Ep. 1237 - America Reacts To Bud Light's Pure Pander Campaign
Bud Light’s sales go from bad to worse, a trans-identifying lawmaker tries to protect pedophilia as a sexual orientation, and 60 Minutes exposes the cynical reality of climate change activism.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3jJQBQ7
Pre-order your Jeremy's Chocolate here: https://bit.ly/3EQeVag
Shop all Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/3xuFD43
Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
GCU - Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University: https://www.gcu.edu/Today’s Sponsors:
ZipRecruiter - Try ZipRecruiter for FREE: https://www.ziprecruiter.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
It is now one month since Anheuser-Busch decided to destroy its best-selling beer, the best-selling beer in America, by sponsoring a particularly offensive transvestite and putting his picture on the beer can.
Within a week, sales dollars were down 6%.
Volume was down 11%.
But the company thought they could weather the storm by doubling down and refusing to apologize.
That turned out to be a bad strategy, since the numbers continued to fall.
The following week, sales were down 17% in dollars and a shocking 21% in volume.
That was for the week ending April 15th.
That was when Bud Light decided to reverse course, kind of, by blaming a lower-level executive and claiming ignorance at the top, and sort of, kind of, but ultimately not really apologizing.
They released a commercial about horses or something.
That didn't work either.
And now, according to figures reported by Barron's and Bump Williams Consulting, sales volume is down more than 26% for the week ending April 22nd.
It would have been bad for Anheuser-Busch if they had suffered a one week drop in sales over Dylan Mulvaney.
Would have been worse if they'd taken a hit and sales didn't get better.
But this is the worst outcome of all for Bud Light.
They took a massive hit and sales have just kept on collapsing with no end in sight.
So what are the geniuses over at Bud Light doing now?
They've released another fence straddling commercial that says nothing.
We've got a girl in jean shorts.
We've got a, like, properly diverse crowd.
All kind of ethnically ambiguous.
But they're in a fun field.
Got chicken fried.
It's starting to rain.
Just a bunch of people walking around in the rain.
Easy to drink.
Easy to enjoy.
Bud Light.
Used to be easy to drink.
Now not so much.
Hey, conservatives!
You guys like blue jeans and that chicken fried song, right?
Yeah, yeah.
Show them that.
Do that.
Maybe put one of the girls in a cowboy hat or boots or something.
Yeah, those hicks will eat that up.
They'll forget about how much we support transgenderism.
Those roofs?
They'll buy anything.
Easy to drink.
No, we won't.
We won't.
And we definitely won't be buying Bud Light.
Anheuser-Busch is pursuing a strategy that many a squishy Republican has tried to follow in our increasingly liberal culture.
Anheuser-Busch wants to stand in the middle of the road.
They think the biggest risk to their reputation is to pick a side.
After all, picking a side with Mulvaney hurt them.
And maybe if they'd shut up for even three or four days, maybe they could have weathered the boycott better.
But the fact is, they did take a side on a major political issue for which everyone ultimately has to take a side.
Do women really exist as a real natural category of people, or do they not?
Bud Light chose the opposite side from the one their customers are on.
Now they're paying the price.
They could fix it by apologizing.
Just apologize.
Just say that you oppose transgenderism and that you support reality.
That would earn them lots of sales dollars from their customers, from beer drinkers.
But it would cost them lots of social points with the liberal establishment that runs our political order.
And that's a price they're not willing to pay.
So Bud Light is straddling the fence.
Dressing and cross-dressing in blue jeans and skirts, lukewarm on a fundamental issue, neither hot nor cold, as conservatives spew bud light out of their mouths.
Let it be a lesson to us all.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
There's a beautiful clip from 60 Minutes going around.
I don't think 60 Minutes intended for the clip to have this effect, but it shows you the cynical reality of the climate change movement and all the fear about the end of the world.
It totally exposes that movement.
We'll get to that in one moment.
First, though, it's not just Bud Light.
It's Disney.
This is a story from last week.
I'm thrilled that I get to report it this week.
I don't want to let this one slip through the cracks.
Disney has cut 15% of entertainment staffers.
15%.
Why is that?
Well, it's from a report in Bloomberg.
Disney CEO Bob Iger announced a couple of months ago that Disney was going to have to lay some people off as part of a strategic realignment to reduce costs.
Why do they have to reduce costs?
Because the company's stock price has declined 17% over the past year.
And Disney viewers, they're not the same customers as the Bud Light customers.
Apparently, there's some substantial overlap.
But you think of Bud Light, you think frat boys, construction workers, normal people, of course going trans was going to affect their sales numbers.
But Disney?
The adults that I know who like Disney are pretty lib.
And Disney is mostly made for kids, but kids have parents and maybe the parents don't like the idea of Disney shoving transgenderism down their throat.
In any case, 17% down, not good numbers for them.
How did Disney find themselves in this mess?
Well, because the people of Florida passed a simple bill that said, hey, teachers, bureaucrats, apparatchiks of the liberal state, we don't want you to trans our kids.
So you don't get to trans our kids anymore.
They passed that through their representatives.
Disney said, hell yes, we're going to trans your kids.
And so the Albedo or O'Rourke line, hell yes, hell yes, we're going to take your guns and trans your kids.
And the parents don't like that.
And so the parents are not giving Disney their dollars anymore.
They're giving their dollars to other places.
They're giving their dollars to people who are making kids content that is free from all this woke craziness.
People like Jeremy and The Daily Wire over here.
And it shows you a lesson that the people are largely on our side.
Yes, people who buy the regular old conservative products, even the Disney people are on our side.
The vast majority of Americans know that transgenderism is fake.
It's not real.
According to Pew Research, 60% of Americans think that your gender just comes from your biological sex and that's all there is to it.
I wish that number were higher.
But the number is moving in the right direction, because two years ago that number was only 56%, and six years ago that number was only 54%.
So a clear majority of Americans think this.
The numbers are moving in the right direction, and if we just keep that pressure up, as we are doing successfully against some of the biggest companies in the country, against the best-selling beer in the country, the corporations are going to get that message.
And either they'll shape up, or what's more likely, because even though they want to sell their product, they don't want to Irritate the liberal establishment that runs our political order.
The alternative is you're going to get an alternative economy.
Like you're seeing here at DW, and like you're seeing other people do as well.
Now, when you want to decide which companies you work for, buy from, work with in our economy, You gotta check out ZipRecruiter.
The same goes for finding a job.
You'd upload your resume to every job posting site and comb through never-ending lists of jobs trying to find the right position for you.
ZipRecruiter is the best place to find the right position, or if you're an employer, the right person to join your team.
Head on over right now to ZipRecruiter.com slash NOLS.
Try it for free.
ZipRecruiter's matching technology excels at finding the most qualified candidates for a wide range of roles.
If you see a candidate that you like, you can easily send them a personal invite so they're more likely to apply.
It also gives you a competitive edge against other employers who may also be interested in that candidate.
Their user-friendly dashboard makes it easy to filter, review, and rate your candidates All from one place.
Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
See it for yourself.
ZipRecruiter.com slash Knowles.
Try it for free.
ZipRecruiter.com slash K-N-W-L-E-S.
ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire.
Realize the party has gone too far.
They were trying to bring the Democrats back from the brink.
This includes a presidential candidate.
Don't forget, Joe Biden doesn't just have the nomination for reelection in 2024.
Joe Biden's gonna have to run the primary.
He's got one opponent named Marianne Williamson, who's kind of a Kooky, new agey, crystals lady.
And then he's got another opponent who is a Kennedy, who is from a very established Democrat family, who's had a long career as an environmental lawyer, pursuing all sorts of liberal causes.
But he's a little heterodox when it comes to the Democrats.
He's heterodox on big pharma and vaccines, and he's heterodox on the transgender issue, at least to some degree.
Bobby Kennedy Jr., running as a Democrat, was just asked what he thinks about men competing against women in women's sports.
Here's his answer as a Democrat.
I think that I'm against people participating in women's sports who are biologically male.
I think women have worked too hard to develop women's sports over the past 30 years.
I watched it happen and I don't think that's fair.
Of course, totally right.
The vast majority of Americans agree with RFK Jr.
on this.
But this is not great for Bobby Kennedy Jr.
because his campaign pitch is basically that he is a Democrat from the 1960s.
He's not a Republican.
He's not a conservative.
He actually is a liberal and he actually is a Democrat.
But he's not a 2023 Democrat.
He's a Democrat from the 60s who says, we're gonna fight the power.
We're gonna fight the man.
We want to defuse political power in the country.
Democrats from 2023 say, give all your money to Big Pharma and allow Big Pharma to capture the FDA and to have it be a revolving door so that the people who are supposed to be regulating the corporations actually work for the corporations and vice versa.
Bobby Kennedy has made it one of his big professional missions to stop that sort of thing.
That doesn't work with the Democrats in 2023.
Democrats in 1960s would say, we want women to have their own sports, and we want Title IX, and we want Title VII, and we want to protect women as a special class.
We're feminists.
Democrats in 2023 say, what is a woman?
I don't know what a woman is.
Forget about that.
No, women don't have the right to their own sports.
Women don't have the right to their own bathrooms.
Women don't have the right to their own employment protections.
Actually, when it says you have a protection for sex in the civil rights laws, that actually means a protection for gender identity, which totally undermines the protections for sex.
That's what a 2023 Democrat says.
But they're both different from what the conservatives say.
They're both different from what a conservative Republican then or now says.
And Bobby Kennedy is going to lose his fight.
I wish him luck.
I hope he really weakens the Democratic Party.
I hope he raises uncomfortable conversations for them.
But it's not going to work for him.
And the reason it's not going to work is not only that his party is very corrupt and is able to keep out outsiders in these nominating contests, but it's also because ideas have a power of their own.
And ideas will be followed to their logical conclusions.
You can't just freeze them.
That's why when people on either side of the aisle say, I want to go back to 1950, or I want to go back to 1970, or I want to go back to this age or that age, you can't go back.
You can never go back in time.
We live in the present.
And this world that we're in has been formed by the ideas that have predated it.
So if you rewind the clock somehow, 30, 40 years, you're very likely to end up in the same place you are now because the ideas have momentum.
They have a direction of their own.
Bobby Kennedy says, I want to protect women's sports because, I think what he's implying is because we had the feminist movement that won all these important rights and protections for women.
Okay, but the feminist movement was predicated on the idea that men and women are basically the same.
So, men and women should not have distinct roles in society, in private and public life, because a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.
Because there are some cosmetic differences, but women and men are pretty much exactly the same.
Okay, well if women and men are pretty much exactly the same, then you're going to get the sexual revolution, and you're going to get the gay rights movement, and you're going to get the redefinition of marriage, and you're going to get transgenderism, and you're going to get transing the kids.
Because that is the logical progression of those ideas.
And when the ideas come to their logical conclusions, and we see how absurd those conclusions are, then we can more clearly look back at the origin of those ideas and say, huh, looks like they started from pretty mistaken premises, doesn't it?
And that's much clearer when those ideas have played out.
But what you're not going to do is say, OK, well, let's just rewind the clock 20, 30 years.
That's not going to make any sense.
That's not going to persuade anybody.
Where is the Democrat Party on this issue now?
They're full steam ahead.
They are so far past Bobby Kennedy, it is not even funny.
It really is not funny.
Because what did we say?
What did all the conservatives say?
We said, years ago, Well, if you get the sexual revolution stuff, pretty soon they're going to redefine marriage.
Oh, no, that's a slippery slope argument.
That's crazy.
That's not going to happen.
But, of course, they redefine marriage.
So, well, if you redefine marriage, then pretty soon you're going to have all of these even more eccentric, disordered kind of family structures, like polyamorous relationships and throuples.
And, oh, Michael, that's crazy.
What are you talking about?
And then, of course, that's what we get.
And then what happened?
The final frontier was Pretty soon, these guys are going to try to establish legal protections for pedophilia.
They're going to try to normalize pedophilia.
Oh, how dare you suggest that?
That's out bigoted.
That's phobic.
How dare you say that?
Well, I don't know.
I mean, we're kind of seeing it in academia.
There are some prominent academics now who have called for getting rid of the term pedophile and changing it to MAP, minor attracted person.
And they're arguing that pedophilia is innate.
And therefore, because of the premises of this modern sexual movement, if something's innate, if a desire comes from birth or in your early years of formation, then you can never change it and you can never suppress it.
It's wrong to repress your desires.
And so, you know, we're going to have to normalize this stuff.
That's what we're hearing in academia.
And now it's what we're hearing in politics.
Now it's what we're hearing in government.
A Minnesota trans-identifying Democrat lawmaker, I don't even really have to say Democrat, but That's what this guy is.
He just tried to alter a bill to protect pedophilia as a sexual orientation.
There it is.
I've got the text of it right here.
Minnesota Statutes 2022, Section 363A03, Subdivision 44, is amended to read.
Subdivision 44, sexual orientation.
Sexual orientation means having or being perceived as having an emotional, physical, or sexual attachment to another person without regard to the sex of that person or having or being perceived as having an orientation for such attachment.
Then it goes on, or it used to go on, it said, or having or being perceived as having a self-image or identity not traditionally associated with one's biological maleness or femaleness, sexual orientation does not include a physical or sexual attachment to children by an adult.
That's what it read, and then this Minnesota lawmaker tried to amend this to cross that out.
To cross out, hey, no, we don't want that bigoted line in there about how sexual orientation does not include a physical or sexual attachment to children by an adult.
That's so bigoted.
That's so phobic.
We've got to get rid of that line.
I'm not making this up.
Here it is.
It's right here.
Got the text right here.
Minnesota State Rep is Representative Lee Finke.
I don't know what his real name is.
Lee, L-E-I-G-H, sounds like one of these made up transgender names, so I don't know.
But anyway, he's a guy who identifies as a woman.
He's a member of the Democratic Farmer Labor Party, first self-identified transgender person in the Minnesota legislature, and introduced this amendment in the Take Pride Act.
So, what would it have done?
It would have protected pedophilia as a sexual orientation, protected from discrimination by the law.
Now, once this made headlines a few days ago, all of a sudden, the Minnesota legislators, even the ones who are generally allied with this guy, said, okay, we gotta correct this.
So they took a vote in the House, they said, okay, we're still opposed to pedophilia, right?
And it passed by unanimous vote.
So even Representative Finke here realized, okay, I gotta back off this pedo stuff for now.
That's good.
Glad.
Glad they all backed off for now.
This is the direction it's going in.
Glad they took decisive action.
Bud Light could learn a lesson or two from them.
You can't take this away.
You can't hide the fact that this is the direction they wanted to go in.
Now, speaking of pedophilia, Governor Ron DeSantis, who would appear to be soon to be presidential candidate Ron DeSantis, has come out and pushed for the death penalty for pedophiles in Florida.
These are really the worst of the worst.
And what happens is the perpetrators of these crimes are oftentimes serial offenders.
And if someone does, one, if they rape a child, and these are very young children, sometimes like 6, 7, 8 years old, if they do that once, Chances are they will do it again unless they're stopped and unless they're incapacitated.
And so we really believe that part of a just society is to have appropriate punishment.
And so if you commit a crime that is really, really heinous, you should have the ultimate punishment.
And so what this bill does is it challenges the U.S.
Supreme Court for recently deciding, probably six or seven years ago, they decided by five to four After over 200 years of our Constitution being in place, that somehow you could never have capital punishment for crimes like rape.
And so Ron DeSantis says we're challenging that now if you rape a child, pretty much the most heinous crime you can imagine, you get the death penalty.
Totally agree with that in principle.
I see no problem with that in principle.
I see no problem with the death penalty in principle.
In fact, I think it's Quite natural, biblical, you see it defended by some of the greatest minds in the history of the church.
And not only defended, but even enacted by some of the great popes in history.
So there's nothing unchristian about it.
There's nothing immoral about it.
And there's nothing unconstitutional about it.
In the early days of our country, The definition of a felony was that you would hang for it.
The death penalty was widely applied, much more widely than it is today.
I don't actually agree with this particular instantiation of the death penalty in practice.
In principle, I do.
But in practice, the only reason I don't is that as a matter of prudence, if you don't kill child rapists, if the punishment is not execution, then it creates some incentive for the rapist not to murder his victim.
So, if there's any way that through the law we can incentivize a rapist not to murder his victim, I think that's probably wise and prudent.
In principle, they deserve death, certainly.
But, putting all of that aside for a second, the difference between the law in principle and in practice, the main thing about this story that's interesting is what Governor DeSantis was standing in front of.
He was not standing in front of the flag of the state of Florida.
He was not holding a regular press conference with some signs behind him.
He was standing in front of a big, gigantic American flag because he's obviously about to announce his run for president.
He is pushing for this law that will obviously be almost universally popular, I guess not among the pedo defenders, actually.
And there are some people who are thinking about this issue, I think, in a little more of a wise as a serpent, innocent as a dove kind of way, who are talking about the actual practical effects.
But broadly speaking, execute pedos is a very Popular campaign slogan.
And so putting the meat of the law aside for a second, what this is signaling is this guy is moving full steam ahead and we can expect a campaign announcement soon.
Now, what are you looking forward to in your life?
Are you looking forward to a good education, a change of pace, maybe a new direction?
Well, you've got to check out Grand Canyon University.
Are you ready to take the next step in your education, but you're struggling to fit traditional classes into your busy schedule?
Grand Canyon University's online programs are designed to make earning your degree easy and accessible, no matter your age or stage in life.
I love Grand Canyon University.
It's one of the first schools that I ever visited when I started speaking on campuses.
This was quite some years ago now.
And Oddly enough, two of those students who brought me to Grand Canyon are now colleagues of mine at different companies.
Making a difference clearly got a very good education.
Whether you're a busy professional looking to advance your career or a stay-at-home parent juggling family responsibilities, GCU's online courses give you the flexibility you need to learn on your own terms.
Grand Canyon University specializes in helping you fit your bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree into your busy day.
From scholarships to customized scheduling, your graduation team, led by your own GCU counselor, provides you with the personal support you need to succeed.
So why wait?
If you're ready to take your education to the next level, you need Grand Canyon University.
Find your purpose at grandcanyonuniversitygcu.edu.
That is gcu.edu.
Are you looking for something interesting to watch?
Are you?
Well, check out our series, What We Saw, hosted by the storyteller Bill Whittle.
Season 1 is focused on Apollo 11, and now Season 2 is in full swing.
This time, Bill paints a bleak picture of a growing existential threat to America due to Soviet, Russia, and Cuba.
Episode 8 picks up during 1961, during the aftermath of the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba.
With the Berlin Wall completed, closing the Iron Curtain on Western Europe, the Soviets have installed medium-range nuclear weapons in Cuba.
One wrong move from President Kennedy might set off an act of war.
Bill makes you feel like you were there witnessing history.
New episodes of The Cold War come out every week, but you have to be a member to see it.
Go to dailywire.com slash coldwar to start watching.
Speaking of death, There's a terrible murder that just took place.
It was a murder by an illegal alien, allegedly killed five people, including an elementary school student, a third grade student.
And the Secretary of Homeland Security can't answer a simple question about the murderer.
There is some question about his citizenship.
He supposedly had a, I guess they referred to it as a consulate card from Mexico, meaning he was here legally, but perhaps he had overstayed?
So Chuck, I won't comment on it because it is an active case.
The tragedy that occurred is, you described it correctly, just absolutely horrific.
Yeah, of course it's horrific.
It's horrific when five people are murdered, and especially when one of them is a little child.
Why won't you comment on it?
The government comments on all sorts of tragic cases.
That was his excuse.
He says, I'm not going to comment on it.
It's a tragic case.
The government doesn't comment on terror attacks.
The government doesn't comment on crime.
The government doesn't comment on... Government sure commented a lot on the January 6th insurrection.
We were told that was absolutely tragic.
They don't stop commenting on that.
But a murder that would appear to be preventable?
Easily preventable?
You won't comment on the question of whether or not the murder was preventable?
Well, I don't know.
I'm not going to comment if he was an illegal alien or not.
Well, I don't know.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency has confirmed that the killer was deported four times between 2009 and 2016.
So, look, I'm no expert.
No criminologist, no immigration expert.
Would seem to me if a guy's deported four times, probably he's an illegal alien, wouldn't you say?
Oh, we can't comment on that.
Why can't they comment?
Because if they say, yes, he was an illegal alien, that means that this administration has blood on its hands because this administration has welcomed illegal aliens.
They've encouraged illegal aliens to cross the border.
The Democratic Party has done that.
It's not just Biden's fault.
They've done that for decades now because they think it gives them an electoral advantage.
And in fact, it does.
But one of the consequences of that is you get gangsters from Latin America who come in and murder people.
And when that happens, then The federal government don't know nothing.
Democrats, we can't comment on that, that's tragic.
That's one reason.
The other explanation, I'm trying to be as charitable as I can towards Secretary Mayorkas, the other explanation is that they just don't know.
That's just as big an indictment of the government as if they did know and encouraged the illegal behavior.
You don't know?
You got this guy, he's committed a terrible crime.
You've now, you've got his information and you can't tell?
You can't even tell if the guys at Foreign National are an American citizen or here legally?
What an indictment of our immigration system.
In any case, it means that practically speaking, the U.S.
doesn't have borders.
And why doesn't the U.S.
have borders?
Either because of the incompetence of Democrats or because of the malicious intent.
And it would appear to me to be the latter.
The White House is even worse on this.
The White House was asked about this easily preventable tragedy that they have just chosen not to prevent.
And here is Karine Jean-Pierre's answer.
On Friday evening, a nine-year-old child was murdered along with four others in yet another shocking, horrific act of gun violence in America, this time in Cleveland, Texas.
Two of the women killed were discovered on top of surviving children and appear to be shielding them from gunfire.
From the guns.
It's the guns.
Of course, it's always the guns.
Does anybody buy this?
I don't think anybody buys this.
I don't even think most Democrats buy this.
That it was the guns.
A lot of people have guns in America.
A lot of people have guns.
The legal gun owners don't commit these crimes.
This guy, Oropesa, he was not a legal gun owner.
He did not have any right to have a gun.
He didn't have any right to be in the country.
He'd been deported.
Number of times, he'd obviously committed a number of crimes.
He clearly obtained his gun through illegal means.
And so the White House solution to that, we've got to take guns away from law-abiding Americans.
Does anybody believe that?
This is like when the Democrats always try to blame the AR-15.
They say, well, what we need to do, we need to ban the AR-15.
Forget about handguns for a second, which are used in the vast majority of gun-related murders.
No, no.
Forget about even other rifles and shotguns.
We've just got to get rid of the AR-15.
Why?
Well, because guns today are so much more lethal than they used to be.
No, they're not.
Guns haven't actually changed all that much in the last century.
And in many ways, the common guns that people are able to purchase in ordinary circumstances are less lethal.
Back in the early 20th century, Gangsters and mafiosi were using tommy guns, using fully automatic guns to murder people.
Now it's very, very difficult to obtain those guns.
The AR-15 is much less lethal than a tommy gun, some kind of belt-fed, fully automatic machine gun.
So it's not the guns.
It's the criminals that you are encouraging to enter our country.
But it's amazing when you encourage violent criminals whose first action in America is to commit a crime.
Just by definition, just by the way of entering.
It's amazing that then when that happens, crime goes up.
Isn't that crazy?
Who could have seen that one coming?
Now, speaking of bad prosecutors.
Is a prosecutor in Florida, state attorney, one of these George Soros funded attorneys, which is a really brilliant political strategy by Soros in particular.
Other Democrats are filling in as well.
Other libs are filling in.
But Soros has really pioneered this and he has such influence.
As probably the preeminent Democrat funder in America, Soros decided, okay, I'm not going to focus on the big ticket races.
I'm going to focus on these low-level races where you don't need a lot of money to get a prosecutor installed.
And then what the prosecutor is going to do is not prosecute the criminals, and then you're going to get chaos on the streets, and you're going to get an upending of society.
So you got one of these people, Monique Worrell, State Attorney for Florida's 9th Judicial District.
She now is saying that Governor DeSantis is going to remove her from office as soon as this week.
Why?
Well, because preventable deaths are occurring because of what she is doing and what she is not doing.
DeSantis earlier this year pointed out that Keith Moses, a 19-year-old, was allowed onto the streets by this prosecutor.
Then Moses is accused of shooting five people, murdering three people, including a nine-year-old, Tianna Major, and a 38-year-old, and a 24-year-old.
This guy, Moses, had been arrested multiple times for felonious crimes.
Now, you might say, well, okay, maybe he was arrested before this state attorney was placed into office.
Yeah, he was, but then he also came up, he was arrested when she was in office.
He was arrested on a drug and gun charge, and she let him go.
And then he went out, allegedly, and he murdered three people, including a nine-year-old girl.
And now DeSantis, it would appear, is going to remove her from office.
Liberals are crying about it.
And some of the squishes, I think, are going to say, well, no, listen, we have a process here.
We have a process.
We can't just be using our political power to remove the people we don't like from office.
That's not very conservative of you, is it?
Why not?
Why not?
Is this just a fun little game that we're going to play until conservatives inevitably lose?
Is politics just about writing laments Elegies on the decline of Western civilization, oh, how sad, how wonderful things used to be.
Is it just about book reviews?
Is it just about angry tweets?
Is it just about, oh, there we go again, throwing our hands in the air and sighing?
Or are we in politics to win and improve things?
Which is it?
Many people in the conservative movement feel much better about the former.
They feel much more comfortable doing the former sort of thing.
Ah, yes, I'm going to write an essay about how this was all predictable.
Yes, I'm going to write some cultural commentary on some new hip-hop album or something like that.
Ah, yes, there we go.
But we're supposed to lose.
It was ever thus.
Many people feel comfortable with that.
Wield the power.
Wield it urgently.
Good stuff.
I hope DeSantis follows through on this.
It's the best move that he could do for his presidential campaign.
DeSantis' best bet right now is not to out-charm Trump.
It won't happen.
His best bet right now is not to even differentiate himself on policy.
That matters somewhat, but they're pretty much running in the same lane.
The best bet for DeSantis right now is to convince people that he is able to wield power effectively and say that I can wield power effectively and Trump can't do it as effectively, so vote for me.
One great way to do that would be to fire prosecutors like this lady.
Okay, what about the Democrat side?
What's gonna happen?
Is Bobby Kennedy gonna win?
Is Marianne Williamson gonna win?
What happens in the general?
Biden gets the nomination.
Is Biden gonna win?
Is Trump gonna win?
Is DeSantis gonna get the nomination?
He's gonna win.
Here's what a former opponent of Joe Biden's, Bernie Sanders, has to say about Biden's chances.
When we live in a nation where you have a major political party, the Republican Party, where many, not all, but many of their leadership doesn't even believe in democracy.
They maintain the myth that Trump won the last election.
They're trying to keep people from voting.
They're trying to deny women the right to control their own bodies.
So that's a whole issue out there.
If you believe in democracy, you want to see more people vote, not fewer people vote, I think the choice is pretty clear, and that choice is Biden.
And second of all, what I do believe is the Democrats and the President have got to be stronger on working class issues.
They've got to make it clear that we believe in a government that represents all, not just the few.
Take on the greed of the insurance companies, the drug companies, Wall Street, all the big money interests, and start delivering for working class people.
You do that, I think Biden is going to win in a landslide.
That's kind of a big if, wouldn't you say?
Now listen here.
I think it's very clear that if Joe Biden completely goes against everything that he's ever fought for for his entire career, if Joe Biden completely flips his party's platform on its head, And takes a party that is completely beholden to all of the big corporate interests and takes a party and a platform that is completely doing the bidding of the plutocrats of society and just does totally the opposite of that, then he'll win in a landslide.
If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a wagon.
If my aunt had gullions, she would be my uncle.
That's all Biden has to do.
He just has to be the opposite of Joe Biden.
Okay, well.
We'll see if he can do it.
We'll see if that even matters.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Noah, who says, when you don't know if you are at the DNC or SatanCon, you are in the year 2023.
The thought occurred to me, and I'm not just saying it to throw bombs or be hyperbolic in my rhetoric.
What's the difference?
Between SatanCon, allegedly the largest gathering of Satanists in American history that took place in Boston over the weekend, and the Democrat National Convention.
What's really the difference?
What did SatanCon support?
SatanCon had lectures on how wonderful abortion is, raised money for abortion, considered abortion to be a sacred right, R-I-T-E, The Democrats do exactly the same thing.
The DNC will exalt abortion as the same sort of sacred right.
R-I-G-H-T.
Both of them view it as both kinds of right.
The SatanCon talked about the importance of transgenderism and the transgender identity.
Elevated that to a sacred matter for the Satanists.
The Democrat National Convention, exactly the same thing.
You might say, well, they look a little different.
Do they look different?
Yeah, at SatanCon, they had all sorts of pentagrams and baphomet imagery and claws and creepy occult symbolism.
The same can be said of Biden's White House.
You remember the guy, the deputy monkeypox czar?
I forget his name.
He had the Greek name.
The guy who took pictures of himself wearing leather harnesses in the shape of a pentagram on top of the pentagram tattoo on his chest.
The guy was dressed up exactly the same way as the people at SatanCon.
Remember Sam Brinton, who got booted because he stole too many dresses and pieces of jewelry out of women's luggage at the airport?
Do you remember the kind of imagery that that guy would photograph himself in?
He would take part in public profiles.
He was so proud of this.
Images of him leading men around by the collar as the men were wearing all sorts of weird, leather, occult-looking, 50 Shades of Grey kind of satanic vibe clothing.
Exactly the same kind of clothing you would see at SatanCon.
What's the difference?
Well, the difference is At one of them, you can write it off as a group of freaks.
At the other one, it's the liberal establishment that controls the political order of the country.
Principalities and powers, spiritual wickedness in high places.
Speaking of false religion, I've long suspected, as you have long suspected, that the global warming climate change movement is not really about protecting the natural environment.
That actually the movement is just about totally restructuring our political economy and the way that we view ourselves and our relationship to the world and our relationship to the state.
60 minutes.
I think probably accidentally seemed to prove that.
And they seemed to prove that on the issue of carbon capture.
So there's technology that can go up into the atmosphere and just take the carbon out of the atmosphere.
The fear is that there's too much carbon into the atmosphere.
That's why when you buy an airplane ticket, they offer you the opportunity to pay more money and offset your carbon somehow.
What do they do?
I don't know.
They say they plant a tree or something.
But what does it really mean?
Well, we're going to figure out a way to reduce the amount of carbon relative to the atmosphere.
Okay, well now we have technology to do that.
So if we've got the technology to just go up and take that carbon down, then why do we need to drive less and get rid of our gas stoves and get rid of our cars and stop moving and stop building and we don't have to do any of that because the technology will fix it for us.
The climate change movement says not so fast.
You fear that people will think, oh, well, we can now clean the air.
We can just take the CO2 out of the air so we can carry on with business as usual.
All the time.
Yeah.
But that's not how it works.
We must stop the emissions and wean ourselves off of fossil fuels.
That's what we need to do right now.
On top of that, we also must take down the carbon that we've already put up in the atmosphere.
Only then will we reach our climate goals.
So, carbon capture can never be an excuse for continuing business as usual.
But it's that business as usual that critics are warning against as direct air capture expands to the U.S.
That's because here, oil companies are one of the technology's biggest boosters.
They have been capturing CO2 to inject into oil wells for decades, not to bury it, but to flush out more oil.
Why can't we continue business as usual?
Why do we have to stop all the emissions?
Why does carbon capture technology, which solves the problem that this guy is supposedly so worried about, why does that solution terrify this man and keep him up at night?
Because it is not the case that we can't continue business as usual because of the dire threat of the sun monster and climate change.
We have to fear the sun monster and climate change so that we don't continue business as usual.
It's totally backwards.
This is the same reason that the Libs oppose nuclear energy.
Nuclear energy, which is relatively safe, extremely efficient, and relatively very, very clean.
Why would they oppose that?
Well, because then we get to just keep up business as usual.
And what the Libs fear is not carbon.
What the Libs fear is not the melting of the ice caps and the rising of the sea levels that's going to happen any day now, folks, and the catastrophic end of the world in 12 years.
That's not what they fear.
What they fear is allowing society to continue in a relatively normal way.
That's what keeps them up at night.
No, we can't have carbon.
No, the carbon capture, that's not an excuse to stop, to continue emitting carbon.
Why not?
Because I said so, dammit!
Okay, well, that's not a good explanation at all.
Not a good explanation in the least.
Speaking of that party establishment, gotta get to a guy.
He is an NBC senior reporter.
He's very, very upset.
This is a guy who went after me pretty aggressively after my CPAC speech when the liberal press were lying about what I said and twisting my words because they knew that what I said was obviously true.
They knew that it was resonating with a lot of people.
And so in order to attack me and to call the violent mob out against me, they had to lie about what I said and libel me.
And then, a little late, they got calls from their lawyers, I think, and realized they had to change the words, because even under the very high standard for libel in the United States, today, I think they realized, ooh, yikes, we could be in some legal trouble here.
So they changed it, but the story was already out there.
So one of these guys is Ben Collins, over at NBC, he's a senior reporter at NBC.
And Ben Collins is very upset.
Because in Florida now, parents, through their elected representatives, have decided that they don't want their kids being exposed to gay porn in an elementary school.
And that's very upsetting to Ben Collins.
So, Ben Collins tweets out, he says, they are literally stripping shelves bare of books at public schools in Florida.
And we're still getting absolutely brain-dead takes like this one by editorial pages of newspapers in 2023.
Grow up and talk to your actual reporters about what's really going on.
He was saying this in response to a Washington Post piece about how universities are pushing back on censorious students.
First of all, the word censorious is often misused in our culture.
Censorious means to be sharply critical of something.
It doesn't mean just to censor something or stifle speech.
It's a minor point.
I digress.
Ben Collins is very upset.
They're literally stripping shelves bare.
Well, what books are they taking off the shelves?
What was the point of this law?
They're taking books off the shelves that teach false things about history, sex, race, reality, all that stuff.
They teach false things that would harm students' education.
And mostly what this is about is taking books off the shelves that are pornographic and obscene, and specifically and especially gay porn like Gender Queer by Maya Kababi, which you can find throughout public schools in the United States, and which constitutes very obscene, very gay porn.
And Barrett said, we don't want our eight-year-olds being exposed to this.
And Ben Kahn says, this is so, this is so terrible.
Why?
Why do these people who are not just fringe lunatics, but, well, even if they are kind of fringy lunatics, they have positions of prominence within the liberal establishment.
They're senior reporters at NBC.
Why are they so hell-bent on exposing your kids, your little tiny kids, to gay porn in the public schools?
What's that about?
That's kind of weird, wouldn't you say?
And what they respond to this with.
Is they'll say, it's not just about this book, genderqueer, most of them feign ignorance about the genderqueer book.
Say it's not, look at the shelves are bare in some places.
To which I say, man, what the hell was on those shelves?
If you have to go in, if there's a law in Florida that says no more gay porn in the elementary schools, and then all of a sudden there are bare shelves in your elementary school library?
You gotta ask yourself, man, what on earth?
was in this library before the law was passed.
Thank goodness the governor and the state legislators and the parents who impelled them to do so had the wisdom to help the kids here.
What kind of an education are they getting?
Now, speaking of what kids are being exposed to, Mr. Davies has a new children's trailer for me to watch.
