The entire Canadian Parliament applauds an old Nation Socialist to support Ukraine, Newsom unexpectedly vetoes a trans-the-kids bill, and embattled Democrat Bob Menendez gives his best excuse for the half-million dollars in cash bribes sitting in his house.
Ep.1338
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3jJQBQ7
Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text "KNOWLES" to 989898 for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit: https://birchgold.com/knowles
Renewal by Andersen - Get your FREE Consultation text KNOWLES to 200-300
- - -
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
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just attended a special session of the Canadian Parliament to honor a 98-year-old Nazi.
We have here in the chamber today Ukrainian-Canadians, Ukrainian-Canadian world veteran from the Second World War who fought the Ukrainian independence against the Russians and continues to support the troops today, even at his age of 98.
His name is Yaroslav Hunka.
And I was going to say he's in the gallery, but I think you beat me to that.
But I'm very proud to say that he is from North Bay and from my riding of Nipissing to Miskaming.
He's a Ukrainian hero, a Canadian hero, and we thank him for all his service.
Thank you.
Yes, one more standing ovation, please.
The Ukrainian hero and the Canadian hero.
Now it turns out that person is Yaroslav Hanka, who at 18 decided to volunteer for the Waffen-SS.
And though Hanka's 14th Regiment of the Waffen-SS was not specifically found guilty of war crimes, it has been linked to some pretty nasty stuff, including a reported massacre in Huta Pierniaka, which housed hundreds of Jews, as well as numerous mass executions.
The whole incident was particularly embarrassing because Vladimir Putin's justification for invading Ukraine was to denazify the country.
A problem that the Ukrainian leadership has said does not exist, a case that is now more difficult to make since the leader of Ukraine is on camera giving a standing ovation to a Nazi.
The whole episode is just so unbelievably funny.
It's out of a movie.
A dark comedy, certainly, but it could have been written by Hollywood.
Not only because Trudeau and Zelensky and the entire Canadian Parliament accidentally applauded a Nazi.
Not even just because, after a lifetime of anonymity, this extremely old man, who appeared so happy to have his war service recognized by the Prime Minister of his adoptive country, has now been universally disavowed and become the living face of Nazism.
What is most funny is the historical ignorance of Trudeau and Zelensky and the Canadian MPs who put this together.
The man was being honored for fighting against the Russians in World War II.
Who did they think was fighting against the Russians when he says he's a World War II hero for Ukraine and for Canada?
They were on opposite sides of the war, guys.
This should not... Sorry.
I'm sorry.
I've got to get it together.
This should not have been a surprise.
Has Justin Trudeau never opened a history textbook?
Probably not.
Probably none of these people have taken much time to read history, which is probably why we're all doomed to repeat it.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Speaking of switching sides, AOC has called on Democrat Senator Bob Menendez to resign.
She is turning on her own fellow Democrat.
We'll get to that in just a moment.
First, though, speaking of lapses in memory and the Nazis, Joe Biden just a few days ago was at a New York campaign stop, and he told a story about the whole reason he ran for president in 2020, the whole reason he's president right now.
And the story was that Donald Trump called neo-Nazis very fine people in Charlottesville.
And we've heard this before.
It was the very first piece of rhetoric from Biden's 2020 campaign.
So he gets through this spiel, and then, about five seconds later, he just repeats the spiel again.
He repeated almost word for word the very same story to the very same small group of people.
The best part is, the most fitting part for Biden, is that it was not true either time.
Because Donald Trump did not call neo-Nazis very fine people at Charlottesville.
He specifically said, I'm not talking about neo-Nazis, I'm not talking about white supremacists, they should be condemned totally.
But he repeats it.
Joe Biden obviously doesn't care one iota about the truth, and that's been true for his entire career.
But for most of his career, he was able to get by with the slick rhetoric of a career politician.
Now that's beginning to fade, and he's just doing the thing that old people in the throes of senility do, which is repeat himself.
This is a big problem for the Democrats.
Because you don't nominate Joe Biden for president because of his conviction.
He doesn't have any convictions.
In fact, you nominate Joe Biden for president specifically because he has no convictions and he can be an empty vessel for wherever the party wants to go.
You don't nominate a candidate like Joe Biden for his youth and sexiness, okay?
He gave that up a little while ago.
Joe Biden is just the symbol of normalcy.
A return to the old ways after the tempestuous years of Trump.
Joe Biden doesn't know what room he's in or what his name is, then the normalcy argument goes away.
Joe Biden is a good politician because he can glad hand and he can backslap and he can simper and he can repeat the talking points.
That's the only talent the man has in politics.
And if he can no longer do that, then he's good for nothing.
If the salt loses its savor, then it's good for nothing and needs to be thrown out and trod underfoot.
Which is why Democrats are beginning to look for alternatives, and the window is closing.
I mean, if someone really wants to make a move for the 2024 race in either the Republican camp or the Democrat camp, they're going to have to do it within about five weeks or so.
But certain candidates are beginning to position themselves to do that.
Gavin Newsom, Governor Patrick Bateman over there in California, has just vetoed a bill that would have made judges consider parent affirmation of transgenderism during custody battles.
This was a very controversial bill, but it was sailing through the California legislature.
And then Newsom, who is quite pro-trans in his rhetoric, he shuts it down.
And why did he shut it down?
Because Gavin Newsom is preparing to run for president.
Now, this should scare all of us because he's been terrible for the economy of California.
The economy broadly is not doing so great, which is why you got to check out Birch Gold.
Right now, text NOLS to 989898.
Vladimir Putin called the U.S.
dollar's drop in dominance objective and irreversible, as Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa Formerly agreed to use local currencies in trade instead of the U.S.
dollar.
As demand for the dollar weakens, the buying power of the dollar weakens.
That is why Birch Gold is busier than ever.
Investors and savers are looking to harness the power of physical gold held in a tax-sheltered IRA.
You can too.
You can protect your IRA or 401k by diversifying with gold from Birch Gold.
As the U.S.
dollar continues to receive pressure from foreign countries, digital currency, and central banks, arm yourself with information on how to protect your savings.
Learn if gold is right for you, too.
Text KNOLLS, K-N-N-W-L-L-E-S, to 989898.
They will send you a free info kit.
on gold.
With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers, and countless five-star reviews, I trust Birch Gold to help you diversify into gold.
If a central bank digital currency becomes a reality, it will be nice to have some gold to depend upon.
Again, right now, text Knowles, Canada WLAS to 98 98 98.
What did Newsom say when he vetoed the trans your kids bill?
He said he feared that the bill might be used to limit the civil rights of vulnerable minorities.
updates.
Now this is really brilliant political stuff.
Because Gavin Newsom knows that he can't come out and say, hey, boys are not girls, and it's wrong to trans your kids.
He can't say that.
That's not how our moral language works in America anymore.
The only moral cause that we can make in liberal public life is for the rights, the supposed rights of aggrieved minorities.
That's the only way we can talk.
The civil rights language is the only moral language left in mainstream America.
So that's what he did.
What does he even mean by that?
The civil rights of vulnerable minorities?
Does he mean traditional Catholics?
Does he mean Orthodox Jews who don't want to trans their kids?
Probably not.
But it just sort of sounds good.
Oh, yeah, it is true.
And I'm sure, by the way, that there are plenty of black guys who don't want to trans their kids.
I'm sure there are plenty of Hispanic immigrants who don't want to trans their kids.
So it does work for the favored minority groups of the Democrats.
But the groups that are most interested in not transing their kids are Traditional people, people who practice Christianity, people who practice Judaism, who take their religious life seriously.
And so Newsom can use this line and it just sort of squeaks him by.
He then says, I appreciate the passion and values that led the author to introduce this bill.
I share a deep commitment to advancing the rights of transgender Californians, an effort that has guided my decisions through many decades in public office.
That said, I urge caution when the executive and legislative branches of state government attempt to dictate in prescriptive terms that single out one characteristic legal standards for the judicial branch to apply.
Other-minded elected officials in California and other states could very well use this strategy to diminish the civil rights of vulnerable minorities.
I challenge anybody to decipher that gobbledygook.
Can anybody, does anybody speak Liberal conman, so that you can decipher what that nonsense means.
That is such mealy-mouthed, well, I actually agree with everybody, and you know, really, man?
And it's so ridiculous that it might just get him elected president.
Because the last time that I heard gobbledygook jargon that good Was Bill Clinton.
This reminded me of Bill Clinton right after the Gulf War, the first Gulf War in the 90s.
When Bill Clinton was asked, the Gulf War was very successful.
It was controversial at the time, but it was very successful.
George H.W.
Bush was starting to take some credit for it.
And in the 92 presidential race, Bill Clinton kept being asked, would you have supported the Gulf War or not?
You were unclear on your feelings on the military action.
And his response It's always stuck with me, he said.
What I said was that I had a great deal of sympathy with those who were arguing that sanctions had not been given adequate time, but that the Congress could not afford to go on record in my judgment undermining the UN position that the war was legal on January 15th, and that I thought the Congress should vote to support the UN resolution to make the war legal on January 15th.
And that they could argue tactically if they wished whether hostilities should commence on the 15th or on some later date.
Yeah, I feel your pain.
I thought, what a masterful piece of political rhetoric.
What he's saying is, do you support the Gulf War?
Well, listen, I sympathized and agreed with the one side of the debate, and I also sympathized and agreed with the other side.
Leadership.
That's right, that's me.
And Newsom is doing the exact same thing.
Newsom is so clearly copying the Bill Clinton playbook that he is now even adopting Bill Clinton's economic policy vis-a-vis Republicans, Ronald Reagan in particular's economic policy.
He made this clear on Meet the Press.
You look at that trip and it made you think nicely of Nixon and Reagan.
Why?
Just makes me think that we've lost.
I'm just dumbfounded when I think about the Republican Party today and how far they have fallen from Reagan, Reaganism, Reaganomics in some respects.
How different the party is today.
I mean the idea that you'd have a Republican president that supported Endangered Species Act, the Clean Air Act, and created the EPA and Nixon.
The fact that the modern environmental movement in many respects started with Ronald Reagan.
In 1989 he was out there promoting Reagan, assault weapons ban.
He was defending the LGBT community.
He's pretty good.
He's pretty good.
He's leaning into being the moderate Democrat candidate who is still He's still supporting the far left of the party.
He's still pro-trans.
He just told you.
He's still really pro-trans.
He supports transgender rights.
He's got a deep commitment to it.
But he recognizes, look, this might be used to harm vulnerable minority groups, so we gotta be careful here.
Oh yeah, I'm a tried and true Democrat, but I love those old Republicans.
I love Ronald Reagan.
I even love Richard Nixon.
What happened to that Republican Party, gosh golly?
And then the clincher for me is, he says, even Reaganomics.
Usually, if the Democrats were ever going to praise Reagan, they'd say, I like his sunny disposition, but his economic policy was evil because it let those fat cats get rich.
And it was trickle-down economics, or whatever slogans they use.
Now today, the Democrats simply are the fat cats, so I think they have more of an incentive to align themselves with Reaganomics.
But the adoption of Reaganomics was one of the brilliant aspects of Bill Clinton's political career.
Bill Clinton said, I'm a new Democrat.
After the 1994 Republican victory in the House, Bill Clinton came out and he said, the era of big government is over.
And this became the standard for Western politicians, especially in the Anglosphere.
You then had Tony Blair, who was elected as a laborer, a liberal left-wing kind of leader, but he was just the Bill Clinton of Great Britain.
A little bit more moderate, especially on fiscal policy, a little bit more pro-growth, and socially fairly liberal.
And that typified the 80s through the 90s, really into the early 2000s.
And that was smacked down with the presidency of Barack Obama, who was far more radical than the Democrats who came before him.
And it really reached the end with Donald Trump, who turned his back on some key aspects of Reaganomics.
And Reaganomics is a little distinct from the actual economic policies of Ronald Reagan because the promoters of Reaganomics like to forget that Ronald Reagan increased tariffs on steel, for instance, like to forget that Ronald Reagan used protectionist policies when he felt it was in the national interest.
But Donald Trump said, no, we want mercantilism for the 21st century.
Donald Trump said, we want more tariffs.
We want to keep more manufacturing here in the United States.
I stand with workers.
We want to raise wages for workers.
That's what is now called populism on the right.
So the question for Newsom is, is America ready for Bill Clinton again?
Is America ready for the 80s through the 90s again?
Are we sufficiently nostalgic?
The election of Joe Biden was, well, if it was, If the man, all right, I'll leave it at that.
I want to remain on social media platforms today.
But if Joe Biden were elected president, the reason for it would be this longing for a return to normalcy.
Well, what does normalcy mean?
Does normalcy mean Gavin Newsom?
That is what he is betting on and that Clintonian kind of policy Fiscally pro-growth and socially liberal.
I don't like it.
I don't like the socially liberal part.
I think it destroys our whole civilization.
I think that the decay of that is evident all around us.
But it has been electorally successful.
Speaking of that social liberalism, there's been a debate that's erupted on the right.
That debate is over marriage.
And I think I might be somewhat responsible for it.
Because, you know, we put out some extra content on the weekends, and often I'm reacting to different people in the culture, and I don't really know anything about these people.
It's usually my producer, Ben Davies, and Professor Jacob, associate producer, will find these clips and say, Michael, what's your take on this?
So, one of them was from these guys who are part of the Red Pill Movement.
And the Red Pill Movement is this movement of men who are basically sick of the way that society treats men.
Which is fair enough, society treats men in a rather unfair and unjust way, but their response to this is to not get married.
They say marriage is really bad because the family courts and divorce favors women and men can be completely destroyed and have their finances emptied out and not get to see their kids and it's just absolutely brutal, so better not to get married at all.
And I have a great deal of sympathy for these guys because it's true, I mean, The liberalization of divorce has been probably the greatest evil perpetrated in our country in the last hundred years.
Probably.
I mean, because it just first cracked up the fundamental institution of politics, which is the family, and the institution most dear to all of our hearts.
And it led to then the further collapse of marriage down the line with its radical redefinition.
That starts with divorce.
We focus on no-fault divorce, which is obviously a contradiction in terms.
A divorce is a violation of one of the most sacred agreements that you could possibly make, so somebody's got to be at fault.
Maybe it's both of you, but it's certainly not no one.
And the way that divorce works now is that men get destroyed, and they can lose their kids, and there's really nothing they could do about it.
So that's all true, and I agree that should be legally changed, and I have sympathy for the guys who've been burned this way.
Whining and their suggestion that there's nothing to be done about this and their really perverse conclusion that men shouldn't get married at all is just deeply wrong.
It's the flip side of feminism and it's wrong because man is a social creature and a coupling creature and men need women and women need men and we want the Love between men and women to be so real that it creates another person.
We want that bond to be indissoluble.
What God has joined, let no man separate.
So just as some really practical advice for these guys in the red pill movement, I would point out yes, it's true.
Divorce rates can be very, very high depending on which statistics you believe.
It could be over 40%.
That's true.
The divorce rate for Catholics is significantly lower than that.
And that's for all Catholics.
That's even the Joe Biden Catholics who clearly don't believe key aspects of their faith.
That's for the cafeteria Catholics who pick and choose.
That's for the types of Catholics who have been...
Pulled away by the tides of liberal modernity.
And even when you consider all of the Catholics, the divorce rates are much lower.
But then when you look at a subgroup, the so-called traditional Catholics, meaning the people who still believe the faith the way that the faith was taught and practiced for 2,000 years, those divorce rates drop to next to nothing.
Okay, so I agree with you that yes, we have a political problem that our political leadership is trying to destroy the family and largely has, but there are things that you can do.
If you practice a religion that not only forbids divorce but denies its very possibility, then your likelihood of being divorced is going to be greatly diminished down next to the point of nothing.
Now, that means that you have to You have to not just reject the parts of liberal modernity that you especially don't like, like divorce law.
You have to reject basically all of it.
You have to reject the feminism.
You have to reject the hyper-individualism.
You have to reject the cultural and moral relativism.
You have to reject the secularism.
You've got to practice a rigorous religion that will tell you that you are severing a very, very sacred bond.
And that there is no remarriage afterward, and there's no second act, and there's no, well, we'll just move on, that you are married to this person until death do you part, so help you God.
That is going to be one way to put yourself in a position where it's probably not, look, all of life has risk, but that's probably going to put yourself in a pretty solid position.
But it requires something of you, and what it requires is that you stop listening to guys who call themselves pickup artists and start listening to Among other things, the Word of God.
Which is good advice, not only for men who have been done wrong by our present political situation, but for the whole civilization.
We need some renewal.
And when you need renewal in your windows, you need renewal by Anderson.
Right now, text NOLS to 200-300.
For most homeowners, window replacement is not something they've done before.
For many, it is not something that they want to do, but something they have to do.
If you've put off replacing the windows in your home because it's too expensive, I've got great news.
You can now get a free in-home window consultation and a free price quote from Renewal by Anderson.
Renewal by Anderson Signature Service is committed to giving you the best customer service possible, the best experience of all, supported by the best people in the industry, a superior process, and an exclusive product.
I have heard from carpenters, The guy wrote in to me.
He said, Michael, I'm a carpenter.
I heard you do a read for Renewal and Renewal by Anderson.
They always have the best windows of any houses that I work on.
Coincidentally, I have a cousin who works for them who's been telling me for years how great Renewal by Anderson is.
You can do it right now.
Check it out.
Renewal by Anderson.
It is offering a free in-home or virtual consultation on durable, quality, affordable windows or patio doors for zero dollars down, zero payments, zero interest for one year.
Text NOLS to 200-300 for your free consultation.
Save $375 off every window and $750 off every door.
Won't last long, so text NOLS to 200-300.
NOLS to 200-300.
Texting Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions posted at textplan.us.
Texting enrolls you for recurring automated text marketing messages.
Message and data rates may apply.
Reply stop to opt-out.
Go to windowappointmentnow.com for full offer details.
When Dr. Jordan B. Peterson made the decision to join DailyWirePlus, it was a major win for those who champion intellectual debate.
With one year of unparalleled output, his contributions have set new standards and remain unmatched by any other platform.
DailyWirePlus now has a vast array of exclusive Jordan content, offering hundreds of hours of captivating content that you won't find anywhere else.
Jordan has created thought-provoking works that reshape your perspective on life, which include Vision and Destiny, Marriage and Dragons, Monsters and Men.
Additionally, you can immerse yourself in discussions that nurture your spiritual side, such as Logos and Literacy and Jordan's groundbreaking series on the Book of Exodus.
I have not even mentioned his Beyond Order lecture series or his extensive archive of lectures and podcasts.
This is the absolute compendium.
Of all things Jordan, plus there's even more exclusive content on the horizon.
This is only the beginning.
By becoming a Daily Wire Plus member, you will embark on an unforgettable experience that will fuel your thirst for knowledge and inspire personal growth like never before.
Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe to become a member today.
Speaking of breaking up...
AOC is breaking up with Democrat Senator Bob Menendez and calling on him to resign.
Should he resign?
And what do you think of his statement that it has to do with him being a Latino?
Well, I think it's the situation is- Quite unfortunate, but I do believe that it is in the best interests for Senator Menendez to resign in this moment.
As you mentioned, consistency matters.
It shouldn't matter whether it's a Republican or a Democrat.
The details in this indictment are extremely serious.
They involve the nature of Of not just his, but all of our seats in Congress.
And while as a Latina, there are absolutely ways in which there is systemic bias, but I think what is here in this indictment is quite clear.
And I believe it is in the best interest to maintain the integrity of the seat.
This is a pretty good answer.
Why is AOC turning on her man, her compatriot here?
Well, because they got him dead to rights.
Everyone knows that Menendez is corrupt.
We've known it for a decade now, at least.
And because New Jersey is safe.
So they'll just appoint some other Democrat there who's probably going to be better, who's probably going to be closer to the AOC line of thinking.
Bob Menendez is not the most far-left radical in the Senate.
And who's probably going to be younger, who's going to be there for longer.
So it's a simple calculation if you're AOC.
In politics, you got no one to hold him, no one to fold him, no one to walk away, no one to run, and Bob Menendez is just totally toxic.
Here's Menendez's excuse.
The feds catch him with $480,000 in cash stashed around his house and stuffed into the pockets of his clothing in envelopes.
They didn't even take it out of the envelopes from the bribes.
They find bars of gold.
I mean, they find bribes.
And his excuse is this.
For 30 years, I have withdrawn thousands of dollars in cash from my personal savings account, which I've kept for emergencies, and because of the history of my family facing confiscation in Cuba.
Now, this may seem old-fashioned, but these were monies drawn from my personal savings account based on the income that I have lawfully derived over those 30 years.
I look forward to addressing other issues at trial.
You know, it's probably the best he could have come up with.
But this is so preposterous.
He's saying, look, he's saying the same excuse that he said right away.
Right away when they caught him, he said, look, they're just coming after me because I'm Latino.
I didn't even know Bob Menendez was Latino.
I know he has a Hispanic last name, but you look at him, he just looks like an ordinary white guy.
He looks like every mildly Italian man that I know from the tri-state area.
But he's a slightly different kind of swarthy, so he gets to say that he's Latino, and they're coming after me because I'm Latino.
They waited a long time to do it, but now they're coming after me because I'm Latino.
They don't understand the only reason I had a half a million dollars in cash stashed around my house is because I'm Latino, and I remember the dark days of Castro, and that's why I need to keep half a million in cash around my house.
It was all lawfully withdrawn from my lawful earnings from my bank account.
Did he also withdraw the bars of gold from his bank account?
Did he?
I didn't know, because I know you go to the ATM and you click, do you want 20s?
Do you want 50s?
Do you want bars of gold?
That's great.
That's cool.
I'm glad.
Maybe I'll try that in the future.
They're kind of expensive though, aren't they?
Can you withdraw Mercedes from your bank account?
No, I was just withdrawing it from my earnings.
How about home furnishings?
How about mortgage payments?
Can you withdraw?
You could withdraw those from your bank account, but that would come from your bank account, not someone else's.
When the investigators went around this guy's house, they found on the envelopes of the bribes, they found the fingerprints of the crooked businessman who bribed him.
They have got this guy completely dead to rights.
And the proof that they got him dead to rights is Menendez just hired a lawyer to defend him.
And the lawyer he hired is the same lawyer that Hunter Biden hired.
There you go.
Just book him at this point.
This is according to CNBC.
Menendez has hired Abe Lowell to represent him in this case.
He already hired that lawyer in 2015.
I guess Abe Lowell is just the Democrat lawyer who represents crooked Dems.
That's it.
If you are a high-ranking crooked Democrat who they've got dead to rights, you hire this guy.
And yet, according to experts, the evidence in this case is much, much stronger than was in the 15th case, so Democrats are going to flee.
Probably he'll have to resign.
Speaking of politicians' careers ending, we've got the second Republican presidential debate coming up.
Trump will not go there, so you can't even really call it the presidential debate in that the guy who's leading with 53% of the vote, or more, 59% of the vote according to some polls, is not participating.
So anyway, it's the undercard.
It's the people who are hoping that Donald Trump slips and falls, either metaphorically or physically.
But one guy is not going to be there in addition, and that is going to be Asa Hutchinson.
Asa, we hardly knew you.
Asa has not qualified.
His polling is pretty low.
Doug Burgum, the North Dakota governor.
is somehow going to appear at this debate.
Doug Burgum, you will recall, is the man who paid people to donate a dollar to him.
So if you donated a dollar to the Doug Burgum campaign, you'd get a $10 or $20 gift card in return.
I have friends and family members, actually, who did this very thing, and they said it works, that he actually sent them the gift card, which is very funny.
So, Burgum will be there.
Christie will be there.
The Chris-issance lives to fight another day, Chris-issance.
Ron DeSantis, obviously, will be there.
Nikki Haley, Mike Pence, Vivek, Tim, Scott.
That'll be at the Reagan Library.
Asa will not.
What differentiates Asa Hutchinson from all the rest?
What differentiates him from Doug Burgum or Chris Christie?
I mean, these are not guys that are polling very high right now.
Asa Hutchinson Said that he would trans the kids.
That's the difference.
And so what we're being told by all the genius GOP consultants is we got to turn away from the culture war issues.
We've got to focus in on the bread and butter dinner table issues.
No one wants to hear about transing the kids or anything like that.
That is the issue that was decisive in this case.
That is the issue that destroyed Asa Hutchinson's career.
That is the issue that got Glenn Youngkin elected governor in Virginia.
That is the issue, one of two, that is one of two issues that made Ron DeSantis the number two guy in this presidential race, having been relatively unknown just a few years ago in Florida.
This is not just some fringe online thing.
Transing the kids resonates nationwide and motivates people to go out and vote.
Now speaking of Ron DeSantis and debates, DeSantis and Gavin Newsom are going to be having their own quasi-presidential debate, moderated by Sean Hannity.
Here is DeSantis on the debate.
I think it's an important debate for the country, not like saying who's better, Florida or California, because that debate is over because people have voted with their feet.
They've left California and come to Florida, not the other way around.
He has lost massive amounts of population.
No governor in California history has ever witnessed population loss at all on net, and he's had it, Greg, because of the policies he's driving people away.
What's the future for the country?
The future for the country, for what the left would want to do, is just double down on the California policies.
And so I think it's going to be an important debate.
I think, I mean, I think he's definitely angling for it.
I think Biden, I don't think Biden is going to step down willingly.
I think it's harder to dislodge somebody who's an incumbent president than people assume it would be.
But I think the Democrat establishment really, really is concerned Particularly, you know, if they have to run against somebody like me.
I think that their view on Trump is that he will help energize their base to come out in ways that maybe some other Republicans won't.
I don't know if that's true per se, the way they're thinking it, but I do think they think that.
I love the way DeSantis gives that line.
He goes, look, look, look.
It was very Trumpy in a way.
He says, look, many Democrats are saying that if you nominate Trump, you're definitely going to lose because all the Democrats are going to come out.
Maybe, you know, they're more afraid of running against, you know, maybe like another candidate whose name rhymes with like Bong DePantis.
You know, I don't know.
I'm not saying it.
I don't.
What do I know?
I'm not.
I'm just saying many people are talking about it.
OK.
And it's a good answer.
And he's absolutely right, too, about the debate.
The debate has already been settled.
The U-Hauls are moving from California to Florida, not the other way around.
So the debate is settled.
Florida wins.
That's where people want to live.
That model of life is better.
And that is due, in large part, to the policies put in place by Ron DeSantis.
So he's won that debate.
But my fear is, will Newsom trick everybody?
My fear is that good policy and competence and vision and all the rest of it don't always win in lowercase d democrat politics.
Sometimes demagogues win.
Sometimes hustlers win.
Sometimes Patrick Bateman over there in California wins.
And so this is going to be a really good debate.
I'm excited for this debate in that it will have to be substantive.
There are no two more different states in America right now than Florida and California.
So even if politicians, especially like Newsom, don't want the debates to be substantive, this one will have to be somewhat substantive.
It's two different visions for America, and it's going to let us see If Ron DeSantis has the charisma to go toe-to-toe with a very charming candidate.
Newsom is a perfect test run in this way, in that he is 100% charm, 0% substance.
100% slap you on the back, make you feel kind of good.
0% effective policies for government and flourishing.
And so we'll see.
If DeSantis could beat Newsom in a debate on the day, not broadly speaking which state's doing better, but I mean a debate on the day on TV, that could be a boost to his presidential campaign.
Now, is it going to bring him from 15% up to 59% where Trump is?
No, it's not.
In many ways, DeSantis agreeing to do this debate is an acknowledgement, finally, that he is not in the same tier of candidate as Donald Trump.
It's an acknowledgement that he's not the frontrunner, even though some people were describing him as a potential GOP frontrunner, someone who could deal a knockout blow to Trump.
That hasn't panned out.
And what the DeSantis campaign has been doing for the last couple of months is just pretending that reality is other than it is.
And I thought that was a huge mistake and it hasn't helped his poll numbers.
It's only hurt his poll numbers.
So here what DeSantis is doing is kind of risky because he's acknowledging, yeah, look, I'm not the front runner.
I'm not the top.
I'm the undercard guy.
And so I'm going to be in the undercard debate.
I'm not going to be debating Joe Biden.
Trump is going to debate Joe Biden if Biden agrees to do it.
I'm going to debate Gavin Newsom, who's he's the undercard guy for the Democrats.
And we're just going to present our show to the world, and both of these candidates benefit from it.
And Ron DeSantis stands to benefit the most.
Though there's also a fair bit of risk here, because if Newsom beats him, then the argument for a DeSantis candidacy is going to collapse.
But good, I'm glad that DeSantis is taking this risk.
If he continues to play it safe, he's going to go nowhere.
He's going to be the most competent number two or number three guy in the race.
He's got to take bold risks.
And so, he's venturing a lot here, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.
And it could be a good show.
I look forward to seeing it.
Speaking of candidates, we've got a new Senate candidate in Pennsylvania.
Not mercifully, Dr. Oz.
Very happy about that.
We have a new candidate, but it's another name that you've heard before.
David McCormick, who's the guy who ran against Dr. Oz in the primary last time.
He lost in the primary.
He's running again.
I thought he was basically a better candidate than Dr. Oz, but I think Republicans in Pennsylvania, and nationwide looking at Pennsylvania, are missing a key fact about how conservatives can win in Pennsylvania.
We'll get to that in one second.
First though, my favorite comment yesterday is from Daniel Plainview2584, who says, Marina Abramovich isn't even Ukrainian.
This is that witch that Zelensky appointed ambassador.
You also missed the part where she's in charge of rebuilding schools now as well.
Right, I did see that.
This, of course, seems to follow perfectly from her appointment.
If you're going to appoint an actual witch to a position of power in your government, you're probably going to put the witch in charge of kids, right?
That's how it would be in the Grimm's fairy tale.
That's how it would be.
That's, of course, that's what the witches are after in our country, around the world, and apparently in Ukraine as well.
David McCormick, running for Senate.
He's a former hedge funder.
He could be a self-funder.
He's a very competent guy.
He's obviously a very intelligent guy.
I felt he was a better candidate than Dr. Oz in the last cycle in Pennsylvania.
He wants to take over the seat as Bob Casey, Democrat in Pennsylvania, becomes more vulnerable as a result of how terrible a job Biden has done.
He's a fine candidate, but he's socially pretty liberal.
On the social issues, things like marriage, rock-ribbedness on issues of life, McCormick is not the most hardcore right-wing guy in the world.
Now, the argument for someone like a McCormick, or even for Dr. Oz, is, well, look, it's Pennsylvania.
You're not going to run a far-right-wing candidate.
You're not going to run a rock-ribbed conservative and win there.
So, just take the squish and be happy that you get anyone with an R next to his name.
I just don't think that's necessarily true.
It wasn't so long ago that Rick Santorum was senator from Pennsylvania.
Rick Santorum, one of the most rock-ribbed, traditional, socially conservative, right-wing candidates that we've had in recent history.
And by the way, the guy almost got himself the nomination for president.
Don't forget, when he was running against Mitt Romney.
Pennsylvania liked Rick Santorum.
Eventually he lost, but he served some time in Pennsylvania.
Why can't we nominate a Santorum?
You want to talk about Mitt Romney?
Mitt Romney lost Pennsylvania.
Donald Trump won Pennsylvania.
Donald Trump, a much more right-wing figure than Mitt Romney.
Are we really so convinced that to win Pennsylvania, you need to have some meek and mild, totally acceptable to the liberal mainstream kind of candidate?
I'm not convinced of that at all.
It's the Rust Belt, baby!
In some ways, a hedge funder is anathema to the way that Pennsylvanians view their politics.
I don't really want to diss McCormick.
I think in many ways he's a good candidate, and I would have supported him over in Oz last time.
But are there other candidates?
Could we get a Santorum-like figure?
Could we get a Trump-like figure?
A Trump-like figure who is suited to Pennsylvania?
Romney lost.
McCain lost.
I don't know.
Where's the Santorum figure?
Can we just get Santorum to run again?
That'd be great.
I would love that.
Speaking of partisans, Maxine Waters is coming out strong against Republicans, insisting that Republicans today are not patriots.
When you take a look at what they're doing, it shows that, you know, the Republicans who have claimed patriotism, claimed that they love this country, they don't care if they will allow seniors and veterans not to be able to get their disability checks, for example.
They don't care.
If they would allow education to be dismantled in this country, they don't care.
If they don't care about the people sleeping on the streets, the homeless, and they're cutting housing vouchers, they're not patriots.
They are basically not only disrupting this country, they're destroying it.
And they cannot claim patriotism anymore.
We, who fight for the people, claim patriotism.
We're the patriots, not them.
For the Republicans, patriotism is lost.
It's gone.
Auntie Maxine is a little outdated on her talking points, I think.
She's speaking like it's 2012.
She's speaking like Republicans' big issue is austerity and cutting spending and cutting social welfare programs, and it just isn't.
That just isn't the way the Republican Party is functioning today.
Republicans are not harping on the need for entitlement reform.
That was what we did in the Paul Ryan days.
Donald Trump ran for president explicitly saying, I am not going to touch entitlements.
You might say that's a terrible thing because our debt to GDP is insane right now, and it's leading us off a fiscal cliff, and you might say I disagree with Trump, but even if you do, it is simply a fact that the Republican Party is not as she describes it.
That's the first thing I noticed.
The second thing that I noticed is that's not what constitutes patriotism.
Patriotism is love of country.
And when it comes to love of country, it is simply a fact that Republicans are more patriotic than Democrats.
Some people are going to want to say, no, neither party is more patriotic than the other.
They're just, we're all just, we're all friends and we're all, we just have different views on it.
But that, no, that isn't true.
What Maxine Waters said is the opposite of the truth.
Republicans are in fact more patriotic than Democrats because Republicans love their country.
They love their nation.
They have an attachment to their nation in a way that Democrats do not because Democrats tend to be globalists.
Democrats tend to use phrases like citizen of the world.
Democrats tend to oppose the very notion of nation and nationalism.
Democrats They have other attachments.
They have attachments to the UN, they have attachments to humanity, they have attachments to all those things, but not to nation.
And this is going to continue to be a defining feature of elections.
It's been building for almost a decade now.
The Donald Trump election was about nationalism versus globalism.
It wasn't about raise welfare spending or cut welfare spending.
It wasn't about reform entitlements or leave entitlements as they are.
It was about nationalism versus globalism.
And you saw this on the debates over trade, and you saw this on the debates over immigration, and you saw this on the debates even over voting and how the elections would be conducted.
Does everybody get to do it?
Do you get to just enter into this country and then you're automatically registered to vote or to get an ID card?
Or do you have to show your ID card when you go vote?
Or do you have to be a citizen and prove that you're a citizen?
That's what this is about.
And that's what Brexit was about.
And that's what the election of Orban is about.
Orban, rather, in Hungary.
That's what the election of Meloni in Italy is about.
That's what This is going to continue for a very long time.
Now, speaking of globalism, before we go, I'll just give you a little tease.
Just a little something to keep you up at night.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology is warning that another coronavirus outbreak is highly likely, which is right about on time.
I mentioned when the Democrats started bringing back the masks a little bit here and there.
Lionsgate in LA.
Morris Brown College in Atlanta, Rutgers in New Jersey, and now we're going to bring back a little, maybe mask in public in New York.
Okay, well get your booster shot.
We haven't talked about the boosters in a while.
Get your booster.
I said they're doing COVID again, and now here's the latest proof, which is the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which leaked the virus the first time, most people think.
Says another one is highly likely.
This is according to a study published by the WIV in July.
There are as many as 20 species of coronavirus that are highly likely to cause an outbreak among humans, especially around polling places in 2024, so watch out for those mail-in ballots.
I will be in Washington tonight.
I'm going to be speaking at Georgetown.
If you happen to be in the D.C.
area, tickets are free.
You can find them at the YAF website, yaf.org, or if you go to my website, michaeljanoles.com, there should be a link somewhere.
You just have to register.
so that people can vet you and make sure that you're not Antifa trying to blow me out.
We will be discussing, I had this very controversial take, which I knew would be somewhat spicy.
I didn't think it would be as controversial as it became, which is that I'm sorry to say that I'm beginning to think that Joe Biden is a more evil ruler, even than our evil opponents overseas, Chairman Xi in China and Putin in Russia.
I'm, I'm beginning to fear that Biden is at least as evil and maybe more evil a ruler than they.
And people reacted with such shock and horror.
A senior presidential campaign staff member was quite opposed to this and made that clear on Twitter.
Twitter and all sorts of people in the political media.
So anyway, I'll be making my case for that tonight over at Georgetown.
Make sure, if you're in the neighborhood, to come stop by.
