Ep. 1194 - Libs’ Disgusting Attempt To Blame Derailment On Trump Fails
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
Liberals try (and fail) to blame Trump for the Ohio train derailment, a mother lambasts Congress after fentanyl smuggled across the border kills her two sons, and Senate Republicans expose corruption at the FBI and DOJ.
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3jJQBQ7
Shop all Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/3xuFD43
Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Cynch - Download the Cynch app and get your first tank exchange for just $10 with promo code KNOWLES. Visit http://cynch.com/offer for details.
Epic Will - Save 10% off your complete will package: https://www.epicwill.com/knowles
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
After the train full of toxic chemicals derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, poisoning the town and the surrounding communities, the Biden administration did pretty much nothing.
Then, a week later, the Biden administration continued to do pretty much nothing.
Then, a week after that, President Trump showed up with water and Big Macs and demanded that the federal government show up and help these poor people.
And then the Biden administration still basically did nothing.
But at that point, after Trump showed up, Biden's supporters did something.
They agreed upon a new talking point, which is that the whole thing was actually Trump's fault.
What do you make of the fact that he went there despite the fact that the regulations that he rolled back were partly responsible for this tragedy?
It was definitely an ironic thing to do.
You take down regulations, you water down regulations, you weaken the power of the administration to deal with freight railroad companies, and then you show up wanting to be a great friend of the people who have been impacted by a rail disaster.
This wasn't just background noise conspiracy theorizing.
This wasn't just finger pointing from the fringes.
These were leading liberal figures from the media and the Biden administration itself claiming that Trump had cut regulations that then caused the train to derail.
This is the talking point echoed by all the libs today.
And it turns out that the talking point is completely false.
Completely false.
Even a handful of honest libs in mainstream outlets are admitting this.
The Washington Post just did an analysis.
Headline.
So far, Trump's rollback of regulations can't be blamed for Ohio train wreck.
Quote, we decided to examine every possible regulatory change made under Trump that could be related to the accident and assess whether it could have had an impact.
From our analysis, none of the regulatory changes made during the Trump administration at this point can be cited as contributing to the incident.
That's the Washington Post.
New York Times, quote, He said later that he believed Mr.
Trump's presence would help keep the pressure on federal officials to take action.
Asked about criticism from the White House on the Republican opposition to rail safety measures.
Mr.
Vance, this is the Ohio Republican Senator J.D. Vance, said attempts to politicize the issue would not help residents.
New York Times says, quote, according to the website PolitiFact, a rail safety rule repealed as part of a broad regulatory rollback under the Trump administration would have had no impact on the East Palestine derailment.
WAPO, Super Lib, New York Times, Super Lib, New York Times cites PolitiFact, Super Lib.
They all admit nothing that Trump did.
None of the deregulation could have in any way caused this derailment.
Even Joe Biden's own National Transportation Safety Board chairman, Jennifer Homody, made a point to explain that the regulation Trump allegedly cut had nothing to do with the derailment.
She tweeted, quote...
Some are saying the ECP, Electronically Controlled Pneumatic Brake Rule, if implemented, would have prevented this derailment.
False.
Even if the rule had gone into effect, this train wouldn't have had ECP brakes.
But falsehood flies, and the truth comes limping after it.
The lie shows up in prime time on page A1 of the paper.
Everybody sees it.
The correction, where does that show up?
It gets completely buried.
The wrong guy gets the blame.
Nothing gets fixed.
And Biden prepares for the next catastrophe by doing what he does best.
Nothing.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Do not forget...
Just smash that like button.
Subscribe.
Ring the bell.
Ring my bell, baby.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Ring my bell.
Leave a comment.
Let's make sure that as YouTube clamps down on some of the perfectly true things that we say on this show, perfectly ordinary things that the libs don't like, that...
We keep juicing the algorithm a little bit.
Maybe we take a little bit of a stand against some of the censorship that we're seeing throughout big tech.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Top10guy1, who says, A transportation secretary is just like an umpire in baseball.
If you know their name, it means they did a horrible job.
So true.
So, so true.
There is no reason these people should blend in with the furniture.
If you know who they are, it is because they are doing a horrible job, just as Pete Buttigieg is.
You want the transportation department to just kind of run automatically.
Run like a railroad as everything is going A-OK. You don't want to have to think about it.
When you don't want to think about replacing your propane tank, you've got to check out Cinch.
Right now, head on over to cinch.com, use promo code Knowles.
Are you dreaming of those summer night barbecues with your family and friends?
Now imagine right before everyone comes over running out of propane on the grill.
What would you do?
Cinch is a propane grill tank home delivery service.
They deliver propane tanks right to your door.
Cinch delivers on your schedule.
No long-term commitment or subscription is required.
Plus, delivery is completely contactless.
You don't have to be home to receive the delivery.
You can track the order on the Cinch app from anywhere.
Whether you are grilling, camping, or enjoying a cozy fire with s'mores, Cinch's propane delivery service ensures that you have the fuel you need to make the most of every moment.
Go online to cinch.com or download their app to order $9.
New customers can get their first tank exchange for just $10 with promo code Knowles.
K-N-W-L-E-S. Go to Cinch.com or download the Cinch app and use promo code Knowles to get your first tank exchange for just $10.
C-Y-N-C-H.com.
Promo code Knowles.
This is a limited time offer and you must live within a Cinch service area to redeem it.
Cinch.com slash offer for details.
The Libs, as always, are trying to pass the buck for everything.
We talked yesterday about Lori Lightfoot, the dismal mayor of Chicago, losing her re-election bid as murder skyrocketed throughout the city.
The city is essentially a war zone now.
Some voters finally threw that bum out.
What does Lori Lightfoot have to say about it?
To what does she attribute her loss?
Her lack of care for the people, her extraordinarily arrogant attitude when called out on her failures, the fact that people in Chicago can't walk down the street without taking their lives in their hands.
No!
No, no.
She, of course, blamed it on her race and on her sex.
Lori Lightfoot is a black lady, and so that's why she was not re-elected.
Of course, one would have to ask if...
If Lori Lightfoot did not win re-election because Chicago residents hate black people and hate women, how did she win election in the first place?
That part doesn't quite make a lot of sense.
But then two, you've got to look at Chicago's demographics.
Lori Lightfoot says, I'm a black woman in America.
Of course, race and sex, race and gender, she was answering, contributed to that loss.
Chicago is 29% black.
America is about 13% black.
Chicago is more than twice as black as America broadly is.
Chicago is 51% female.
There are more women in Chicago than men.
The blame it on your race, blame it on your sex stuff doesn't really play anywhere as far as I'm concerned.
But it especially does not play in Chicago because Chicago is one of the blackest American cities and it's more female than male.
What do we think is most likely to have contributed to Lori Lightfoot's loss?
The identities that she represents, which are disproportionately represented among the electorate, or her utter failure in the fact that residents of Chicago, black, white, yellow, and brown, male, female, and these days I guess everything in between, just don't want to be shot as they're walking down the street.
I strongly suspect it would be the latter.
That kind of irresponsibility I find very, very funny.
Why'd you lose re-election?
Oh, it's because I'm black.
That's very funny.
That's a silly thing.
Sometimes the Libs' irresponsibility is much less funny.
As we saw yesterday, there's a woman who showed up to Congress To put a human face on the opioid epidemic that most of our politicians, certainly the liberal politicians, but many establishment politicians broadly, just don't seem to care very much about.
Her name is Rebecca Kiesling.
Her sons, Caleb and Kyler, were killed along with another friend of a fentanyl overdose.
This was just a few years ago.
Her sons were 20 and 18 years old.
And...
And Mrs.
Kiesling is asking, why won't the Congress do anything about this epidemic?
I lost my two sons.
Caleb was age 20 and Kyler was age 18 on July 29th of 2020.
It was absolutely a perfect storm.
There was also a 17-year-old girl, Sophia Harris, who died along with them.
And the drug dealer, Lorenzo Bravo, was spared by Narcan.
And he ended up getting 8 to 15 years for killing three people.
He was another addict, and so because he survived, they had leads to who he got it from, and they actually could try to start tracing it back.
And the law enforcement made it clear to me that this fentanyl came from Mexico.
It came from our southern border.
You talk about children being taken away from their parents!
My children were taken away from me!
It's an amazing line.
It's an amazing moment.
One of the most impressive moments I've ever seen in congressional testimony.
This mother who lost two of her sons so young, completely preventable deaths.
Deaths caused not just by teenage irresponsibility, which is basically universal, but by the decisions of people in Congress to keep that border open and to go soft on drugs.
This is not just something that's happening naturally and you can't prevent it.
In the year 2000, 20,000 Americans died of drug overdoses.
Today, 100,000 Americans, more than 100,000 Americans die every year from drug overdoses.
5x today what we saw just a little over 20 years ago.
That's not just an accident.
That's not just the natural changes of politics.
That is because of specific policies.
That's because Democrats and some establishment Republicans won't close the border.
That's because Democrats and some squished Republicans want to go soft on drugs.
Not just not enforce the law, but actually stop enforcing.
Not just not enforce the law, but loosen up the law.
liberalize the drug laws, make it easier for drug dealers to peddle poison.
That's why this is happening.
And what do we hear?
We say, well, look, we know that fentanyl's pouring across the border.
They say, well, what do you want to do?
You want to stop those future dreamer Americans from coming across?
Yes.
Yeah, I want to stop the drug cartels from poisoning America across the border.
Say, well, don't you know that when we enforce border policies, parents are separated from their children.
That woman says, well, you know, my children were separated from me too.
What about me?
What about me?
It's not a complicated issue.
Ronald Reagan made this point in the 80s.
He said, illegal immigration is not complicated.
It's illegal.
End of story.
We were talking about gangs and drugs and breaking the law in El Salvador this week.
El Salvador was able to cut its murder rate by 58%.
And it wasn't all that complicated.
It was actually pretty simple.
If you arrest the criminals, the murder rate goes down.
How do you prevent these drug deaths?
100,000 plus per year.
You enforce the immigration policies and you enforce the drug laws.
Not rocket science.
We can do it.
The liberals and the squishes in the Republican Party don't want to do it.
This is the consequence.
Okay, that's fine.
They have their reasons for it.
They want cheap labor.
They want foreigners to flood the country.
They think that people have a right to do drugs that will kill them.
Okay, then look the victims in the face.
And look at the consequences of those actions.
And don't say, well, this is the tides of history.
No, it's because of specific decisions being made by very, very irresponsible politicians.
Now, we all, we think about mortality.
We all think about mortality when you're thinking about your own mortality, which people seem to be doing more and more these days.
You got to check out Epic Will.
Right now, go to epicwill.com, use promo code Knowles.
According to a recent poll, 62% of Americans who think about their own death a lot of the time do not have a will.
That is a little like being afraid that your house will burn down, but not having homeowner's insurance.
Being afraid of drowning but refusing to wear a life jacket.
A will protects your wishes and your family should anything happen to you.
When you have one, you have peace of mind because you know you've done your best to protect the ones you care about.
I cannot stress enough How important it is to write a will, and Epic Will is here to get you started for just $119, and in as little as five minutes, Epic Will can help you create your last will and testament, living will, and even healthcare power of attorney.
Their step-by-step online form makes it super easy.
All you need to do is fill in the blanks.
Go to epicwill.com, use promo code Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to save 10% on Epic Will's complete will package.
That is epicwill.com, promo code Knowles.
The fentanyl problem is not just a little uptick in drugs in America.
It is something we have never seen before.
Fentanyl is just pure poison, and fentanyl is pouring across our border as part of a concerted effort to weaken our country.
By foreign actors, by our enemies, by China to begin with, and then through Mexico because they know that effectively we don't have a border.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, who were assigned to the Andrade Port of Entry in California, just hit a new port record by seizing nearly $1 million of fentanyl and meth.
That was in one car.
They were hiding it in the gas tank.
One million dollars worth of fentanyl and meth.
How many people, not only could that amount of drugs have killed, how many people would that fentanyl have killed had that car made it through?
We don't know.
Chances are, if you don't know somebody who has died of a fentanyl overdose in the last five years...
I promise you, you know somebody who knows somebody.
I know people who died of these overdoses, people I grew up with.
Everybody does.
And it's not like I grew up in Breaking Bad, okay?
I didn't grow up in some totally drug-ridden community.
I grew up in a pretty nice suburb in New York.
It's everywhere.
And so we can celebrate, oh good, CBP was able to catch a million dollars worth of this stuff.
That's what we caught.
Imagine what's getting through.
Sometimes the liberals who try to make excuses about this, they say, yeah, it's good.
Border protection's working.
We were able to catch these people.
They'll say, well, we were able to catch the criminals that we're trying to sneak over illegally, who usually are then just released back into the public.
Or they'll say, oh, we were able to catch the drugs.
Yeah.
Imagine how much in the way of drugs is getting through.
You don't have to imagine, because 100,000 plus Americans every year are dying from it, a 5x increase.
It's just total irresponsibility.
Why won't the Biden administration do something about this?
Well, because the Biden administration is directing its federal resources toward much more pressing issues, like terrorizing parents who don't want their kids to get trans, and terrorizing pro-lifers, and infiltrating Catholic masses and trying to harass Christians for going to church on Sunday.
Josh Hawley Grilled the Attorney General Merrick Garland just yesterday on that latter FBI initiative to infiltrate churches such as my own, churches where Catholics just want to go on Sundays and worship God in a traditional way that has existed for at least 1,200 years.
I notice a pattern, though.
The FBI field office in Richmond, on the 23rd of January of this year, issued a memorandum in which they advocated for, and I quote, the exploration of new avenues for tripwire and source development against traditionalist Catholics, including those who favor the Latin Mass.
Attorney General, are you cultivating sources and spies in Latin mass parishes and other Catholic parishes around the country?
The Justice Department does not do that.
It does not do investigations based on religion.
I saw the document you said.
It's appalling.
It's appalling.
I'm in complete agreement with you.
I understand that the FBI has withdrawn it and it's now looking into how this could ever have happened.
How did it happen?
That's what they're looking into.
How many informants do you have in Catholic churches across America?
I don't know.
And I don't believe we have any informants aimed at Catholic churches.
There it is.
So Merrick Garland, he's a very talented politician.
He's been in the upper echelons of Washington for a long time.
And he gives the right answer to Hawley.
And let's say he's being sincere.
I was appalled, Senator Hawley.
I can't believe this was happening.
I've ordered them not to do it anymore.
I was totally appalled.
Okay, that's good.
But then did you notice that second answer that Garland gave?
Hawley says, before we go, how many informants do you have in the Catholic churches?
And Garland makes a big mistake.
He says, I don't know.
Oops!
I mean, I don't think we have any.
Wait, hold on.
You just said, I don't know.
Implying that you've got some, you just don't know what the number is.
Implying that your first answer was kind of disingenuous, right?
I was appalled.
I can't believe that the FBI is going in there and harassing these Catholics.
I'm going to get to the bottom of this.
How exactly?
I'm not going to tell you.
But I'm absolutely infuriated.
Okay, well just, alright, before we get to any of that, you know, do what you can.
But how many people do you have spying on the Catholics?
Oh, I don't know.
I mean none.
Yeah, okay.
Okay, so Hawley is grilling Garland, and then we get Senator Cruz.
I don't say it just because he's a friend of mine.
I don't say it just because we hosted a podcast for three years together.
This guy is just the best at grilling witnesses in the Senate.
There is nobody better than Cruz.
So Cruz goes in, he's going after Garland, and he brings up the case of Mark Houck, a pro-life activist who was threatened with jail time.
The DOJ showed up at his house with his kids, terrorized him, arrested him, all for pushing back on a pro-abortion fanatic who was screaming at his son.
All for just like, hey, get away from my son.
You got the men in the windbreakers showing up.
The federales show up to your door and arrest you and threaten you.
Cruz says, what gives?
Why do you send two dozen agents in body armor to arrest a sidewalk counselor who happens to be pro-life, but you don't devote resources to prosecute people who are violently firebombing crisis policies?
It is a priority of the department to prosecute and investigate and find the people who are doing those firebombings.
They are doing it at night and in secret, and we have found one group which we did prosecute.
You found one.
How many have there been?
How many attacks have there been?
There have been a lot, and if you have any information specifically as to who those people are, we would be glad to have that.
Did you personally authorize 20 agents going to Mr.
Houck's house, and he offered to turn himself in through counsel, but you didn't want that.
The Department of Justice wanted to make a show of it.
Did you personally authorize it?
And do you want to apologize to Mrs.
Houck and her seven children for being terrorized?
The decisions about how to do that are made at the level of the FBI agents on scene.
So there we go.
It's the same kind of answer from Garland that we saw when he was answering Hawley.
He says, I don't know.
I didn't make these decisions.
This was not me.
This was lower level FBI agents.
We're looking into it.
I'm very, very responsible, Senator Cruz.
How dare you impugn my motives or my integrity?
And okay, that's fine.
But then Cruz, he also, he just kind of gets in there.
I remember once he was grilling Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook.
And what Cruz really shines in is he's doing the grilling and he's asking all these questions over here, over here, with this hand over here.
And then he just hits you with the other hand right when you're not expecting it.
So he's grilling Mark Zuckerberg on whatever, I don't remember.
And then out of nowhere he goes, why was Palmer Luckey fired?
Because there was a rumor that a major Facebook executive had been fired for being a conservative.
And he just off-footed him, and Zuckerberg didn't know what to say, because he was so focused on this other topic.
So we saw Cruz do this again.
Cruz is grilling Garland on all sorts of issues.
And then he says, hey, one quick question just before you go.
Is it illegal to protest on the grounds of a judge's house while a case is pending?
Here's the answer.
General Garland, is it a federal crime to protest outside of a judge's home with the intent of influencing that judge as to a pending case?
The answer to that is yes, but I also want to at least respond to your characterization of the department, which I vigorously disagree with.
Huh?
Oh, what?
Yes, the thing you said is true.
But let me get off this for a second.
Because what Cruz was doing there was quoting the U.S. Code verbatim, which says that the protests that we saw after the Dobbs decision was leaked, all the pro-abortion fanaticists who showed up to Alito's house, who showed up to Kavanaugh's house, who showed up to the homes of the conservative justices to protest, terrorize them, terrorize their kids in the middle of the night.
One guy showed up to assassinate Brett Kavanaugh.
And the local police and the federal police just allowed this to happen.
It was completely illegal.
And so now, Garland's answer to Hawley and to Cruz is, oh, I didn't know.
I wasn't aware.
We're investigating.
We're looking into it.
Had I known, we would have done things differently.
It's exposed as complete BS. Because Garland says, yes.
What they did was illegal.
I know it was illegal.
I know it was happening.
It was all over the news, and I let it happen.
I'm the Attorney General of the United States, and I permitted this kind of lawlessness when it benefited my political party.
I brought down the full force of the federal government to terrorize a pro-lifer and his wife and his kids for having the temerity to protest outside of, or not even to protest outside, to pray outside and to peacefully demonstrate outside of an abortion clinic.
Oh yeah, we're going to terrorize those people.
But when left-wingers violate federal law outside the homes of Supreme Court justices, one of whom goes and tries to kill the guy, That I knowingly allowed to happen.
Absolutely humiliating day for Merrick Garland on Capitol Hill.
Great job to those Senate Republicans.
So we need some new leadership.
President Trump, obviously, would like to reclaim the mantle of leadership.
And one area where Trump has really shined is on foreign policy.
This is, in this race, clear because he's the only candidate really with a foreign policy.
That's no knock on DeSantis or Haley or Vivek or anybody else.
It's just that Trump is the only guy who's gotten to be president before, and so he's the only guy who's had an opportunity to articulate a foreign policy.
And Trump went on our pal Seb Gorka's show a couple of days ago, and he articulated his foreign policy vis-a-vis Ukraine.
And a deal has to be made.
It would have never happened, but that has to stop, and it has to stop right now.
And a deal can be negotiated by the right president.
You have a president that knows what he's doing.
You can negotiate a deal even right now.
It would have been a lot easier early.
I always say, you know, Putin put those soldiers on the border.
And I said, oh, he's looking to negotiate.
I was actually a little surprised he did it because nothing happened during my term.
He didn't take over anything.
It was the only one.
Typical Trump take on foreign policy, which is, if I were in charge, things would be totally fine.
That's Trump's foreign policy.
He's not articulating some grand strategy.
He's not articulating some foreign policy doctrine.
He's just saying, put me in charge, it'll be all right.
And the funny thing is, It seems like that is true.
In fact, the fact that there is not some overarching strategy that you can put down in a five-point manifesto, this is the Trump foreign policy doctrine, that seems to be the strongest part of it.
It is simply a fact the world was more peaceful during Trump's tenure than at any other time in my life.
Trump had a more successful foreign policy in terms of preserving the peace than Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, even other Bush.
And Bush one was pretty good at preserving the peace.
Reagan even.
Trump did a great job.
Why?
Because Trump was unpredictable, and because Trump was unpredictable, sometimes you thought he was gonna go send in the troops and he was a total dove.
Sometimes you thought that Trump was going to stay away and he goes in and assassinates the top Iranian general.
Or drops the mother of all bombs.
And you just don't know.
And so if you're Xi Jinping, if you're Vladimir Putin, even if you think that Trump is only 5% serious...
When he says, I'm going to blow you to smithereens if you do something I don't like.
Even if you think 95% chance he's bluffing.
In fact, Trump went on record.
He said, I told Vladimir Putin if you invade Ukraine, I'll blow up Moscow.
And so you're Vladimir Putin and you think, there's no way.
He's bluffing.
But because he's unpredictable, you've got to think in your head there's a 5%.
There's a 2% chance that this crazy mother lover is going to do it.
And so you hold back.
And in fact, this is not just Trump bragging about how things might have been in a conditional and a hypothetical had he been president.
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky says the same thing.
Zelensky says that the proximate cause of the war was that Joe Biden lifted the sanctions off of Russia and And Joe Biden then invited Russia to invade.
Joe Biden said if it's just a minor incursion into Ukraine, we won't really do anything about it.
That's what Zelensky pointed out.
And Zelensky and Trump seem to agree on that point.
Unfortunately, though, we have irresponsible leadership, and so we seem to be hurtling ever more toward war.
There was an insane press conference yesterday with the Secretary General of NATO, that would be Jens Stoltenberg, and the Finnish Prime Minister, Sanna Marin, about how, even though we haven't all really voted on it yet, or even though the people of these countries seem to be pretty opposed,
Ukraine is totally going to join NATO. Well, NATO allies have agreed that Ukraine will become a member of our alliance, but at the same time, that is a long-term perspective.
What is the issue now is to ensure that Ukraine prevail as a sovereign independent nation, and therefore we need to support Ukraine.
I see that the future of Ukraine is to be part of European Union and also member of NATO. We have taken many steps forward.
So this press conference was insane for a number of reasons.
One, if Ukraine joined NATO today, we would instantly be in World War III. We might already be in World War III, but we would instantly formally be in World War III because Ukraine is currently occupied by Russia, so this would trigger the NATO treaty and we would all be at war.
It's insane for another reason because buffer states serve a purpose.
Historically speaking, When you've got big aggressive empires bordering right up on each other, that creates a lot of tension.
That often is a cause for war.
So there are such things as buffer states, which are caught in the middle of great powers.
And the way that they exist is they play the great powers off of one another.
And it does a pretty good job, historically speaking, of preserving peace for the people and of keeping the greater powers from killing each other.
But then the craziest part of this press conference...
Is that that woman that the NATO Secretary General was speaking with is the Prime Minister of Finland, who, if you recognize her at all, you will recognize her because she is famously the hottest world leader ever.
People know her because of her tabloid exploits, where she's this young, good-looking woman who goes out to the club, who stays out dancing and partying all night.
So that...
Alone doesn't give you a ton of faith in her judgment that she famously will miss phone calls about matters of state because she's out just dancing at the club and hanging out with all of her friends, getting kind of weird.
So, absurd in itself.
But then also because...
The Prime Minister of Finland is not the one who would be making these foreign policy decisions.
That would actually go to the President of Finland, the President of Finland who doesn't have a lot of power generally, but it's a different position and it does still have a lot of control over foreign affairs.
But then most of all, because Finland is not in NATO! Finland is not in NATO. Why is Finland making decisions for NATO? Forget it.
Why is the NATO Secretary General saying, oh yes, Ukraine will join?
Does the United States have any say over this?
NATO is just the American imperial arm when it comes to the military, okay?
And we shouldn't pretend otherwise.
It's preposterous to suggest, oh, the United States, we're just one party among many.
No, NATO's our thing.
It's our military imperial arm.
And now you're just going to say, oh, and Ukraine's going to join NATO. Do the American people have any say over that?
Apparently not.
And I'm sure our liberal leaders, irresponsible as they are, would love that.
Completely insane.
Speaking of foreign affairs, this is a big foreign affairs day.
Very sad story out of Iran.
Headline, dozens of schoolgirls in Iran taken to hospital after poisoning.
Suspected attack on students in the city east of Tehran is latest in spate of incidents over the past three months.
So Iran, traditionally not so in favor of women going to school and higher education.
So there have been these incidents where girls going to school in Iran have been poisoned.
Terrible.
And we sit here in America and we say, gosh, could you imagine?
That's awful.
You send your daughter to school in Iran and you've got to worry that she gets poisoned.
We would never do that here in the United States, would we?
No.
Here in the United States, when we send our girls to school, they don't get poisoned with arsenic or cyanide.
They get poisoned with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, and then they're put on the path to have their bodies mutilated.
Very often without the knowledge of parents.
Yeah, it's very different.
We're not like those awful Iranians, where a small number of girls have been attacked with poison at school.
We're Americans, where a large number of girls are being attacked with poisons at schools, with the assent of the teachers and the scientific establishment and the federal government, which is now fully in support of transing little kids at school.
Hmm.
Wait a second.
Hold on.
I thought we were...
Aren't we supposed to be the good guys?
Why are we doing the stuff that the bad guys do?
Why are we doing the stuff that the bad guys do in some ways in a more egregious way than the bad guys are?
That's not great.
We look around at foreign affairs.
We like to believe that we're much better than the rest of the world.
Traditionally, we have been.
We're the place that everybody wants to come to.
So we look over at China.
We say, China, they're surveilling their citizens.
They're spying on all their citizens.
There's no privacy.
There's a social credit score there.
If you violate that social credit score, you can't engage in commerce.
You really can't participate in society.
And we...
We have cameras everywhere, and our government intercepts all of our data and analyzes all of those data, and if you fall afoul of the government and you behave in a way that's politically incorrect, well, you can be kicked out of, not just deplatformed from social media sites, You can be fired from your job.
You can be expelled from your school.
You can be banned from apps to get around, like Uber.
You can be banned from places to stay, like Airbnb.
You can actually be debanked.
You can be kicked out of your bank in the United States if you contradict politically correct orthodoxy.
Aren't we supposed to be the good guys?
If we're the good guys, how come we keep doing stuff that the bad guys are doing?
Why?
That's not to say that we should behave like the other countries.
It's not to say we should behave like the bad guys.
It's quite the opposite.
We should stop behaving like the bad guys.
We should behave like we used to.
We should maybe look back to that traditional American way of life.
Those other countries target political dissidents.
Not like us here in the United States.
No, no.
Here in the United States, if you're a political dissident, the FBI will knock down your door.
And we'll arrest you and throw you in solitary confinement for drinking a beer in the Capitol Rotunda.
Hmm, wait a second.
I thought we were the good guys!
We can be the good guys, but we can't be the good guys with irresponsible, disingenuous, rotten leadership, which is what we currently have.
You know, the European Union officially enacted a statute allowing food producers to incorporate cricket powder into its flour-based products.
Not because the bugs taste better, but because the political elites have deemed that eating the bugs is better for the environment.
So, right down to the food you eat, the world wants to make you woke.
But not Dennis Prager.
Dennis wants to make you wise, and the founder of PragerU is going to do just that with a never-before-seen series exclusively on Daily Wire Plus called The Master's Program with Dennis Prager.
Dennis is a mentor with a wealth of experience.
What The Master's Program aims to do is take 40 years of wisdom and experience from one of the most influential conservative thinkers in America.
And distill it all down to its essence.
He covers such topics as the consequences of secularism.
Is human nature basically good?
My dentist could use a little bit of work, but I've spent a lot of time with it.
Subscribe to my YouTube channel and pass me a cigar.
It's as thought-provoking as it is illuminating.
The first five episodes of Prager U's master's program are available to stream right now and exclusively on Daily Wire+.
Head on over to dailywire.com slash subscribe to become a member and watch PragerU's master's program and more.
That's dailywire.com slash subscribe today.
Speaking of transing the kids in schools, there's a lawsuit out of New York alleging that a trans teacher...
a fifth grade student, one in particular, to change her name and her pronouns.
A New York male to female transgender teacher manipulated a fifth grade girl to adopt a male name and pronouns, which then caused the child to have suicidal thoughts according to a new lawsuit.
This elementary school teacher, who goes by Deborah Rosenquist, I don't know what his real name is, allegedly forced this young girl to use a male name and pronouns.
And then the girl later drew a picture that said, I want to kill myself.
The family's lawyer says that this man, quote, manipulated a preteen female into changing her gender identity when the child did not feel any inclusion to do so.
The student reportedly met with a school psychologist, said she was confused about her gender identity.
The transgender fellow, quote, the lawsuit uses female pronouns to refer to this fellow, so I will substitute them for male pronouns, pursued his own agenda outside the curriculum, which included persuading his fifth grade students to try being gay or being another gender, even when they were not.
To further his agenda, Rosenquist read and provided his students graphic books about gender and sexuality, which were not in the curriculum.
Of course.
Does anybody find this surprising in the least?
I do not.
My first reaction when I read this story was, can you imagine sending your kid to a school where the teacher is going to be so disturbed and confused that he's not going to know what sex he is or what sex she is?
Could you imagine that?
You send a student to school so that that student can learn about the world, make sense of reality, cultivate virtues, suppress vices, cultivate the rational will, and go on and become a functioning member of society.
If you are sending your student to do all of those things with someone who is so ill-adapted to the world that he doesn't know what his sex is, You are not setting that student up for success.
Now, in fairness to the parents, what are the parents going to do?
What are the parents going to do?
In many cases, people can't afford private school.
People don't have the time for homeschool.
There's no school choice available in a lot of places in the country.
And the school says, no, this is your teacher.
Sorry, you've got to be taught by this extraordinarily confused and disturbed individual.
Sorry.
What are the parents going to do?
Now, in this case, it's a little bit weird because the parents seem to be okay with the idea of transgenderism if that's what the child really wants.
It just so happens that the child doesn't really want it.
So now I want to be as fair and charitable as I possibly can to this teacher and to this school.
The teacher seems like a total perv and should for sure be fired and probably institutionalized.
But let's be as charitable and fair and generous as we possibly can.
Let's say that this teacher...
It was just making a judgment call.
The 10-year-old says, I'm confused about my sex.
I don't know.
What was the exact line?
Confused about my gender identity.
And so the teacher has to say, okay, am I going to encourage this girl to acknowledge that she's a girl?
Or am I going to encourage this girl to explore the possibility, fantastical though it may be, that she's really a boy?
She's got to make a judgment call.
Let's say that the teacher in question were not sexually confused himself.
Let's say that he were just a regular, normal person.
Let's say that it was a female, a caring woman like most elementary school teachers, and she just doesn't know what to do here.
How is she supposed to make the judgment call?
The whole culture says, when in doubt, trans the kid.
When in doubt, you have to trans the kid, because if you don't, if you tell the potentially gender-confused little girl that she really is a girl, you are engaging in conversion therapy.
That's right.
Conversion therapy.
You remember that?
That's a term that was first applied to homosexuals.
Now it's being applied to transvestites.
And they're saying, conversion therapy is when you tell someone that they shouldn't engage in same-sex relations.
When you tell someone that men really can't become women, that's conversion therapy.
That's got to be banned.
That's so harmful.
But what about in the other direction?
Let's say the girl is just confused.
If you encourage the confused girl to act like a boy, aren't you just engaging in conversion therapy in the other direction?
What do you mean conversion therapy?
It's a euphemism.
It's a political slogan used by activists who want to promote sexual absurdity and eccentricity.
Sexually absurd ideologies that are deeply harmful to people.
And lead them, in many cases, to have suicidal thoughts, like this little girl did.
That's what they're leading toward.
So what do you do?
What's the rule?
I made this point on the show.
I got in all sorts of trouble.
From the usual suspects, from all the sort of publicists over at Media Matters, so it's good trouble to be in.
But I made the point, I said, if you actually want to preserve women's spaces, if you want to preserve women's bathrooms, if you want to preserve the women's locker room, if you want to prevent girls from being abused like this at school, you have to ban transgenderism entirely.
Meaning, you cannot tolerate the expression of this absurd ideology in public.
No man has the right to present himself as a woman in public.
No man has the right to use the women's bathroom.
No man has the right to dress up in stilettos and call himself Sally.
That doesn't exist.
And you have to do it for everybody.
Because if you just say, wait until 8.
Wait until 8 and then at 9 you can trans the kids.
Then women lose their bathrooms.
Then women lose their locker rooms.
You're not afraid of a two-year-old walking into the women's locker room.
You're afraid of a 22-year-old walking into the women's locker room.
That's who's doing it.
So it's got to be a rule for everybody.
You have to have a shared anthropology if you're going to live together in society.
It's inescapable.
There is no conciliatory middle ground.
And I know how the squish Republicans are going to try to work it.
They're going to say, the libs are going to say we need to trans the two-year-olds.
Then the conservatives are going to say we need to trans the 18-year-olds.
But no one younger than 18.
And then they're going to meet in the middle and they're going to say, okay, we'll trans the 12-year-olds.
And then what's going to happen?
The Overton window is going to have shifted to the left, and the labs are going to say, we need to trans the newborns.
And then the conservatives are going to say, no, no, no, we need to just stay and only trans the 12-year-olds.
Then they're going to meet in the middle and they're going to trans the 6-year-olds.
That's already happening.
That's happening here in schools right now.
The only thing you can do, the only solution that is compassionate and defensible and coherent is to say...
No, we're just going to ban it entirely.
No, we're going to believe that men can't become women and women can't become men.
And that's an anthropological fact, and so therefore it applies to everybody.
And the confused men, like this teacher who abused this little girl in school according to the lawsuit, these confused men who think that they're really women, they just need help.
We need to get them to some psychologists, and you're going to call it conversion therapy, but you are the groomers who are pushing conversion therapy on our kids to convince confused little girls that they're boys.
Our version of conversion therapy is taking confused people and persuading them of reality and attempting to dispel them of their delusions.
Your version of conversion therapy is attempting to take confused people and indulge their delusions and encourage them to go further down the path to delusion.
It's all conversion therapy.
We're all trying to persuade people of something.
We have to have some understanding of what human nature is.
The question is, whose are we going to go with?
The liberals have a clear answer to that.
Trans everybody.
That's why they have to trans the kids.
Because they understand if you're going to trans anybody, you've got to trans everybody.
Or everybody at least has to accept the premises of transgenderism.
They get that.
They actually have a much clearer view about that than the conservatives do.
And the conservatives want to have some...
Middle-of-the-road solution.
Trans this group, but don't trans this group, and let's not talk about it in any way.
Come on, move along, move along, move along.
If you stand in the middle of the road, especially on basic questions of nature, you are going to get hit by a truck as conservatives had, as our culture has, and as have so many unfortunate victims of this terribly pernicious ideology.
Speaking of women and men, we have a very important expert panel coming up Some people have asked me.
Well, people always ask me about dating, relationships, marriage.
And the topic has come up about a certain celebrity who only dates women until they turn 25, and then he dumps them.
I don't want to name names.
He happens to be a movie star.
He was in Titanic.
It's Leonardo DiCaprio.
He famously will dump his girlfriends right when they turn 25, and then he'll start dating younger girls again.
And Some people are very divided about this.
Some people say it's actually very traditional for older men to date younger women.
Some people are saying this is degenerate kind of sexual behavior.
Well, I've decided I'm going to talk to the women about this.
I want to get a lady's perspective, okay?
So head on over.
Your official love guru, Dr.
Romance, the Lothario of the Daily Wire, will be discussing this important topic with the expert panel.
