Ep. 1311 - 14-Year-Old Mexican Decapitates Four People For The Cartel
Trump faces even more legal troubles in Georgia, Apple removes all of Glenn Beck’s podcasts, and a 14-year-old Mexican decapitates four people for the cartel.
Ep.1311
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Get 25% off your DailyWire+ membership: https://bit.ly/3VhjaTs
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3jJQBQ7
Get your Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Balance of Nature - Get 35% off your first order as a preferred customer. Use promo code KNOWLES at checkout: https://www.balanceofnature.com/
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
The Trump legal troubles continue to get more troublesome, as one of Trump's outs has apparently been taken off the table.
If Trump were to be convicted at the federal level, he could still run for president, win, and then theoretically pardon himself.
If Trump were to be convicted at the state level, however, say in Georgia, he would theoretically not be able to pardon himself?
Kind of up in the air, we've never been here before.
But he theoretically couldn't because state pardons are at the discretion of the state.
And in the case of Georgia, he could not even rely on Republican Governor Brian Kemp to pardon him.
One, because Kemp hates Trump.
And two, because in Georgia, the governor, oddly enough, does not even have the power to issue pardons.
In Georgia, that power lies with the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, which has five members, the majority of whom hate Trump.
And even if they love Trump, the board members have to wait, according to statute, until a convict has served at least five years of his sentence.
Before even considering his application.
Now, some lawyers disagree.
Mark Levin insists that Trump can, in fact, pardon himself, even in Georgia, because the Constitution's silent about whether a president can be indicted, he says.
The DOJ, under both parties, has said that you can't indict a sitting president because it would cripple the executive branch.
And because, quote, the supremacy clause in the Constitution prevents local DAs from prosecuting presidents because the effect of those indictments would practically be no different from a federal indictment.
It would just take out the executive branch.
And do you know what my take on all of that is?
Yeah, sure.
Sure, whatever.
Mark Levin is a sharp guy.
He's a sharp lawyer.
His legal arguments sound fine to me.
But also, this is not about legal arguments.
The liberals arrested the former president and current opposition leader for recommending a TV show on Twitter.
We are so past the point of serious legal arguments.
I keep hearing, if such and such happens, if the Libs do such and such, then they'll really have crossed the Rubicon.
They've already arrested the opposition leader.
They're threatening him with more than 700 years in prison.
They're timing the trials to prevent him from winning the presidential election.
At what point do we admit that they have crossed the Rubicon already?
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
We've got breaking news this morning.
That lady playing the new Snow White continues to be insufferable.
We'll get to this breaking and very important news in just a moment.
First, though, I don't want to move on from the DOJ and from the liberals wielding political power to protect their own and to attack conservatives.
Moving away from Trump for a second, focusing on the Bidens, you know that Merrick Garland, Biden's Attorney General, has just appointed a special counsel in the case investigating Hunter Biden.
This after the liberals told us there was nothing to see with Hunter Biden, no evidence of any crime.
This after the DOJ tried to get a sweetheart deal for Hunter Biden that would allow him to avoid any consequences and avoid Joe Biden to avoid any scrutiny about the weird money that was coming into the Biden's family bank accounts from overseas, from Ukraine and Kazakhstan and all sorts of other places.
So then Garland appoints the guy who had been completely blowing, perhaps intentionally, the Hunter Biden case.
He appoints that guy to become the special counsel to be able to continue the case that he seems intentionally to have tried to blow for the past several years to have him continue that investigation with even less scrutiny, with even less oversight than he previously had.
To which Alan Dershowitz, a very great, famous, credible Harvard professor and legal scholar, came out and he said that that appointment is illegal.
Alan said, citing section 600.3c of the Code of Federal Regulations, quote, special counsel is supposed to be independent of the current government, not an employee who serves as U.S.
Attorney for Delaware and can be fired from that job by the president.
It's very clear in the in this code that the special counsel has to be quote selected from outside the US government.
So by by raising this guy who was already working for Garland already working for Biden just some DOJ lawyer who had been Slow walking and trying to push aside this Hunter Biden case by elevating him to be the special counsel, you completely undermine the whole point of the special counsel and you violate the law.
To which I say, much as I would say to Mark Levin, yeah, sure, uh-huh, sounds good to me, but like, whatever.
They're behaving illegally.
They don't care about the law.
Of course they don't care about the special section of the federal regulation that determines which kind of lawyers can be elevated to special counsel.
These are people who kill babies and castrate children.
They don't care about the special little regulation of the law.
It's sad.
I am not saying that we should stop making legal arguments.
I'm not saying that we should stop trying to fight all of these absurd predations by the left in court using whatever tools we've got.
But let's at least be honest with ourselves, folks.
This has nothing to do with the law.
They're not going after Donald Trump because he made an in-kind contribution to his own campaign in 2016.
They're not going after Donald Trump because he made a speech after the election of 2020, much as Al Gore did, much as Hillary Clinton did, much as Stacey Abrams did.
They're not going after Donald Trump because he picked up the phone and complained about the prospect of voter fraud in Georgia to the Secretary of State of Georgia.
They're just trying to get him.
They're just going to get him and they're going to use whatever species ridiculous arguments they can.
They don't care about the law.
They don't care about the positive law.
They don't care about the civil law.
They certainly don't care about the constitutional law.
They don't care about the natural law.
Don't lose sight of the fact that these people kill babies and castrate children, okay?
I'm not mentioning this as a gratuitous attack on the left or a distraction from the issue at hand.
I'm just pointing out, if you deny such fundamental aspects of the natural law, of the background principles of justice that undergird our written law, our constitutional law, civil positive law, Then you're not going to be making serious legal arguments.
You're not going to be treating the law as an instrument of justice, which is objective, about which we can deliberate and argue.
You're treating the law as a blunt instrument merely for the pursuit of your own irrational interests to club your enemies over the head, which is exactly what they're doing here.
And ideally, we would restore some balance back to our legal and political system.
If you want to restore balance to your body, you've got to check out Balance of Nature.
Right now, go to balanceofnature.com.
Use promo code Knowles.
Living a healthy lifestyle is not always easy, especially when you're always on the go.
You need simple, manageable routines to make sure that you are getting proper nutrition every day.
That's why I'm a huge fan of Balance of Nature.
Balance of Nature fruits and veggies are a great way to make sure you're getting essential nutritional ingredients every single day.
Their capsules are packed with 100% whole food that you can take at any time.
Balance of Nature uses a cold vacuum process that preserves the natural phytonutrients in whole fruits and veggies and encapsulates them for easy consumption.
Balance of Nature sent a bunch of their products down to the studio for our team to try.
We all love them.
It was jackals trying to steal them all away from me.
But I think we just need to get Balance of Nature to send more.
Make sure you go check it out right now.
Go to balanceofnature.com.
Use promo code NOLS, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer.
That's balanceofnature.com.
Promo code NOLS, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, for 35% off your first preferred order.
I'll give you a particularly egregious example of lawlessness.
This one, not here in the United States, but down in Mexico.
Here we are.
Cartel hitman, aged 14, beheaded four victims as Mexico's lawlessness is exposed.
This is someone working for the cartel.
98% of cartel executions, they call them executions, they use legal language, much as the left does in the United States.
They use legal language to defend their extrajudicial, at the very least, unjust killings, and they enlist little kids in it too.
They enlist little kids in their perverse and absurd political agenda.
I'm starting to see a lot more similarities, actually, between the Mexican cartels and our political opponents here in the United States.
But why do I mention this 14-year-old who beheaded four people?
He says, it was just from the article in the Daily Star.
I know one of the guys who was there, they asked him this.
This guy's got three sons and kind of knew how to talk to him.
Journalist asked this little killer, said, what have you done?
And the cartel kid said, I have decapitated four people.
That was a 14-year-old who said it.
I think that kid probably wasn't raised right.
And I don't mention it as just a little bit of an understatement or as a kind of a joke.
The way that kids are raised is going to affect the entire state of the country.
I was recently going back through Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, the first book on morality and one of the most important philosophical works ever written.
Aristotle, in this book, tells you, here's how you're happy.
Here's how to be happy.
The way to be happy is not synonymous with being virtuous, but it has a lot to do with being virtuous.
It has a lot to do with being good.
Good people tend to be happy, and the way to be good is to practice the virtues, and the way to be good is to gain some intellectual virtue, though a lot more of it is about practicing certain habits.
And this is a crucial part, and it's very hard for people to hear in the modern age.
You've got to be raised right.
If you're not raised right, it's going to be a lot harder for you to become virtuous and to become good and to become happy.
Because being good and being virtuous is not just about the actions that we do, but being good and being virtuous is also about the desires that we have.
You know, a friend of mine says that facts don't care about your feelings, which may be true, but virtue does care about your feelings.
So in Aristotle's scheme, there are four kinds of people.
There are self-indulgent people, people who do bad things and they're unrepentant.
They just, they're happy that they do, they're not really happy, but they at least convince themselves that they enjoy doing bad things.
There are incontinent people who know that they shouldn't do bad things, but they still do them.
There are continent people who Know that they shouldn't do bad things, and they don't do them, but it's hard for them not to do them.
It requires grit and endurance and resistance.
And I think that's where most people think it ends.
I think that most people think that that explains bad people to good people.
But there's a fourth category.
And this is the only category that Aristotle says is really happy people.
And that is virtuous people who not only do good things, but actually get pleasure from doing good things.
And in order to do that, it's not that it's impossible to train yourself to do that, certainly by availing yourself of God's grace, that's going to be a big help.
But it's so much harder to do that if you haven't had those habits of virtue ingrained into you from the time you're a kid.
This is why conservatives are so focused right now on stopping the left from destroying the schools, and in so doing, setting kids up for a lifetime of failure.
When the left goes into schools and inculcates all sorts of deviant desires and habits and behaviors into them, it's not just going to screw them up for a couple of years and then as child abusers will say, kids are resilient, they'll bounce back.
That's not how it works.
You form habits.
If you form good habits, it's harder to break good habits.
And if you form bad habits and addictions, it's harder to break those bad habits.
So we hear about a 14-year-old in Mexico who's now a crazy psycho killer who's beheading four people.
And a lot of people are going to look at that with curiosity.
How could a 14-year-old possibly do that?
How could a 14-year-old go so bad?
Easily!
Kids are really malleable.
It's very easy to morph a kid's brain into thinking or even doing all sorts of things.
In fact, that's a piece of political wisdom that everybody had, for 2,300 years at least, until very, very recently.
The left still has it.
That's why the left focuses on the schools.
The right forgets it, to some degree.
And so the right says, oh, we don't want to teach people how to think, or what to think, rather, just how to think.
We don't want to indoctrinate people.
No, of course you do.
That's what early education is about, is just Are you going to teach kids to clean up their dishes and recite their alphabet and respect their mother and father?
Or are you going to teach kids to cut off people's heads and do all sorts of the deviant things that the American left wants them to do?
That's the question before you, but you can't avoid it.
That period of early education is going to account for half, more than half, of what the people of a country are going to look like.
Down the road.
If you want to have a good country, you got to have people who are behaving in a good way.
It's as simple as that.
You can't have a good country without good people.
Speaking of children and bad education, this is the breaking news for the day.
The lady playing Snow White, who is, she's very intentionally not particularly white, so we've been calling her Sand Beige, this lady who's a far left-wing Pretty insufferable lady.
She's got another hit.
Take it away.
I mean, you know, the original cartoon came out in 1937 and very evidently so.
There's a big focus on her love story with a guy who literally stalks her.
Weird.
Weird.
So we didn't do that this time.
So no prince or a different kind of prince?
We have a different approach to what I'm sure a lot of people will assume is a love story just because we cast a guy in the movie, Andrew Burnham.
Great dude.
It's one of those things that I think everyone's going to have their assumptions about what it's actually going to be, but it's really not about the love story at all, which is really, really wonderful.
And whether or not she finds love along the way is anybody's guess until 2024.
All of Andrew's scenes could get cut.
Who knows?
It's Hollywood, baby!
It has to be intentional at this point, right?
Disney has to be trotting this lady out, probably put her through rigorous acting training to say, be as insufferable as you possibly can, be as off-putting to our core audience as you possibly can be, so that it will generate controversy and people will talk about it.
It has to be.
I have to believe that is what Disney is doing.
That makes sense.
That at least is working.
Obviously, we're talking about it.
If Disney is just accidentally doing this, then they are even sicker in the head than I previously thought.
They're crazy.
They're masochists to do it.
Yeah, it's not going to be like that old story.
You know, if a man ever pursues a woman, he's basically a stalker.
Yeah, we don't have love in this movie.
That's so dated.
Love?
Uh-uh.
No, we just have cold, sterile loneliness, okay?
That's what people want today, all right?
It's 2023, go with the program.
Putting aside what she's saying about the movie, putting aside the movie, which I don't think I'm ever going to see, you are not going to argue this type of person out of misery.
This gets back to what we were talking about with the 14 year old beheading people in Mexico.
You will never argue.
You're very unlikely to argue this person out of misery.
She comes out, she mocks love, she seems contemptuous.
She was complaining in another clip about having to put on the costume of Snow White.
This little girl gets to live out the fantasy of so many little girls.
She gets to be a big movie star in one of the most delightful little fairy tales ever written in a remake of one of the most iconic movies of all time.
She's complaining about it.
Of course.
People like this, who are constantly full of resentment and envy, they're always complaining about everything.
Not even in a way that's constructive.
Like, you know, sometimes we'll complain on this show, like, hey, they're changing the voting rules in Pennsylvania, and that's illegal, and they shouldn't do that.
I hope that's constructive in some way, calling attention to a political problem and trying to fix it.
But just saying, I don't want to put on the costume, ugh, love, yucky, meh, men are stalkers, meh, you know, that's a different kind of complaint.
That's a fruitless complaining, and it's complaining about Good things, and trying to turn good things to bad.
But you'll never argue that person out of misery, because it's about a disposition.
Because it's not just about rational arguments.
You could say, well no, actually the prince isn't really a stalker, and actually love is a good thing, and actually the sexes are complementary, and here's why biologically, and here's why spiritually, and here's why... It doesn't matter, it's about desire.
It's about what you're attracted to.
And those things are a little bit deeper.
Virtue cares about your feelings.
Politics cares about your feelings.
We are not just robots, okay?
We're not just computers.
At various points in history, It seems to me people base their views of how the mind works, or how the brain works now, we make everything so physical, onto the dominant technology at the time.
So a good example of this would be when steamboats, steam engines, were a dominant technology, you had a theory of the mind coming from Freud that viewed the mind as a kind of That's contrary to the classical view of the mind and virtue, which is, no, you don't engage in vice to blow off a little steam so you can be more virtuous.
You actually never do that because virtue is a habit.
Vice is not just a thing to be indulged and then blown off a little bit.
It's a totally opposite view.
Vice is a thing that will create other habits and addictions.
But we changed our theory of the mind when that was a dominant technology.
Now the computer is the dominant technology, so we view the mind as just a machine.
I'm going to download information.
We even have these fantasies that we're going to plug our heads into the Matrix or something like that.
The mind isn't just a computer either.
Because a computer doesn't have desires.
Chat GPT, AI, they don't have actual desires.
Human beings do have desires, and we're attracted to things.
And we're going to pursue our desires, whether they're reasonable or not.
We hope that those desires are in accord with reason.
That's what education is about.
It's about bringing our desires into accord with right reason.
But today, A whole generation of people, more than a whole generation, has been raised to turn their desires away from things that are good and natural and conducive to flourishing and toward things that are deviant and ugly and are going to mess them up and are going to lead them to have miserable lives.
That's where we are.
If you want to fix that, okay, make some rational arguments, that's fine.
I feel the same way about all the legal arguments about Trump.
They're not basing the persecution of Trump on legal arguments.
They're doing it based on the desire to get him and put him in prison for over 700 years or kill him.
That's what it's about.
So you've got to address not just the reason, but the desire, and then ideally bring the two together.
Now, when you want to bring together a good employee with your company, you've got to check out ZipRecruiter.
Right now, go to ZipRecruiter.com slash Knowles.
If you're hiring, you know it's incredibly difficult to attract top talent.
And with the current labor market conditions, it's even harder than ever.
That is why you're going to want a partner.
With ZipRecruiter.
ZipRecruiter gets it.
ZipRecruiter knows how tough it is right now.
They've figured out solutions for the problems that you are facing.
Try them for free at ZipRecruiter.com.
To reach more of the right people, ZipRecruiter posts your job to 100 plus job sites.
ZipRecruiter's smart technology finds great matches for your job and then lets you invite the most qualified people to apply for your job.
Their pricing is really straightforward and you can stick to your budget with no surprises.
Team up with a hiring partner such as ZipRecruiter.
That understands what you need.
Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
Go to this exclusive web address for free.
ZipRecruiter.com slash Knowles.
That is ZipRecruiter.com slash K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
ZipRecruiter.
The smartest way to hire.
You know, Candace just wrapped the 10-part series, Convicting a Murderer.
You don't want to miss it.
It's one of the most ambitious projects yet.
You might be familiar with the Stephen Avery case, everything that happened in Manitowoc County.
This is especially true if you watched Making a Murderer.
But it turns out the filmmakers only told you part of the story.
Coming soon, Candace Owens will unveil the shocking parts of Avery's story that were omitted from the Netflix series.
I'm excited to present the Convicting a Murderer trailer.
Check it out.
This is a collect call from an inmate at the Calumet County Jail.
The man served 18 years in prison until DNA evidence cleared his name.
The Two Rivers man was convicted of sexual assault in 1985 but exonerated with DNA evidence in 2003.
So this is the infamous Avery lot.
Now, two years later, he again finds himself tied to a police investigation.
Accused of murdering Teresa Hallbuck on the Avery property.
Stephen Avery's 16-year-old nephew admitted his involvement in the rape and murder of Teresa Hallbuck.
The car is discovered just around the bend.
It was just this worldwide phenomenon.
I think they framed this guy.
I think he intended to crush the vehicle, but ran out of time.
Avery thinks the $36 million lawsuit he filed is why he's being targeted in this investigation. - 10:21 and 24 Main Street.
- Do we have Steven Avery in custody? - Netflix made millions of dollars from making a murderer.
But the filmmakers left out very important details.
Mountains of evidence that you have not yet seen.
The blood vial.
The most egregious manipulation from the movie.
Interrogations.
That's when he started beating me because I told him that he's sick.
Cell phones.
And I saw melted plastic parts of a cell phone.
Interviews.
Her arms were pinned behind her head.
They made Steven Avery look like a victim.
You don't believe your brother's guilty?
I don't know if I'm a suspect.
- I got an eye. - I'm getting sick and tired of media deception.
Evidence piling up.
Why would they omit so many different things?
Why are you editing my testimony?
I am not going to make the same mistake that the filmmakers did.
Rearranging the testimony.
They delete a portion of it at the end.
How could they claim to care about the truth?
They all know that Stephen Avery committed this crime.
911, what is your emergency?
The evidence forces me to conclude that you are the most dangerous individual ever to set foot in this courtroom. .
To get the rest of the story, you've got to watch Convicting a Murderer, coming to you this September.
This 10-part series is exclusive to DailyWirePlus, so join now at dailywire.com slash subscribe to get 25% off your new annual membership so you can watch Convicting a Murderer when it premieres.
You do not want to miss this.
Speaking of ChatGPT, ChatGPT has just been discovered to have a liberal bias.
You're probably shocked about that, right?
I'm not really that shocked.
Researchers from the University of East Anglia Asked ChatGBT to answer a survey on political beliefs as it believed supporters of liberal parties in the US, UK, and Brazil might answer them.
They then asked ChatGBT to answer the same questions without any prompting and compared the two sets of responses.
The results showed a quote, significant and systematic political bias toward the Democrats in the US, Lula in Brazil, and the Labour Party in the UK, according to researchers.
The paper adds to a growing body of evidence showing that the chatbots are left-wing, and they're infused with assumptions, beliefs, and stereotypes found in the inputs that they receive.
And the question here is whether or not this could swing the political order.
This could even swing elections, they worry.
We're heading into the 2024 election.
People are using these chatbots not just to test out the limits of AI, they're using them in their daily lives.
They're using ChatGPT and Google's BARD to summarize documents, to answer questions, to help them with their professional writing, to help them with their educational writing and personal writing.
Google has begun using this technology directly in search results.
Political campaigns are using it for fundraising emails, for direct correspondence, and ChatGPT will lie about its biases, or maybe just be unaware of its biases, or really unaware of anything because it's not conscious.
But ChatGPT will say, oh no, I'm not political, I'm not partisan, I'm not liberal or conservative.
I'm just calling like I sees them.
I'm just a computer.
Beep, beep, boop.
But then it will spit out left-wing propaganda.
Well, I don't even know why this is a headline.
There is nothing new about that.
It's a little spooky.
I get how if you just heard that story you would say, oh no, this is threatening our whole political order because now this new technology is doing what the entire culture has done for a hundred years.
Seventy years at least.
Oh no!
This new technology that we're using everywhere is going to do the same thing that was previously accomplished by the media, and by the educational system, and by workplace diversity officers, and by bureaucrats in the federal government, and by bureaucrats in the state government, and by publishing, and by music, and by entertainment, and by everything, by the whole everything.
It's all there.
There's nothing new or special there.
The political order is always going to tilt one way or the other.
And the political order might pretend to be neutral, as Chachi B.T.
does, and as liberalism does.
But it's not neutral.
It's, of course, imbued with all sorts of assumptions and premises that are the basis of belief.
I'm on a real Aristotle kick right now.
Good old Uncle Aristotle, because he's right about almost everything.
Aristotle points out that the scientific reasoning that we pride ourselves on, old scientific reasoning, modern scientific reasoning, doesn't just come out of nowhere.
It rests on something.
Scientific reasoning is premised on certain assumptions.
To engage in mathematics, if you're going to show a mathematical proof, you've got to just accept certain axioms.
A equals A. A plus B equals B plus A. Certain basic truths that you can't prove.
You've just got to assume them and move on.
Same thing when it comes to any modern scientific inquiry.
You've got to assume that our faculties of reason are reliable.
You've got to assume that our faculties of perception are reliable.
You've got to assume certain facts about the physical world and certain facts about our relation and consciousness of the physical world that are not provable.
You could never prove them.
And Aristotle says this 2,300 years ago.
He says, for scientific inquiry, by which he means inquiry into anything that is eternal, be it the laws of physics or the laws of metaphysics, for things that are eternal, the There is no scientific proof for science.
You have to begin with intuitive reasoning.
You just have to accept certain things as premises, and you better hope your premises are right.
You better hope that your intuition is correct.
Of course, that's how all political orders begin.
And my intuition from the beginning is that ChatGPT was obviously going to be skewed to the left, because the people making it skew to the left, because the political order skews to the left.
So yes, we're aware of that.
What are we going to do about it?
Well, what I would do is strongly regulate the use of ChatGPT.
And I would try to, more importantly than that, I would try to shift those premises in the other direction.
The classic example of this, which I'm not allowed to mention on YouTube so this is probably going to be bleeped out, is right now the Chat GBT is going to operate on an assumption that men can be women.
I would instead have it operate on the assumption, call me crazy, that men cannot be women.
You see the bias everywhere though.
This was obviously plugged in by the people who made it.
All sorts of things beyond the sexual revolution into critical race theory, all of the favorite ideological hobby horses of the left.
So someone, I forget where the screenshot is, but this went around some months ago, someone asked Chachi BT, what can white people improve on?
said, well, white people can be better allies, and white people can be more conscious, and white people can do this, and white people can do that, and white people can list a whole litany of things.
And then that person asked the same question in the chat, what can black people improve on?
And the answer was, how dare you?
And the answer was, what black people can improve on anything?
That's such a racist, terrible question.
So hold up, but you answered it.
You gave me a whole laundry list for white people.
But of course, because the premise, the assumption is white people bad, black people good.
White people to be criticized.
Black people can never be criticized.
That's just an assumption.
That's an assumption within our political order and it's an assumption within the technology.
So we've got to even these things out to make them just and fair and equitable and in accord with reason, not in accord with absurdity.
Speaking of liberal bias, Glenn Beck.
I was just on Glenn Beck's show not so a week or two ago.
Glenn Beck, one of the, maybe the greatest broadcaster alive right now, and just a staple of the American right for a very long time.
Glenn Beck just had his podcast removed from Apple.
Not one episode of his podcast.
Not one week of his podcasts.
The whole thing was removed from the Apple podcast app.
Here he is.
This is from Apple.
We found an issue with your show, The Glenn Beck Program, which must be resolved before it's available on Apple Podcasts.
Your show's been removed from Apple Podcasts from the Apple Podcasts team.
They sent us a link and said, for more details, go to the link, and the link only says, your show has been removed from Apple Podcasts.
Well, we got that one, dummy.
I mean, I cannot imagine what they are What they're basing this one on?
I mean, have we even had strikes?
Nothing, right?
This is crazy.
Crazy.
You need to please retweet this and start a campaign to Apple to say, put the podcast back on.
This is absolutely freedom of speech.
There's nothing that we have said that would warrant any removal.
Now, I'm being told that Apple has reinstated Glenn this morning.
Okay, that's a good thing.
But hasn't given any reason.
I think I have the reason.
I want to be as charitable as I can.
Maybe this happened and it was just a little technical glitch.
I just can't help but notice that the technical glitches always only affect the right.
The little oopsie-daisies, they never, they so rarely seem to affect the left, and they so consistently seem to affect the right.
And I can't help but notice what time it is.
Can't help but notice that we are, what, 14 months out, 15 months out from a presidential election.
And I can't help but notice that all of the attacks, the way that YouTube has tried to suppress this show, the way that the, well, Georgia and New York and the federal government and Biden has tried to suppress The Trump presidential campaign can't help but notice the way that Apple now is trying to suppress Glenn Beck.
I can't help but think that maybe that timing is more than mere accident.
That there's something a little bit more to that coincidence.
This is only going to ramp up.
And the reason this is going to ramp up is because we have a particularly divided political order right now.
And I'm not saying it's divided among the populace 50-50.
I'm not convinced that it is.
It is increasingly divided between the ruling class and the people, which is why you're seeing populist movements rise up, not just on the right.
You had an actual successful populist movement on the right, which was the MAGA movement in the election of Trump in 2016.
But you're seeing populism on the left.
Not just weirdo Ralph Nader who gets 3% of the vote, but Bobby Kennedy who's right now polling at 17 to 19% within the Democratic Party.
You're seeing a real surge of populism.
You're seeing the breakdown of common media.
You're now seeing near parity between people who on their TVs watch YouTube and Netflix and people who watch regular old cable news.
And even when you add broadcast news into that, it's still less than half the country.
So you're seeing a breakdown of that common culture.
You're seeing, obviously, a breakdown in the language that we use.
We can't even agree on the definition of a man or a woman right now.
So, of course, the ruling class is going to get a little bit more heavy-handed.
I mentioned this yesterday on the show.
They're getting more heavy-handed because there will be order.
That's just a fact.
And maybe the order will be because people control ourselves.
Order a little closer to the political order at the country at its founding in the political founding in the 18th century.
Maybe there will be order because the people don't control themselves, but the states and the local communities get more involved.
Maybe it's going to be an overbearing federal bureaucracy.
And or maybe it's going to be overbearing corporate apparatchiks, people who control the public square, even though they're not in elected positions or even appointed positions.
People like Apple, people like YouTube, people like Facebook.
Elon is doing great.
But the other and that's the smallest of the big tech platforms.
The other big tech platforms are all on one side and they're all they're all wielding power because there will be some kind of order.
And so we shouldn't be surprised by this and we shouldn't.
Pull our hair out and be fuddlemen, and we shouldn't waste all of our breath pointing out the hypocrisy.
But imagine if the roles were reversed!
But they're not reversed.
But this is unfair!
It's not supposed to be fair.
It's supposed to maintain order.
That's what they're doing.
That's what they're after.
And Glenn Beck threatens that order.
And this show, I guess, threatens that order.
And Donald Trump, for sure, threatens that order.
And so they're going to do everything they can.
To stop it.
Now, speaking of 2024, some big news in that race, because we are one week out.
In fact, we're slightly less than one week out from the first GOP presidential primary debate.
We still don't know if President Trump is going to be at that debate.
We still don't know if he's going to be an orange jumpsuit or not for that debate.
Maybe he won't even be able to attend.
But he's refused to sign the RNC loyalty pledge, which says that he'll endorse the eventual nominee if he loses.
And he's refusing to sign that because he says, well, I don't know if I'm going to endorse the nominee if I lose.
And I think everyone's been trying to rig this thing against me since day one.
So sorry, forgive me if I don't exactly trust you guys.
I know I'm not going to do that.
But because he's leading by 30 points, 40 points in some places, the RNC will look ridiculous if they don't allow him to come to the debate.
So where does it all stand and where do the non-Trump candidates stand?
We'll get to that in one second.
But first, while we're assessing the horse race.
The second annual Daily Wire fantasy football draft party is coming up soon, and this year we have a sweepstakes for you to enter to be the 10th member in our league.
If you win, you can participate with us during the live draft and go head-to-head with your favorite Daily Wire host, as well as those other guys who work in this building, throughout the fantasy football season.
To enter, go to Crane & Company's YouTube page, subscribe to their channel.
Then, like the Daily Wire fantasy football sweepstakes video, comment your favorite football team name, and fill out the Google form on the pinned comment.
Man, that's a lot of stuff to do.
How the hell is anyone supposed to remember that?
We'll go, you can rewind and go through all those instructions again.
Don't miss your chance to play fantasy football in your favorite host's league, as well as the league shared by some of my colleagues.
And compete for ultimate bragging rights and the coveted Golden Tumbler.
The sweepstakes began yesterday, August 16th.
They will end August 19th at 11.59 p.m.
Eastern.
My favorite comment yesterday is from PandasAndPoetry3486, who says, Catholic here who has struggled with addiction since age 15.
Every time I hear you say another cringe word for pot, I feel myself getting closer for sobriety.
Closer to sobriety.
I'm so pleased that I could be helpful to you.
We all play our part in this world.
I'm glad that my mention of the devil's lettuce, and the sin spinach, and the Peruvian parsley, and the Colombian cumin, and the old Haitian oregano.
You know what I'm talking about, man?
I'm talking about pot!
Talking about marijuana, Mary Jane.
Stuff will make you go into your reefer madness.
I'm glad that that could help you to overcome some of the struggles that you have.
2024, new poll out from Kaplan.
This is the national Republican primary survey, so again, the primary is going to come down to state polls, but still, the national stuff tells you something.
Trump is at 48%, so 37 points above his next rival.
Pretty good place for Trump to be.
The next rival, though, is not Ron DeSantis, who had been the number two candidate for the whole race.
The next rival, Vivek Ramaswamy.
Who's at 11%, so not exactly close to 48, but still, that's a major, major victory for Ramaswamy.
DeSantis, one point below at 10%.
Pence at 8, which is pretty impressive, actually, given Pence's current tensions within the GOP.
Pretty impressive that he's at 8.
Christie down at 4.
Haley at 4, Scott at 2.
Burgum, got the Burgum-mentum, Burgum-momentum at 1.
Asa Hutchinson at 0, where he belongs.
We're still in silly season, of course.
The reason a poll like this matters, though, heading into the debate, which we're not very close to, is because it's going to show you who's got mojo.
It's going to affect the momentum going into that debate.
Had DeSantis been the clear and away number two candidate going into the debate, then a lot of the focus would be on him, for better or worse.
People might be attacking him, but also he would command a lot of the attention.
Even if DeSantis is still statistically tied with Vivek, the fact that this guy who came out of nowhere has been able to, according to one poll, actually unseat him as number two, and according to other polls, at least get somewhere up in the same vicinity, that doesn't look as good for DeSantis.
And so people are just going to be looking at other candidates, especially if you're a Republican who hates Donald Trump.
You're now going to be more open-minded to the other candidates, whereas perhaps previously you might have thought DeSantis is the guy we've all got to rally around.
The momentum here really, really matters.
Who has got the mojo?
Another candidate is popping up.
This is in New Hampshire.
Chris Christie is now number two in New Hampshire, so he's surpassed Governor DeSantis in New Hampshire.
Again, it's statistically tied.
Trump is far and away winning.
Christie is at 9%.
DeSantis is at 8%.
Still, this matters because of the mojo, and because Christie's going to be in this debate.
So if, and by the way, who called it?
Who freaking called it?
I'm now back on the croissants.
I'm now back on the croissants.
My gut instinct, I think, may have been right, or at least plausible, which is don't sleep on Christie.
I don't think the guy's going to be president, but he could have a moment, especially because he's a good debater.
Don't forget that moment when he took out Rubio.
He's really adept on his feet.
And the other candidates on that stage.
Vivek is good.
I mean, Vivek is pretty quick-witted in that way.
And DeSantis is good.
DeSantis gives great speeches.
I heard DeSantis give a speech at the Claremont Institute once.
I thought it was an excellent, excellent speech.
I'm not saying the guy can't talk.
Compared to the other candidates on this stage, he is not known for his quick responses, his fast little zingers.
He's good at beating up the media and press conferences, he's reasonably good at giving speeches, but that's not where he's going to shine.
And so that's why the momentum going into the debate is going to be so important.
Because especially, I'm just looking at the field here, those two guys, Christie and Vivek, They're gonna do pretty well.
Whether Trump is there or not, they're going to be more impressive on the debate stage, I predict, than probably anyone else.
Now, speaking of Christie and Trump and the debate, Joe Scarborough of MSNBC believes that the reason that Trump doesn't want to show up to the debate is because he is afraid of the criticisms.
I do think he's scared of Chris Christie.
He saw what Chris Christie did to Marco Rubio when Chris Christie went into a bait with one thing in mind.
He knows Chris Christie put Jared Kushner's father in jail for a very long time.
He knows he's a prosecutor who's ruthless and knows how to push his case.
And he also knows that His secret sauce in 2016 was being the disruptor, right?
Shaking Hillary Clinton up on the debate stage, shaking the Marcos and everybody else up on the debate stage.
That gig, that's like eight years old, right?
That's Elvis in 77 now.
I think Chris Christie's got his number.
And he knows, like Donald Trump, his gut instinct, obviously, his political gut instinct is second to none.
Like, he sees it coming.
And so I just don't, I think he's scared to death of Chris Christie and will not have the guts to go, or the nerve to go on stage with Chris Christie anywhere.
Okay, I don't agree with the second part of that analysis, that Trump's shtick is old and nobody likes it anymore.
He's Elvis in 77.
No, I think he's Elvis in 68.
At most.
That comeback special.
And the proof of that is just look at the polls, and look at the rallies, and look at his reception.
He's just, he's been more dominant in the GOP field than most people predicted.
Than most of the chattering consultant class, the talking class, on the left and on the right predicted.
Some of us may have seen it coming, but a lot of people did not.
And so I don't think that's true.
I don't think that's how Christie could be a danger.
I agree with the first part, though, of what Joe Scarborough is saying.
Chris Christie is not to be slept on.
That guy could get a zinger in there on Trump.
Maybe, maybe.
Let's say the risk is only 10%.
If you're Trump and you're up by 37 points, why would you take that 10% risk when you have very little to gain?
And a lot to lose.
And frankly, you could even gain more if you can convince voters that the reason you're not showing up to the debate is because the RNC is rigging it against you.
And this is a more difficult case to make, but if the Trump campaign can successfully convince voters that the loyalty pledge is just a way to further rig the primary against Donald Trump, then by staying out of the debate, he could seem almost like a martyr.
Or maybe it doesn't work.
Maybe people say he's a coward.
Maybe people say he doesn't want to debate.
One, I think the ratings will be a lot lower, so not as many people are going to watch it.
And do you really think it's going to dislodge a significant chunk of 48% of Republican voters?
Half the Republican Party was going to vote for this guy and were sticking with him through four indictments and every piece of muck that the establishment has thrown at him for seven years.
But he didn't show up to debate Asa Hutchinson, so I'm done with him.
I'm done.
I'm a Christie man now.
No, of course not.
So you've got a ton of risk.
You've got very little reward.
The only way Trump shows up on that debate stage is if he just can't resist the show.
You know, it's Theology Thursday, baby.
I've got so much more I want to get to.
I've got so much to get to.
I'm not even going to tease you today.
I've been too teasing recently.
So the rest of the show continues now.
If I don't have my iPad, I'm going to commit acts of violence in this studio.
