pool with people who share the same values and beliefs as you.
So if you're a young conservative looking to amp up your dating life, go to joinrightstuff.com to gain early access.
We need to get back to the right way of dating.
See you there.
Compared to Tinder and Grindr and all of the other ones, I'm sure this app is way better.
Actually, on the Grindr point, one of the criticisms that The Right Stuff is getting here is that they don't have a same-sex dating option.
And they're saying they're open to the possibility of a same-sex dating option in the future, but they're not sure they're not doing it yet, which raises a whole other question.
If you've got a same-sex dating option, can you really call it a conservative app?
We're the conservative gay dating app.
Maybe.
It's an open question.
I don't know.
I mean, that's what's being debated right now.
What does it mean to have a conservative dating app?
Is that even possible?
And I come down on the side of, I don't know that it is possible.
Ms.
McEnany, Ryan McEnany says, we need to get back to the right way of dating.
What is the right way of dating that we keep swiping on people like they're little commodities just to be consumed and like they're swiping on little digital phantom images on a screen instead of talking to real people in real life, but we do it on the right-wing app, not the left-wing app?
Is that the right way of dating?
No, I think the right way of dating is not just which app are you going to swipe on.
The right way of dating is how do you view people?
Where do you meet people?
Who are the kinds of people that you marry?
In the old days, you would marry very often your high school sweetheart.
Or you'd marry people from your town or from your church.
Now that almost never happens.
In the old days, you'd marry people that you'd known since you were a teenager.
Now you marry people maybe that you didn't meet until your 30s.
I'm not judging any of that.
I'm not saying that's a terrible thing to do.
We live in the world that we live in.
That's how dating works now.
I know plenty of marriages that have come out of even the lib dating apps.
And they are great marriages.
So I'm not mocking that.
I'm not deriding it.
I'm not even saying don't do it.
I'm not saying don't use Ryan McEnany's app.
Ryan McEnany's app is probably a great alternative to the liberal dating apps that exist today.
But her point is even more important.
She's saying we need to get back to the right way of dating.
And ultimately, the right way of dating is not going to be swiping on people like they're commodities.
That might be an improvement over Tinder or Grindr or whatever.
But that's not ultimate.
We've got to follow it to its logical conclusion.
The conservative perspective cannot be Let's do what the liberals want to do, but just slightly a little bit better or more efficient or like a little bit less crazy.
The conservative way of life cannot just be, let's do what the liberals did six months ago.
Not even five years ago.
We're talking about dating apps, we're saying six months ago.
No, the conservative point of view has to be different.
It's got to be a choice, not just an echo of the libs.
Speaking of intimacy, this story...
I was almost hoping I'd run out of time before getting to this story.
I have to get to it.
But it's so gross.
I'll just say it.
There's a medical report out now.
Headline, Evidence of Human-to-Dog Transmission of Monkeypox.
Now, you don't need to be a scientist or an epidemiologist to know how monkeypox spreads.
Well, I guess if you're watching the mainstream news, even the allegedly right-wing cable news channels, you might not know how monkeypox spreads.
Monkeypox pretty much only spreads at gay orgies and from people who go to gay orgies.
About 98% of the spread is from that.
And now, a human has given monkeypox to a dog.
So we don't do a weather report on this show, and I know there's been a heat wave.
I would look out in the sky for fire and brimstone.
I would just recommend on your drive home, just like you might look out in the winter for hail.
I would say it's much more urgent right now to look out for fire and brimstone, because this stuff makes Sodom and Gomorrah look like child's play.
You know how the dogs got it, okay?
I know, and you're going to hear all of these apologists for lib decadence say, no, maybe they probably just got it from a soda can or something.
No, they didn't.
Okay, we know how the dogs got the monkeypox.
The question we have to ask is, why is this wrong?
Guys shh up to their animals.
That's what happened.
You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
We know how these dogs got monkeypox.
My question is, why is it wrong?
We all know it's wrong.
We all know it's gross.
Why is it wrong?
The conservatives can answer, it's wrong because it's intrinsically wrong because that's not what human sexuality is for.
That's not what the body is for because there's an objective moral order and that ain't part of it.
But if you're a lib and you don't believe in any of that stuff, and you don't believe in right or wrong, and you just think, hey man, you do you, you know, just don't bother me, you know, just leave me alone, man.
Why is that wrong?
You might say, what the libs are going to say is, well, the animals can't consent.
Yeah, we eat them.
We kill and eat animals all the time.
So we don't get their consent for that.
I don't think they would consent to us killing and eating them.
So, okay, we don't care about their consent.
So why is that wrong?
The liberals cannot answer.
Unless you're the most extreme sort of vegan of all.
But it raises other questions even about the way that we care for animals, the way that we control animals.
We don't care about animals' consent.
Sure, animals can't give consent.
Period.
So why is that wrong?
And if it is wrong, because of all the reasons the conservatives say, the objective moral order, because the human body has a purpose, because our sexuality especially has a purpose...
What implications does that have for the rest of our dating life?
Getting back to the right way of dating, what implications does that have there?
You know, the rest of the show is continuing now.
I have got a story that I'm very, very excited to get to, but it's not for the hoi polloi.
It's not for all of you out there, you cheapskates, who don't want to join the Daily Wire.
If you do not want to miss the member block of this show, then you've got to click the link in the description and join us, where I will be hearing from you.
I'll be getting into my story, I'll be hearing from you in the comments, and I'll be talking to my friend Jenna Ellis about President Trump's legal troubles, because Jenna Ellis was President Trump's lawyer.
