The libs will livestream Trump’s trial, the White House asserts executive privilege over Biden’s pseudonymous and crooked business correspondence with his son, and a federal judge rules that age limits on porn are unconstitutional.
Ep.1322
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Get 25% of your DailyWire+ membership: https://bit.ly/3VhjaTs
Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
PureTalk - Claim your FREE 5G Samsung Galaxy! https://www.puretalkusa.com/landing/Knowles
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.
Genucel - Download the Cynch app and get your first tank exchange for just $10 with promo code KNOWLES. Visit http://cynch.com/offer for details.
- - -
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
Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee has just announced that every minute of President Donald Trump's trial in the election interference case will be broadcast for the public.
This would seem highly unusual, as cameras and recording equipment are almost never permitted in federal court.
But this is not a federal court.
And more important, this is a show trial.
Trump is not seriously being indicted for committing any crimes, be it in New York, or DC, or Florida, or Georgia, or wherever else they try to legally lynch him next.
He is being arrested and imprisoned, potentially for over 700 years, because he's the leader of an actual political opposition.
Political opposition in America is frequently play acted.
It's not real.
Candidates run against each other.
Sometimes they even differ on some matters of policy, but on the big controversial questions that you're not allowed to bring up, mass migration, globalization, liberalization, war, those kinds of things.
On those issues, both parties in recent decades have tended to deliver the same results, no matter who wins.
Until Trump.
Trump, who upended Republican orthodoxy on all of those things.
So now, they're gonna get him.
And they'll make up some crimes to justify it along the way.
But most importantly, they're gonna make sure that we watch it.
Because this is not an ordinary prosecution.
It's a legal and political revolution.
A total upending of our established traditional political order.
And the revolution will be live streamed.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
The White House wants to take away your beer.
They want you to only have two beers per week.
We'll get to that in just that really important news story in just one second.
First though, while Donald Trump is having his show trial broadcast for the whole world on a bazillion indictments for seven million years in prison, the White House is asserting executive privilege to cover up the crimes of Joe Biden.
So Joe Biden would appear to have committed actual political corruption.
There is an investigation into that now.
Biden denied that he ever engaged in any of the corruption with Hunter Biden as the front man for the enterprise and with the crooked foreign adversaries and even allies who Hunter encountered to sell Joe's influence when he was vice president of the United States.
The White House is saying, no, not going to happen.
So what's been the timeline here?
Joe denies any knowledge of this, it comes out that he knew about it.
Joe denies any involvement, it comes out he was very involved in the business, on a whole lot of phone calls, invited Hunter's business partner over to the White House for lunch, that sort of thing.
Joe Biden says, well, I've had no correspondence with my son about business, which is sort of true in the sense that Joe Biden conducted business with his son under a pseudonym while he was vice president.
In fact, under multiple pseudonyms while he was vice president.
So if a conservative were to file a Freedom of Information Act request for all of the emails of Joe Biden pertaining to Rosemont Seneca, the front group, the fake company through which Hunter was conducting this business, no records would turn up.
That's because Joe Biden was using a pseudonym.
So now a conservative group, America First Legal, files a FOIA request for all the pseudonyms that Joe Biden used to conduct the business with Hunter, and the National Archives says no.
And the National Archives is able to say no to this FOIA request because Joe Biden is asserting executive privilege.
And this is a big victory.
It seems like a failure because we don't get those records.
This is a big victory.
FOIA, Freedom of Information Act, can prove guilt even when we don't get the documents.
Because the very fact that the White House is exerting executive privilege here proves that these pseudonymous emails involved the President.
If these pseudonyms, Robin Ware, Robert L. Peters, all of these Joe Biden pseudonyms, if they were not actually the pseudonyms of Joe Biden, the White House would have no standing to exert a certain executive privilege.
But because they obviously do here, we know Joe Biden was doing all of this stuff.
And yet, they are going to throw up roadblock after roadblock for the investigation of actual crime.
We're talking about actual high-level political corruption, selling American influence to the highest bidder, raking in millions and millions of dollars, at least from around the world.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump as president Called an elected representative in Georgia and said, hey, Georgia elected officials, I think that the election was kind of corrupt.
Can you look into that for me?
And for that, they're going to try to throw him in the clink.
They've arrested his lawyers, they've arrested activists for him, and they're going to live stream the show trial.
Speaking of live streaming, This is the saddest story in our politics right now.
Forget about Biden, forget about Trump, forget about war, forget about disease, forget about...
Did you know that the late-night TV hosts have been out of work for well over three months now?
Probably you didn't.
If you did, it's because I mentioned it once a couple of weeks ago, which was the first time that I realized it.
Because there's a writers' strike in Hollywood.
So the WGA is on strike, which means the writers for the late-night shows are on strike, which means the shows are in reruns, and nobody noticed it.
Because very, very few people watch these shows anymore.
So, in order to fight back against this and try to make some money for the staff of these shows, All of the big late night hosts, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon, Seth Meyers, all of these guys are doing what all white men in America are obliged to do, which is start a podcast.
Here's their podcast.
One more time, Jimmy.
Hi, I'm Jimmy Fallon.
I'm Stephen Colbert.
I'm Jimmy Kimmel.
I thought when you said Jimmy, you meant me, Jimmy, but you meant Jimmy, Jimmy.
I always mean you.
But when you say Seth Meyers, who do you mean?
I mean, John Oliver.
It's the five of us together for maybe an hour a day.
Strike Force 5 is the name of our podcast.
Subscribe to it now.
Spotify or wherever else you get your podcasts.
But Spotify, you f***.
Oh, my face is never going to lose this permanent state of cringe.
Do you get it?
I was talking to the one Jimmy, not the other Jimmy.
And then they all try to get their little line in there.
And then John Oliver, who I forgot was even in the podcast, he just does the John Oliver routine, which is he says something not funny, but then he says the F word afterward.
So that's supposed to pass for comedy.
And this was a revelation to me.
And it's a revelation because when I was a kid, Johnny Carson, Jay Leno, David Letterman, these were huge stars.
These guys hosted, initially it was just one late night show, then it was, you know, two, then three, then four late night shows.
But still, these were huge, huge shows that commanded a huge audience.
And now, all of these guys, the hosts of these supposed big late night shows, these are franchises that go back decades in network television, they have the same job that I do.
We have the exact same job now.
We just have podcasts.
And this isn't merely a way to get around the writer's strike and remain relevant and stay in the news and maybe make some money for the staff.
This is true even when they're on TV.
This is why no one noticed that they were off air.
Because their audiences, which used to be gigantic, have dwindled down to very, very little.
Johnny Carson, on his last week on air, averaged 19 million viewers per show.
His final show, Johnny Carson's final show, had 50 million viewers.
And by the way, this was in 1992.
The U.S.
population in 1992 was just north of 250 million people.
Today it's something like 330 million people.
So the equivalent today to 50 million viewers, the last night of the Johnny Carson Show, would be equivalent to 65-ish million viewers today.
What are these guys getting?
These guys are pulling in a million people a night.
Maybe, maybe a little more, sometimes significantly less than that.
Half a million people a night for Seth Meyers, I think.
That's a podcast.
The major network late night shows have become a podcast.
Any continued allure of the establishment media is a virtual Potemkin village.
The culture has just divided up.
There's no one thing that commands all of the eyeballs.
Probably until the Trump show trial.
That will probably be the highest ratings of any television program in decades.
But that's all divided up.
And this is important for a political order because the Ruling Class was able to exert a lot of soft power when everyone was tuned in, certainly to the three network television stations.
And then even with cable, people were still watching a lot of the same kind of stuff.
So you can exert a lot of soft power through propaganda and conditioning.
But when that totally breaks up and everyone's just listening to their own podcasts, which get, what, a million views or even half a million views?
Some podcasts get very fewer and still have a devoted following.
Well, then the political order's got to get a little tougher.
If they can't exert that soft power, and people are starting to ask questions, and people are starting to question things, and people are starting to think for themselves, then the enforcement mechanism of the state is going to get a lot tougher, and it's going to start cracking down on dissidents, it's going to start arresting people who question the ruling class, as we are seeing every single day.
That is the consequence of a breakdown of the common culture.
Maybe it's a good thing, because we're not all as hypnotized as we used to be, but now Bare reality of our political order and the coercion that it entails is becoming much clearer.
And we've got to talk about that.
When you want to talk to your friends, you've got to check out Pure Talk.
Right now, go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
Is your cell phone in desperate need of a replacement?
You know the signs.
Your battery life is so short that you gotta have a charger on hand all the time.
Cracked screen that gives you glass splinters.
It's time to put that old phone to rest and upgrade to a new 5G Samsung Galaxy from Pure Talk for free.
Get a free 5G Samsung Galaxy with two-day battery life, edge-to-edge display, and ultra-strong Gorilla Glass when you sign up for Pure Talk's unlimited talk text and 15-gig data plan for just $35 a month.
Plus, it comes with a mobile hotspot.
You are not using Pure Talk, you are simply paying too much.
That's the rule, okay?
Get all the data that you could ever need for half the price of the big carriers on America's most dependable 5G network.
Not a similarly dependable network, the most dependable 5G network.
Go to puretalk.com slash noelskin for your free super durable 5G Samsung Galaxy when you switch to Pure Talk.
PureTalk.com.
Make the switch to my cell phone company that I use, PureTalk, the official wireless partner of The Daily Wire.
Also, when you're hanging out with your friends...
You've got to play THE game.
THE most popular game in the entire world, according to the Michael Knowles Institute of Card Games.
Yes or no, it is spicy, controversial, some might say conspiratorial.
The Yes or No Game is all that and so much more.
Now the anticipated follow-up to that best-selling game is finally here.
Yes or no, Conspiracy Expansion Pack.
It's available at dailywire.com slash shop.
With over 110 new cards, the Conspiracy Expansion Pack is a comprehensive compendium of conspiracy.
C-c-c.
Tackle topics such as political assassinations, cryptids, chemicals in our food, and more.
You can discover more about your family and friends than ever before and judge their stances on the most hotly contested conspiracies in American life.
If you haven't gotten the full Yes or No game, head on over right now to dailywire.com.
Pick it up, then get the all-new Yes or No Conspiracy Expansion Pack because the original game wasn't controversial enough.
I would order this now.
We've sold out of this game.
Three or four times at this point.
It always sells out pretty quickly, so if you are going to want it, looking ahead if you're going to want it for Thanksgiving, if you're going to want it for Christmas, I would just get it now.
I don't know the next time they'll come in.
Hopefully we'll restock them soon, but order it now that you have the chance.
Speaking of live streaming and the judiciary, this is the most pathetic story of the week.
A federal judge has just ruled That age limits on porn, on online porn, are unconstitutional.
So some of us, conservatives, have said, just ban porn.
It's not good.
It's really bad.
It leads to the exploitation of women.
It leads to addiction, especially for young men.
It's in no way good for anybody.
It's like any drug.
We should just discourage it and ban it, ideally.
But the softer, more conciliatory middle ground approach is, well hey, let's at least make sure that little kids aren't looking at porn.
We know that the median age of exposure to porn these days is something like 10 or 11 years old, maybe younger now.
So let's just, you gotta prove that you're at least 18.
Just like you used to go buy a Playboy down the street at the magazine stand, you had to show an ID to do that.
Well, let's do that with far more egregious online pornography.
And a federal judge said no.
No, you can't make sure that five-year-olds aren't looking at porn.
No, that's unconstitutional.
That's a violation of the First Amendment.
This weirdo judge, man, Judge David A. Ezra, Senior U.S.
District Judge of the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Texas, finds, quote, the court finds that HB 1181 is unconstitutional on its face.
That's the law saying we're going to have some age limits on porn.
Prohibited Texas from any further enforcement of this law pending further order or final judgment.
They say the statute is not narrowly tailored and chills the speech of plaintiffs and adults who wish to access sexual materials.
The law is not narrowly tailored because it substantially regulates protected speech, is severely under inclusive, and uses overly restrictive enforcement methods.
Okay.
I don't know who needs to hear this.
I guess this federal judge needs to hear this.
I'll pull myself closer to the microphone here.
Pornography is not protected speech.
It's not.
In the last 50 years, we've pretended that it's protected speech.
In America, because of some stupid Supreme Court rulings.
But it's not.
It's smut.
Our Founding Fathers, the great men who built our country, the wise statesmen through all of Western civilization, have never considered pornography to be protected speech.
It's obscenity.
It's smut.
It appeals to the prurient interest.
It has no artistic merit.
It has no speech quality.
Think of it this way.
When an animal grunts, Is that the same thing as when a human being gives an oration?
Is the barking of a dog the same as the Pericles funeral oration?
No.
They're both sounds, but they're not both speech.
When we have an argument, when we write a letter, when we give a speech, that is speech.
There's meaning to it, it appeals to reason, it allows us to deliberate and think about things in an abstract way.
When a dog grunts, even when a baby screams for milk, that's not really speech.
That's an expression of the instinct and of the appetite.
It can be an important type of communication.
It can have an effect in the real world, but it's not the same thing as speech.
Well, it's the same thing here.
When I watch a movie, if I watch Citizen Kane, that is speech.
If the court were to come in and say, you can't have Citizen Kane because we the judges don't like the movie, that would be a curtailment of speech.
Citizen Kane and some hardcore porn on the internet are not the same thing.
One is appealing to the intellect.
One is appealing to the soul.
Stirring the soul and calling up sentiment that ultimately does have a reasonable component to it.
Pornography just excites your lusts.
It's extremely unreasonable.
It's the opposite of speech.
Where did we get this from?
We got this from Miller versus California, which is this 1973 Supreme Court decision.
There are so many stupid decisions Around this time, well you had Roe v. Wade, obviously, you had all of the weird sex cases, and you got this one too, Miller v. California, which modified the definition of obscenity from that of, quote, utterly without socially redeeming value, to that which lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
So this is a weakening of obscenity, and therefore a weakening of the government's ability to enforce obscenity laws.
Then in 97, we got, to my mind, the most egregious pro-porn Decision that was in the name of free speech, but it was total BS, and in a way it's kind of undermined free speech.
The Supreme Court rules in Reno versus ACLU that the anti-indecency provisions of the Communications Decency Act were unconstitutional.
So we talk about the Communications Decency Act, that often comes up as a way to regulate big tech, because you hear about Section 230, which gives big tech platforms certain legal protections that have kind of Screwed us over in the long run because it's allowed big tech to censor conservatives while receiving the protections of an online platform rather than a publisher.
But the Communications Decency Act is really about decency in communications.
And it was a law intended to address the new technological and social issue of online pornography.
There was a similar law passed around this time called the Child Online Protection Act.
Republicans wanted to pass it.
Democrats wanted to pass it.
Even Bill Clinton, who was, you know, a little bit loose in that arena of sexual propriety, he signed it into law.
And yet this ridiculous court says, no, you can't have anti-indecency provisions because that would be a curtailment of free speech.
Porn is not free speech.
And this is a reminder conservatives are never going to win by trying to split hairs and find some conciliatory middle ground with something as egregious as hardcore online porn, a ubiquitous social problem causing all sorts of of psychological and spiritual and health issues among American people.
Just ban it.
Just go out there and be bold and ban it and appoint bold judges and don't do this to totally shred the Constitution or anything like that, what the liberals say.
No!
Do that to return us to a time when we had a far more reasonable principle of constitutional interpretation and statutory interpretation.
Before the 1970s, do you think things were more reasonable or less reasonable?
Did the 1970s make things were better and better behaved and more conducive to flourishing?
I don't think so.
70s was the decade of disco and weird sex stuff and cocaine, okay?
And things have only gotten crazier since.
So let's be bold, guys.
Forget about this.
Well, we're gonna just make sure that only 18-year-olds can look at porn, not 17-year-olds.
Now just get rid of it.
It's bad.
No socially redeeming value whatsoever.
Now, speaking of speech, I'm going to shift gears hard here.
Some people are voicing their opinion using their speech to say who they want to be the Republican nominee for president in 2024.
And you know all of the polls, pretty much all of them with that exception, have been overwhelmingly in favor of Donald Trump.
But there's a new poll out that the people who don't want Trump to be the nominee are touting as evidence That maybe Donald will be upended as the front runner here.
This is a poll from the Young Republican National Committee showing Donald Trump as the favorite to be the GOP nominee in 2024.
in 2024.
Now, I, I hate to, uh, rain on this parade here for the people who are supporting Governor DeSantis, But I don't think this poll shows exactly what the anti-Trump crowd thinks it shows.
Now, we could talk about this over a nice barbecue sometime if you invited me over to your house, but if you ever did that, you better make sure that you've got propane.
That's why you gotta check out Cinch.
Right now, go to cinch.com, use code NOLS.
Have you ever craved a nice barbecue meal with the family?
Say you go to the store, get all the groceries, invite family over, and when you go to turn on the grill, your propane tank is empty.
Well, that's where Cinch comes in to save the day.
Cinch is a propane grill tank home delivery service.
They deliver propane grill tanks right to your door.
Cinch delivers on your schedule, requires no long-term commitment or subscription.
Plus, delivery is completely contactless.
You don't have to wait around at home.
Track the order on the Cinch app from anywhere.
Whether you're grilling steaks or lighting up the patio heaters on a cold night, 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 the Cinch app to order.
New customers can get their first tank exchange for just $10 with promo code NOLS, K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
That is cinch.com or download the Cinch app and use promo code NOLS, K-N-O-W-L-E-S to get your first tank exchange.
Use promo code NOLS to get your first tank exchange for just $10.
Limited time offer.
You must live within a Cinch service area to redeem it.
Visit cinch.com slash offer for details.
As you know, the spooky season is quickly approaching.
There will be demons out on the prowl.
I guess there always are, because they're wandering about the world seeking the ruin of souls.
But I'm not just talking about woke corporations that look upon your values with disdain, okay?
Let's unwoke Halloween with Jeremy's Chocolate.
Our delicious chocolates come in two forms, he-him with nuts, tee-hee-hee, and she-her, which is nutless, just as our Lord intended.
Don't be a ghoul.
Head on over to Jeremy'sChocolate.com to order your chocolates in time for Halloween.
Spooky.
Young Republican straw poll results are in.
Top of the straw poll, Ron DeSantis with 36.6%.
He wins the straw poll.
Looks like good news for DeSantis.
Trump comes in second, very close second, 35.4%.
Vivek, third, 9.1%.
Nikki, 7.5%.
Tim Scott, 5.5%.
5.4%.
Vivek, third, 9.1%.
Nikki, 7.5%.
Tim Scott, 5.5%.
Okay.
This is in keeping with what I hear on campus.
I travel to a lot of campuses.
I give a lot of campus speeches.
I talk to a lot of young people, especially the sort of young people who would join the college Republicans and who, when they get a little bit older, would join the young Republicans.
Young Republicans are more for young professionals.
And I'll say, who are you supporting in 2024?
And the majority of them will say Ron DeSantis.
A minority of them will say Donald Trump.
That's pretty much all I've been hearing.
So this seems like good news for DeSantis, right?
It's a nice enough headline, it is not enough.
And the reason it's not enough is because there are multiple factions in the GOP.
There is the...
Young Republican, college Republican, Brooks Brothers wearing, country club belonging, a little bit more establishment leaning type of Republican.
There are also the more eccentric Republicans, the populists, and the nationalists, and the paleoconservatives, and the traditionalists, and all those ists and isms.
I once heard it described as The obscure political monikers being the right-wing version of gender pronouns.
There are just so many of them.
But there are these disparate factions, okay?
And the fact is, Donald Trump has the eccentric wing of the party locked up.
The populists, they're not going for anybody but Trump.
Maybe they'll flirt with Vivek, but probably they're with Trump.
The nationalists, mostly with Trump.
The paleo-conservatives, pretty much with Trump.
All the eccentric wing, they're with him.
The group that Trump does worst with is the more establishment Brooks Brothers Country Club wing.
The YRs, the CRs, the neoconservatives, that type.
He does the worst with that.
If Trump is only trailing the number one spot among that group of conservatives by one and a half percentage points or less, what is it, 1.2 percentage points?
Then his lead is dominant.
This is not just about Ron DeSantis.
Any candidate who wants to be able to compete seriously against Trump needs to be dominating among at least one of the factions of the GOP.
Think about Reagan and Bush in 1980.
Ronald Reagan had the Conservatives, what we might call the Eccentrists, the Populists, the Nationalists, the Paleos.
Reagan had that part of the party, the Social Conservatives.
George H.W.
Bush had the Brooks Brothers establishment.
Committee, part of the party.
And Reagan won, and then they came together in a unity ticket.
That's why Reagan picked Bush.
Here, Trump is statistically dead even, even among the establishment types.
So, where does a competitor go from there?
Where does a competitor go?
The DeSantis campaign is obviously dealing with the lackluster poll growth, non-existent poll growth, so now the never-back-down super PAC Which is the DeSantis Super PAC has upended its strategy.
They've announced that they're going to stop door knocking in Nevada and California.
The reason for this, according to the spokesman, is they want to focus on the early primary states.
So Aaron Perrine, who's spokesman for the Super PAC, says, we want to reinvest in the first three, insinuating Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
We see real opportunities in the first three.
The first three are going to set the conditions for the March states.
Now what's weird about this is, Nevada is the second state, as far as I know.
I don't think South Carolina is in the first three.
I think Nevada is in the first three.
So I don't know what lines are getting crossed here, or if this is some spin because maybe they're not doing as well in Nevada.
Either way, A turning away from Super Tuesday.
If you launch your campaign and you say, we're going to be in all these different states, and we're going to, forget about the first primary states, we think we're already going to do very well in Iowa and New Hampshire, and we're already looking ahead to the Super Tuesday states, and then you pull back from that, that's not a good sign.
I've worked on some presidential campaigns where that's not a good sign.
I've seen it, and we've seen it happen for many years.
So, I don't think DeSantis is out yet.
Okay, and I know people are going to say I'm carrying water for Trump or something here.
I'm really not.
I do like Trump.
I like Trump very much.
He's the best president in my lifetime.
I think he reshaped the Republican Party in a good way.
I also really like Ron DeSantis.
And my analysis would be absolutely the same if I hated Donald Trump.
Or if I hated Ron DeSantis.
My analysis would be the same.
I think the analysis has been pretty close to accurate, and I think it's been proven right at pretty much every step of the way, going back about six months now.
So don't shoot the messenger, guys.
If you're upset that Donald Trump is leading, then you've got to change your campaign strategy.
Or perhaps just recognize that the conditions in this presidential race—we have not seen this kind of thing since, what, 1892, where a conservative—I'm sorry, where a president is running for a non-consecutive second term.
Maybe the conditions are just such that It's not the year to challenge somebody.
That's the conclusion that Glenn Youngkin, obviously, has reached in Virginia.
He's a great-looking presidential candidate who just thinks he's not going to beat Trump, and so he's staying on the sidelines, at least for now.
But if you're pegging your hopes on, well, my candidate is one point higher than the guy who's 40 points ahead in the national polls, and he's one point higher among the young Republican National Committee, That ain't gonna cut it, man, and you're gonna spin your wheels and spend a lot of money on a strategy that is going to continue not to work.
Now, there is some not-so-terrible news for Ron DeSantis.
There's something being reported as awful news for Ron DeSantis, which is actually fake news.
And the story is that a pro-DeSantis super PAC, a $50 million super PAC, has shut down and has flipped sides and is now supporting Donald Trump.
And as far as I can tell, that's just completely made up.
This is from the Daily Mail.
Exclusive, Ron DeSantis' $50 million Super PAC closes doors after donors were spooked by rookie mistakes.
A strategist, John Thomas, secured $50 million in donations for Ron to the rescue.
The group will shut down after donors had second thoughts, and now they're going to support Trump.
The Super PAC appears to have had basically no money on hand.
It secured promises for donations, but it never actually got the money, and it just seems like a Like a scam.
There are a lot of scam super PACs out there because the super PACs are not allowed to have any direct relation to the candidate.
So today I could start the Doug Burgum is the man, give us your money super PAC.
I've never met Doug Burgum.
I have no intention of giving Doug Burgum any of my money.
I could go raise all of that money.
Donald Trump had to deal with a lot of this.
People raising money based on the positive feelings for Donald Trump.
And then the Trump campaign never got the money at all.
So that seems to be what's happened here.
So that's a fake news story.
But the real news stories are bad enough.
Okay, and so I've said it for months now.
I have no intention of endorsing in this primary.
I like primaries.
I like when the candidates duke it out so that they can get tougher for the general election.
Trump's a big boy.
He's got thick skin.
The same thing goes for DeSantis.
The same thing goes for Vivek and the other guys, too.
Even when we talk about these different parts of the party, I'm a fairly eccentric Republican who also wears a lot of Brooks Brothers, okay?
The different aspects of the party relatively clearly, and as of now, Trump's lead seems to me solid.
Totally, totally solid.
Now, speaking of stories that seem like fake news, in this case, stories that are not actually fake news, the White House wants to take away your beer.
They want to limit you to two beers per week.
Does President Biden want to limit Americans to two beers a week?
Where is this coming from?
Maybe I didn't miss you so much.
Where is this coming from?
Dr. George Koob, who is the director of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Says the U.S.
may soon follow Canada and recommend just two beers a week.
How do you guys think that's going to go?
Let me tell you what I'm not going to get involved in.
In that question right there.
I have no idea.
I've not seen the data.
I cannot speak to this.
I will leave it to the experts and not weigh in.
So if the experts say two beers a week, that's okay with you?
I will leave it to the experts.
I'm just not going to comment on that.
This is a great exchange.
Not because of the beer thing, who cares, no one's going to follow this advice.
But because of what it tells you about the experts, and what the conservatives think about the experts, and even what the liberals think about the experts.
When Peter Doocy asks this question, Karine Jean-Pierre gets a little smile.
She goes, oh, here we go, the beer question.
Yeah.
Karine Jean-Pierre knows this is ridiculous.
She knows that there's no win answering this politically, but she also knows that two beers a week is ridiculous and it's almost certainly a bogus study and no one's going to pay attention to it.
But what does she say?
She says, yeah, we, um, look, I'll defer to the experts.
All right.
Yeah.
Okay.
Listen to the experts.
In a way, she is Admitting the same thing about the experts that the conservatives have now long thought, which is the experts are often full of it.
They conduct their studies, the studies often arrive at silly conclusions, and so we discard them.
Oh yeah, well, listen to the experts, Peter.
Tee hee.
Yeah, whatever.
Moving on.
She's tacitly admitting that the experts are often wrong.
But, she won't go all the way.
She's tacitly admitting it's ridiculous, but her substantive answer is, just listen to the experts.
It's an amazing, very, very subtle admission and response.
And what it comes down to, what the upshot of all of it is, I think, is that everybody knows the experts frequently get it wrong.
The one thing I know about science is that statistically it's almost always wrong because scientific discoveries and innovations end up getting upended sometimes centuries later, sometimes generations later, sometimes weeks later.
It's a tacit admission that our trust in science is misplaced, but it's also an admission that the political ruling class will wield the supposed credibility of science willy-nilly as a way to skirt responsibility, As a way to avoid democratic accountability, certainly.
They'll just use them in a really arbitrary and capricious way.
All of that contained in this silly little exchange about beer.
Because it's not going to be so silly when the exchange is about the next vaccine you're going to have to take.
And it's not going to be so silly when the exchange is about how you're going to have to shut down your business and lock down and not go to Granny's funeral and you're going to have to vote by mail because COVID-23 has come around and the election's right around the corner.
That's going to be a little less funny about beer.
We're all going to be drinking probably significantly more when that happens, but it's going to be the exact same principle at play.
Speaking of Joe Biden, the Democrat leader in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, has just come out and he's on the defense against the rumblings that the Republicans are considering impeaching Joe Biden.
They have nothing to show for their majority throughout the year.
And so as a natural consequence of that, they just continue to take orders from Donald Trump, their puppet master-in-chief, who has directed them to persecute and to go after Joe Biden, which may take the form of an illegitimate impeachment inquiry.
Pot meet kettle, yes, obviously very hypocritical, insane that as they're arresting Donald Trump, after they impeached Donald Trump twice over complete nonsense, they're complaining that the Republicans are considering opening an impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden.
When did this all start?
This started with Watergate when the Democrats were prepared to impeach Richard Nixon over nothing.
And then it accelerated during the Clinton era when the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over perjury.
They didn't impeach Bush.
They didn't impeach Barack Obama.
John Boehner said we're not going to impeach Obama, basically just because he was the first black president.
They didn't want to be called racist.
And then they made up for lost time when they impeached Trump twice.
And now the Republicans might impeach Joe Biden.
So this is just what we do now.
The political opposition just impeaches the executive.
This has become the pattern.
It's not the exception.
The Democrats did start it.
With Nixon, just as the Democrats started the Supreme Court fights with Robert Bork.
But the Republicans have participated too.
This is the way the system works now.
And as usual, the Republicans are behind.
Because it's no longer just about are we going to open an impeachment inquiry.
Now, the Democrats have already upped the ante.
They are now arresting the former president.
They're now arresting the opposition leader.
They're now arresting the lawyers who have the audacity to be lawyers and to represent the sitting president of the United States.
They're arresting political dissidents, like the five pro-lifers who demonstrated against abortion.
They're facing 11 years in the clink.
They're going to lock up hundreds of January Sixthers who committed the heinous, traitorous, treasonous crime of wandering around the Capitol for a few hours and then going home.
It's a sad state that our political order is such that we're always going to impeach the other guy now, or that that's at least the expectation.
But the sadder fact is, we're still trailing behind.
We're still fighting yesterday's war.
The Republicans bring a knife to the fight and the Democrats bring a bazooka.
Ooh, we're considering opening an impeachment inquiry.
Cool, they're gonna put Trump in an orange jumpsuit for 700 years if they don't outright execute him, okay?
So maybe we should start engaging in lawfare a little bit more aggressively, a little bit more on par with what the Democrats have already been doing.
Doesn't look good for us.
And when you wanna look good, you gotta check out Jen Yussel.
Right now, go to JenYussel.com slash Knowles.
When you look in the mirror, Do you see dark spots?
They're not going to go away on their own.
You're not going to just wish them away.
You need help from GenuCell's Dark Spot Corrector.
The Dark Spot Corrector has not one, but three cutting-edge ingredients.
It goes to work fast on sunspots, dark spots, liver spots, and even old discoloration, both on your face and hands.
You'll be amazed at how quickly you'll see results.
You can now enjoy what is left of that summer sun, beach days, and barbecues without embarrassing spots.
With GenuCell, you will see the results Or your money back.
No questions asked.
Go to GeniaCell.com right now.
GeniaCell.com slash Knowles.
Get your dark spot corrector with the new GeniaCell Most Popular Package.
Say goodbye to those pesky spots tomorrow.
Really love the company.
Love the owner, Coptic Christian, who left Egypt for the American dream.
All orders will include a mystery luxury gift while supplies last.
GeniaCell.com slash Knowles.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Lindsey Hickman 9604 who says, the most bleeps in a Daily Wire show ever and none of them were curses.
That's true.
If you were watching this show on the Daily Wire yesterday, maybe go check it out on YouTube.
It's kind of fun to see how few syllables I was able to get in in my introduction because I had had the temerity to Speak about reality in a clear way.
So you're not allowed to do that on YouTube, at least in one particular case anymore.
So you can catch that.
And if you were watching on YouTube, you should go watch it on DailyWirePlus if you want to figure out what I was actually saying.
Now, finally, finally, we've arrived at my favorite time of the week, when I get to hear from you in the mailbag!
This mailbag is sponsored by PureTalk.
Go to puretalk.com slash Knowles for your free, super durable 5G Samsung Galaxy.
When you switch to PureTalk, take it away.
Hi Michael, it's Kyle C here.
First, I wanted to say that I really appreciate your straightforward and honest assessment of the state of the GOP race so far.
I personally think you do the best out of any commentators in giving analysis of the race.
So, my question is related to it, and specifically about how the Democrats are clearly interested in bringing back COVID lockdowns and rules back into society.
In my opinion, one of the biggest problems for Ron DeSantis' campaign is that arguably his biggest strength in comparison to Trump is the handling of COVID, but people have basically forgotten about it or don't really care to talk about COVID anymore.
So with this renewed interest from Democrats bringing back the COVID craziness, do you think the spotlight on this Will help the DeSantis campaign at all?
Enough to bridge the massive lead that Trump holds right now?
Or do you think it will have little to no boost for him?
I'd really appreciate your thoughts.
Thank you very much.
Yes, I think this is DeSantis' best shot.
Right now, the Democrats are testing out whether or not we have the stomach for COVID insanity again.
So, they're doing it one school, one company, and one industry.
Okay, now maybe it's two schools, and they're just testing it to see if we'll go along with it, and people probably will because it was politically very effective for the Democrats.
So, DeSantis' best shot certainly is to Remind people that he was very strong during COVID.
I'm not convinced this will, even that would bring him across the finish line because DeSantis will continue to govern well on COVID and Trump will not have any responsibility.
He'll just be on the campaign trail and he can say whatever he wants and come out strongly against the COVID lockdowns and it'll sound just as good.
You know, in the same way that Vivek Ramaswamy has never held public office, but he says things that are very appealing and he's And he's had a successful career in private enterprise, so when he says things, he gets just as much credit, if not more credit, than governors or senators who have been in the government arena on those issues.
That would be my guess.
If DeSantis can really tie Fauci around Trump's neck, it might help pull him down.
I do agree it's his best shot.
I'm not sure it's enough, but it's his best shot.
Keep going.
Dearest Doctor of Love at the Daily Wire, I have two questions for which I need your suave wisdom.
First and most importantly, is it possible to be a part of the Crème de la Crème without taking on the moniker of Cream Puff?
No.
My sock-footed loafers are far too heavy for such a designation.
Yeah, I know.
You got a dance, man.
I don't know what to tell you.
Secondly, I've been meeting regularly with the woman for a couple months, and despite both being in our mid to late 20s, neither of us have ever been in a serious or long-term relationship.
I have never known someone with whom I've met eye to eye with on everything, more than with her.
Everything from theology to family roles, political views, life goals, even down to minute details that are of no real importance.
The problem is that neither of us feels particularly attracted to the other.
Is this where an opposites attract cliché comes in?
Is attraction something that grows as you get to know someone beyond the first couple months?
My question is, how much of a role do you see romantic attraction playing in a relationship?
No other woman that I have ever have been attracted to has ever reciprocated that affection.
So do I just give up on finding that and continue pursuing a relationship with someone I'm not particularly attracted to, but see life through the same lens as?
Or does romantic attraction play an important role in a relationship?
Thanks for your help.
Really good question.
Yes, it can grow.
And yes, if you marry this woman, you could have a wonderful, beautiful marriage.
And if it's a good marriage, your love will deepen.
I love sweet little Elisa today more than I ever have.
And I've loved sweet little Elisa for decades.
But the caveat I'll say there is...
You know, Sweet Little Alisa and I went to middle school and high school together.
I remember, this is a little, this is my VTMI, I remember having like a dream about Sweet Little Alisa when we were in 6th or 7th grade.
Like I thought she was just a little hottie, you know, when we were 12 or whatever we were.
And I actually remember the dream and it was saucy and not fit for the queen and I won't mention it, but I was instantly Physically attracted to my beloved wife and I think it does.
It's important.
I do think it's I'm not saying you can't have a good marriage without that people have in history, but especially you say you've never had any relationship before you don't really know how to do it.
You might just consider your circumstances.
I mean, how old are you?
How what how large is your social circle?
How long do you want to wait until you do get married?
Do you want to play the field a little bit?
You know, sweet little Lisa and I split up for college and, you know...
I sometimes wake up in a cold sweat thinking of how awful my life would be had I not married sweet little Elisa.
And that's because of, obviously, the most important kind of attraction, which is the attraction to her virtue and her, like, goodness and all those things.
But also, you know, she's just a hottie.
I don't know.
And that matters, too.
We're physical creatures, too.
We're incarnate.
We're not just floating in outer space, you know, in the ether or something like that.
The physical is not primary, and it should not be primary in any love affair, certainly in any marriage.
But you got a body.
You are your body too, as well as your soul.
Okay, we got more to get to.
We got more voicemail bag.
We got more written mail bag.
We've got...
Of course, Fake Headline Friday.
I need your help in discerning which the fake headline is.
So, head on over now.
If you were just a member of the hoi polloi out there, go to dailywire.com.
