Ep. 1400 - Secret Jewish Tunnels Discovered Under New York
Tensions flare after cops discover a secret Jewish tunnel in Brooklyn, a Republican secretary of state threatens to kick Biden off the ballot, and a Jeffrey Epstein accuser makes titillating accusations.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
Ep.1400
- - -
DailyWire+:
Unlock your Bentkey 14 day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go
Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
ExpressVPN - Get 3 Months FREE of ExpressVPN: https://expressvpn.com/knowles
Good Ranchers - FREE chicken for a Year + $20 off your order! Use promo code KNOWLES at checkout. https://bit.ly/43G8p0P
- - -
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
Not one but two factions of Orthodox Jews clashed in Crown Heights yesterday, among themselves and with the NYPD, over what to do about the secret Jewish tunnel in Brooklyn.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
In a moment, we'll get to the pro-Palestine protesters vandalizing U.S.
military cemeteries and blocking highways.
First, though, we have to get to the Jewish Tunnel in Brooklyn.
Today is it?
It's January 9th?
That was pretty quick.
And the story broke on the 8th.
We got eight days into 2024 before we got to the craziest headline I've read in weeks, at least, I guess.
I don't know, there are a lot of crazy headlines these days.
Yes, there is a secret Jewish tunnel in Crown Heights, Brooklyn.
And we at the Michael Knowles Show have obtained exclusive footage, actually, of the extent of these tunnel networks.
Roll the tape.
That kicks a little bit.
Wait a second, what's underneath that sidewalk?
Oh wait a second, it's hundreds of Hobotniks dancing to EDM music.
That's amazing.
I don't know, I think we need to verify.
That footage.
I'm not sure that that is... Okay, we've got other footage, though.
The footage came out last night, and this is in the worldwide headquarters of Chabad.
Now, for those of you who did not grow up in New York, as I did, you probably don't know what Chabad is, and you probably don't know very much about all the different factions of Jews.
Having grown up in New York, where most of my friends were Jews, and like most people just around me were Jews, I am fairly well acquainted with the distinctions between The Chabad Lubavitch Jews, which these are the ones with the shul in the tunnel.
Then there's another group that kind of look like them, which is the Haredi Jews, sometimes called the Ultra-Orthodox Jews.
Then there are the Reform Jews.
They're the ones who aren't all that religious, but, you know, they eat a lot of bagels or something.
Then there are the Conservative Jews, who take the religion a little bit more seriously.
Then there are just all these different distinctions.
And the one we're talking about here is Chabad.
This whole story reminds me of one fact, which is, I really like the Chabadniks.
And the story is not just a local story about New York.
The story is not just sensationalist and silly because it's really weird.
The story actually has political import for all of us because I think everybody can learn a political lesson from the Chabadniks.
The reason I like the Chabadniks is not just because they're personally very charming people.
It's because they have been able to maintain Tradition and a coherence within their community and big families and political power that they can wield in their communities while also thriving in modernity.
They've done something that a lot of people have struggled to do and it's a lesson that any traditional sort of person might be able to copy.
Apparently what was going on in this tunnel story is there's a debate over who has the rights to operate the Chabad headquarters.
And there are two groups.
There's the Chabad International, call it, you know, the global organization.
And then there's this group of particularly zealous, I suppose it's being reported as messianic kind of Chabadniks, students who had come in and were insisting on digging this thing.
So something that would deflate a lot of the conspiracy theories that I've seen.
Floating around.
I know because, you know, the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth is six months when it's Dr. Fauci and all these guys saying it.
People are open to these sorts of things, but I think something that deflates some of the theories about the Hobotniks in Brooklyn is It was one group of the Chabadniks that ordered the tunnel to be filled in the first place.
It's not as though there was just this unified movement to dig a secret tunnel.
It was this group of students who were digging it, contrary to the wishes of the people who had the legal right to operate the school.
And so then they call in the cops and they try to fill in this thing.
And this intra-Chabad battle will go on and on and on.
But even with that, one, it shows you that all political communities have these debates and these factions and these rival parties.
But, broadly speaking, these guys dress in a respectable way, they take their religion seriously, they have big families, they, even when there is factionalism, they operate in a way that is politically cohesive and effective.
That's something we should all seek to emulate, I think.
Even if we don't dig the tunnels, which is generally probably a bad idea and might threaten the buildings around them.
All in all, a story that I find very, very delightful.
Now, speaking of faith, there's a new Morning Consult poll out that says that faith in democracy remains very strong.
I think this poll is total BS.
So you look at it, and you can see all the little tabs, and not only does Morning Consult believe that faith and democracy in America remain strong, it's faith and democracy everywhere that they take the polls.
All of the countries that they survey.
Okay.
All well and good.
Except that, as the Harvard Law professor Adrian Vermeule points out, democracy means two things in America.
Two things that are contrary to one another.
When the libs talk about democracy, in the same breath they will talk about how important it is to kick Donald Trump off the ballot and stop people from being allowed to vote for him.
We conservatives listen to that.
We say, what are you talking about?
You're saying it's democratic to stop the people from voting for their favorite candidate?
Yeah, and the liberals really believe that that is democratic.
They believe that democracy and liberalism are synonymous, even though liberalism is a minority ideology.
It can be deeply, deeply unpopular, and then it's imposed from above.
And it is a totalitarian ideology, I guess you would say.
It infiltrates every aspect of life.
That's how it's managed to corrode not just federalism, not just constitutional protections, but it's corroded even the family.
It's corroded even local rule, and it's like an acid.
That's no good.
That's not how I refer to democracy.
When I say I support democracy, what I mean is I support the people voting for whom they want to vote for.
That's a very different meaning of democracy.
So I just don't think this poll means anything at all.
It's similar to saying, hey, do you support freedom?
You could ask me, a rather conservative person, do you support freedom?
I say, of course I support freedom.
You could ask some crazy purple hair doing a bunch of drugs who's in a lesbian thruple with With three dudes and a billy goat, and we'd say, do you support freedom?
And she would say, of course I support freedom.
But we would think that the other one does not support freedom because we have different understandings of freedom.
The Lib would believe that freedom is the ability to do whatever you want, particularly following your base passions.
And I would believe the opposite.
I would say that true freedom is disciplining your base passions and following your rational will and bringing that into accord with the divine will.
That true freedom is the right to do what we ought, not the ability to do what we wish at our lowest levels.
Those are totally in conflict.
But a Morning Consult survey that said, do you all support freedom?
Say 100% of people support freedom.
100% of people support democracy.
And the centrists are going to sit back here and say, okay, good.
The guardrails hold no big deal.
The guardrails are not holding right now.
This is happy talk, this is papering over a fundamental difference, and it gets down to a number one national bestselling book that I recommend that everyone read called Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds.
Thank you.
All this happy talk is papering over a battle over language.
Whose definition of democracy is going to prevail?
For all of human history, democracy was the political order that the people want.
The liberals have totally perverted that meeting.
They will go on TV with a straight face.
They will say, we've got to legally prohibit Donald Trump from appearing on a ballot in order to save democracy.
We've got to overturn the Trump administration after he wins in 2016 to save democracy.
Oh no, the Hungarians are electing Viktor Orban.
He's a threat to democracy.
George Maloney is a threat to democracy.
The Brexit's a threat to democracy.
All these things that the people keep voting for, it's a threat to democracy.
Who's going to win that battle over the word?
It's a very, very powerful word.
It still has so much currency.
But for all intents and purposes, it no longer means what it traditionally has meant, what it actually means.
Now, when we want to protect ourselves from these powerful elites who want to destroy us, we've got to check out ExpressVPN.
Right now, go to expressvpn.com slash gnolls.
Have you noticed that big tech companies masquerade as privacy companies?
They tell you, fix your privacy settings, turn off app tracking, and you're protected.
Big Tech watches where you go online and then collects and sells your data.
To protect myself against Big Tech's prying eyes, I prefer ExpressVPN.
I trust ExpressVPN, and it's easy enough that I can actually use it.
When you use ExpressVPN on your computer or your phone, you are hiding your unique IP address so that websites can't find out your real location or track what you do online.
ExpressVPN also encrypts and reroutes 100% of your online activity so your ISP, Wi-Fi admin, and hackers cannot see.
Best part is, you do it with one button.
One ExpressVPN subscription covers up to five devices at the same time.
You can protect your whole family too.
It's rated number one by me and CNET and WiredTechRadar and a lot of others.
Today is the day.
Get the VPN that I trust to protect my online privacy when Big Bad Tech is at the door.
ExpressVPN.com slash Knowles.
K-N-W-L-E-S.
You can get three extra months for free on a one-year package.
E-X-P-R-E-S-S VPN.com slash Knowles.
ExpressVPN.com slash Knowles to learn more.
Speaking of democracy, the Supreme Court will hear the case about Trump being kicked off the ballot in Colorado.
The court agreed to review the unprecedented decision.
And that's a very good thing.
But we can't just rest easy on that.
We can't just say, well, the guardrails are certain to hold.
There's no way.
Wouldn't it be so crazy if the Supreme Court didn't let the most popular presidential candidate in the country on the ballot?
I don't know.
Strange things have been happening in recent years.
Wouldn't it be so crazy to shut down the entire world over a cough?
Wouldn't it be so crazy to shut down churches and synagogues in New York, actually, in that neighborhood that we were just talking about, over a cough and suspend fundamental constitutional rights?
Wouldn't that be just nuts?
Wouldn't it be crazy to change all the election rules in the weeks before a presidential election in a way that totally advantages the opposition, supposedly opposition political party, the Democrats?
Wouldn't that be so crazy?
And then it just happens.
So I am not convinced that the Supreme Court is going to do the right thing here.
Because the Supreme Court pays attention to the polls.
The Supreme Court reads the news.
The Supreme Court doesn't want the Democrats sending any more assassins to go kill them.
Like the Democrats did in the case of Brett Kavanaugh.
Like the Democrats did in the case of all the conservative justices.
Sam Alito had to go into hiding.
Yeah, I think that the political pressure Might be too much for them.
And so what the conservatives have to do, the rest of us who are not on the Supreme Court, we have got to bring political pressure to bear on the other side.
Not the Democrat kind of political pressure, which is where you go send assassins after your enemies, whether the assassins are a BLM mob or the assassins are some looney tune from California trying to kill a Supreme Court justice.
What the political pressure we need to bring to bear is Has to be just, it has to be moral, but it's got to be effective.
So one thing we could do, I suggested it on the show the other day, it was not an original idea.
I thought it was a brilliant idea, but I can't take credit for it.
I heard it from lowercase g, lowercase k over here, Mr. Jeremy Boring.
And he said, you know what the conservatives have to do?
We need a conservative governor and specifically a conservative Secretary of State to kick Biden off the ballot.
I'm sure there's some reason to kick Biden off the ballot.
We're in totally uncharted territory here.
We are in an unprecedented political situation, but there's probably some reason, and it's probably a better reason than the nonsense they're cooking up to kick Trump off the ballot.
And let's say you don't even want to figure out why to kick Biden off the ballot.
You could probably kick Kamala off the ballot pretty easily.
Right, using the argument of the left.
The left is saying that Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection and they're a little fuzzy on the evidence for how he engaged in an insurrection because he didn't He didn't go take over the Capitol.
He told people to be very peaceful.
He told people to go home when they were demonstrating at the Capitol.
The whole Capitol riot to begin with wasn't even in the top dozen insurrections that have ever taken place at the Capitol, the vast majority of which were left-wing in nature.
And then when the guys did get into the Capitol, a lot of them were given private tours by the Capitol Hill police.
It was just total BS.
They didn't have weapons.
The only person who was killed in the political violence that day was a pro-Trump person who was shot by a trigger-happy cop.
So what's the argument for kicking Kamala off the ballot?
The argument for kicking Kamala off the ballot is that she raised money to bail out violent criminals during the George Floyd riots.
She wasn't bailing out the peaceful protesters, she was bailing out the violent criminals who got arrested for breaking the law.
So kick her off the ballot.
Easy enough, right?
And then you've broken up the Democrat ticket, and it's going to go up to the Supreme Court.
And then the Supreme Court has the political cover to say, all right, we're not kicking anybody off the ballot.
The people will have their say, which is all we want in the first place.
I don't really care about kicking Kamala Harris off the ballot.
Frankly, I'd put her at the top of the ticket because she's one of the worst politicians I've ever seen.
But we've got to at least We've got to at least engage in the political realities according to justice and according to morals.
But we've got to do it.
In a battle, your opponent has a say.
And that's what we're looking at here.
Well, I'm glad to report some people have heeded the call.
The Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft Is now threatening to remove Biden from the ballot if the Supreme Court does not reverse Colorado's decision.
So this is according to a report from NBC, and I really, really applaud Secretary of State Ashcroft here.
I think this is great news.
My only quibble with it is I think you've got to be more aggressive about it.
I don't think it is that.
I don't think it is sufficient.
To say, okay, if the Supreme Court declines to overturn the case, then we're going to kick Biden off the ballot.
In fact, in a way, that might make the situation more tense.
That might raise the heat.
What I'm trying to do is lower the heat here.
Okay, I think you've got to bring that political pressure to bear before the case is decided so that the Supreme Court can say, okay, look, we don't really want to get into this game where the party candidates are only appearing on the ballots in their respective states.
Where their parties have a majority.
We don't want to get into that situation.
That's Civil War territory.
So, you know what?
Look, hey, sorry Democrats, but do you really want that?
Look, the Republicans are already kicking Biden off the ballot.
You really want that just so that you can kick Trump off in Colorado, which he's not going to win anyway?
I don't think so.
I don't think.
Okay, we're just going to back off this thing.
No one gets kicked off the ballots.
That's what I would do.
I'm not a Secretary of State.
in Missouri or anywhere else.
Governor DeSantis has floated this idea.
He said, I'm having my administration look into whether or not we ought to kick Joe Biden off the ballot.
He said this just a couple of days ago.
So it's bubbling up.
I'm glad to see that Republican politicians are taking this seriously.
But I think this would be a case where a half measure is worse than no measure at all.
I think a half measure has the potential to make this a much more volatile situation.
If we just wait, if we make little, mild, meek threats, and then the Supreme Court says, alright, there's not enough pressure coming from the right, we'll just give the Democrats what they want in Colorado, and maybe in Maine, where Trump was also kicked off the ballot.
Then all of a sudden, the Republicans are going to want retribution, and you might really end up in a situation where the red states have the Republican on the ballot, the blue states have the Democrat on the ballot, and we're just going to duke it out and no one's going to accept the results of the election.
I think sometimes you've got to have peace through strength, as Ronald Reagan would say.
You've got to bring that pressure early, make clear that the threat is legitimate, and then we can move on and have a semi-normal election.
Speaking of these early primaries, The Hill, which is a center-left-ish news outlet, is reporting in an op-ed, so this is an opinion piece, that DeSantis will drop out after Iowa.
This op-ed from The Hill says, I've heard from two people very familiar with the DeSantis campaign, a major donor and a high-level political operative, that if the Florida governor loses the Iowa caucuses to former President Trump, as expected on the night of January 15th, he will either drop out of the race that night or make his announcement the next morning.
And then there's an editor's note here on this op-ed says, the DeSantis campaign vigorously denies this assertion.
This op-ed has been updated to include the following statement from the campaign.
Ron DeSantis is in this for the long haul.
Okay.
I think both statements are correct, actually.
I think it is likely that if DeSantis loses Iowa, that he will drop out.
But I also believe that the DeSantis campaign is telling the truth, which is that the campaign is going to stay in it as long as it can.
The reason for this is, I spoke to a friend of mine who is very familiar with presidential campaigns.
And he told me, We were going back through some of the older presidential campaigns, 2012, when this candidate dropped out and this candidate, I said, well, I think he dropped out for this reason and he dropped out for that reason.
And my friend said, Michael, presidential campaigns end for one reason and one reason only, because they run out of money.
That's why they end.
That's why people, because they can't go on any further.
Now, DeSantis had raised a ton of money.
DeSantis' campaign also burned a ton of money.
But if the DeSantis campaign looks at Iowa, sees that they're going to lose, and who knows, maybe they'll pull a huge upset, and then looks at New Hampshire, sees for sure they're going to lose, and then looks at this state, and this state, and this state, the only way they could even possibly make a claim to be able to compete in some of these states is to spend oodles and oodles of cash they're not going to be able to raise any more money when The donors smell blood in the water, and the campaign will end then.
They'll be in it for the long haul, but circumstances have a way of forcing the hand of candidates, and it can happen really quickly.
We've just gone through, what, 16, 18 months already of candidates running or signaling that they're going to run or starting to raise money, and it's going on for a really long time and nothing has really happened.
The minute that voting starts, the minute you see the Iowa caucuses, the minute you see some of those early primary states, Things are going to winnow pretty quickly, I think.
Now, there's a new number two candidate in the race, at least according to some polls, but that candidate is facing some problems now as well.
We'll get to those in just one second.
First, though, I gotta talk to you about what I had for dinner last night, which would be Good Ranchers.
Right now, go to GoodRanchers.com, use code Knowles.
You know what I had for dinner last night?
I come home, and Alisa said, I just made a quick little sauce.
I said, okay, so it's just pasta.
Well, I forget what kind of pasta, and a nice little sauce.
But it was easy, you know, you make it in 10 minutes.
So she makes this up, whatever.
I said, oh, this is really good sauce.
What kind of sauce is that?
Just a little meat sauce, just a quick meat sauce.
I don't know.
You know, meat sauce is easy.
It's just the canned tomatoes and this and that.
So, then it occurred to me, the only thing that would have determined how tasty the sauce was, was the meat.
So I said, well, where'd you get this?
It's like the best meat sauce I've had in a long time.
He goes, huh?
Oh, I just got the Good Rancher's hamburger, and I kind of just... And it was the Good Rancher's meat!
Of course it was!
Good Rancher's has the absolute best meat out there.
Their chicken is unbelievable.
Their beef is unbelievable.
They're all their stuff.
They've got everything.
And it's the best in the business, and the prices are the lowest in the business somehow, and it sells itself.
I don't know how they do it.
Go to goodranches.com, use code Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to enjoy free chicken in 2024 plus, an additional 20 bucks off your first order.
Change the way you buy meat by switching to Good Ranchers.
Subscribe today, use code Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to claim over 200 bucks in free chicken and New Year savings.
Goodranchers.com, American meat delivered.
Nikki Haley's campaign is feeling pretty good because a lot of people wrote them off in the early days of the campaign, and DeSantis looked as though he were the only Republican who could possibly unseat Donald Trump.
And then some of us suggested early on that Nikki Haley is a very talented politician who would be able to last pretty long in the race, and that DeSantis, in part because he's so good, in part for the reasons that make him so likable and admirable, he was going to have a very hard time in the race and was going to be a man without a home and he'd go away.
And, you know, some of us appear to have been proven correct in that prediction.
Nikki Haley is facing the problem that was always going to crop up because it's also her strength.
Nikki's strength is she has a ton of centrist establishment cred and she has played very well with the right of her party sometimes too.
She has the backing of the Koch network.
She was a relatively moderate governor in South Carolina.
Also, she worked for Donald Trump.
She was the UN ambassador.
She brought it to the bad guys every day, and Trump fetted her as she left the administration and said, oh, Nikki, you're welcome back whenever.
You're so great.
We love you.
And that's a really hard tightrope to walk, and she's managed to do it pretty well.
But it does lead to certain contradictions.
So there was a town hall in Iowa.
Now we're days away from the Iowa caucuses.
Nikki Haley was asked, what Her opinion is on social security reform.
Here is an unfortunate answer.
So Governor, Governor DeSantis is hitting you for claiming the retirement age is, quote, way, way too low.
He said, quote, I don't know why she's saying that.
So are you saying that?
I have never once said that.
Well, wait, wait, wait.
In Bloomberg interview.
You said, anyone who says they'll leave America bankrupt, Social Security will go bankrupt, Medicare will, so we don't touch anyone's retirement, but go to people like my kids in their 20s and tell them the rules haven't changed.
Change the retirement age to reflect life expectancy.
Yes.
OK, so it's it's a little bit of a tricky one.
And Brett Baer here, he's a very good journalist.
So he tests to see if Nikki is going to give a Nuanced answer on DeSantis' accusation.
Nikki Haley wants to raise the retirement age for Social Security.
She's going to gut entitlements.
And Nikki says, I absolutely have never said that.
And then he says, hold on, you did, because I have this statement.
And I'm sure we don't have the rest of the clip.
I'm sure Nikki had a masterful response to that.
And she probably would have said, I'm almost certain I'm right about this.
I haven't even seen the rest of her answer.
She would say, well, no, what I'm saying is I certainly will not raise the retirement age for people who are at retirement or even anywhere close to retirement.
But the Social Security Fund is going to go bankrupt.
And so if we want our children who've been paying into it, To have any social security at all, we need to raise the retirement age and reform entitlements.
Okay, fair enough.
That was the answer that we heard 2010, 2011, 2012.
2010, 2011, 2012, that was a big motivator of at least the more mainstream establishment wing of the Tea Party movement.
The reason that the Koch Network backed the Tea Party movement was because they were real fiscal hawks and they said we got to shrink the budget, we got to reform entitlements.
There was another side of the Tea Party movement which was a little bit more populist and was a little bit more grassroots which was just an anger
That the government under Barack Obama was becoming tyrannical, that it was spinning out of control, that it was being wielded against political enemies, that our basic freedoms and traditions were being upended, that our border was being blown wide open, that we weren't being respected, that our president now was sneering, was looking down his nose on those bitter-clinging, Bible-thumping rubes and idiots who just have to go away.
I think that was a big motivator, and the two parts of the Tea Party movement didn't always line up in motivation or aim.
But at least the beltway circuit, the intellectual think tank version of the Tea Party movement, they wanted entitlement reform.
And the Trump movement, and the conservative movement, and the Year of Our Lord 2024 has no appetite for entitlement reform.
They don't want it.
And the people in the first group, they're going to say, well, it's just because you guys don't understand basic economics.
You can't do math.
You dummies, you just want something for nothing.
You're becoming like the leftists.
But I think the conservatives who have moved on from entitlement reform for now actually have an important point, which is that.
In 2010, we were told, put the social issues on ice.
Let's have a social truce until we can deal with the true menace facing our society, which is the national debt.
We have to fix our fiscal house, and then we can deal with the cultural issues.
And that didn't work.
We elected the Tea Party Congress.
We elected Republicans in the Senate.
We didn't manage to oust Barack Obama.
We elected a lot of Republicans around the country, and nothing happened.
And what we began to realize was, You couldn't fix the economic problems before you fix the cultural problems.
Actually, all those Wall Street geniuses and all those think tankers, many of whom were wearing bow ties and tweed, they weren't right about the fundamental premise of how politics and human nature works.
You can't just throw us all into a computer and fix all the financial problems and then deal with the cultural problems.
We're cultural.
Even the inside of Andrew Breitbart, that politics is downstream of culture, in a way gets at that point.
And the conservatives had learned that lesson.
They had taken it to heart by 2016.
They said, no, we're going to fix migration first.
We're going to fix the family first.
We're going to fix the sexual confusion first.
We're going to fix the role of Washington, D.C.
in our political life first.
We're going to fix subsidiarity and federalism first.
We're going to fix our communities first.
And then and only then will we even be able to think about These financial problems.
So, what's it going to be for Nikki Haley?
Her only role in the race is to be the more centrist, more clubbable 2010-2012 style Republican.
That's her only role.
Even if she wants to be the newer kind of Republican, that was the DeSantis trap.
If you try to be too much like Trump in a race against Trump, you're going to lose because you've got the original.
Nobody wants New Coke.
They want Coke Classic, even if in a blind taste test they prefer the taste of New Coke.
So Nikki is going to have to have to carry on that line.
The question is now, in a race where potentially DeSantis gets out relatively soon, in a race where Chris Christie will be out, in a race where who knows what happens with Vivek, are there enough Republicans Who don't like the new flavor of conservatism that came up in 2016.
Are there enough Republicans who want to go back to that 2010-2012 consensus?
Maybe.
Maybe.
Politics is kind of slow, and we often run one or two cycles behind.
If the new hip thing in 2012 is the Tea Party, who do we nominate?
We nominate Mitt Romney.
He's the guy who invented Obamacare, okay?
So maybe, I actually think Nikki Haley does in fact have a chance, but she's going to face more uncomfortable questions like that.
Speaking of changing priorities, good news out of the Vatican yesterday.
Pope Francis condemned surrogacy.
There have been some other unfortunate things that have come out of the Vatican.
an embarrassing book about using all sorts of bizarre sexual language from the person who is now the head of the dicastery for the doctrine of the faith, once called the Holy Office, once called the Inquisition, you know, the doctrinal office of the Catholic Church. once called the Inquisition, you know, the doctrinal office of And there's this kind of odd book.
I won't even get into it because a lot of it seems even kind of obscene.
And so there was, anyway, there was bad news coming out.
Catholics were feeling a little bit low.
And then all of a sudden we got this good news from Pope Francis.
And it's worth repeating because the people who think that Pope Francis is just purely a liberal, the kind of liberal left-wing atheists who applaud Pope Francis without reading everything that he has to say, they're going to try to paper over this one, but it's important.
He's not just talking about IVF here, which is totally condemned and unacceptable according to Catholic teaching.
He's not just talking about certain kinds of surrogacy, homosexual couples renting out a womb, which is a phrase that Pope Francis uses, uterus for rent.
It's not even just that.
It's not just, you know, the commercialization.
It's all of it.
Pope Francis says, I deem deplorable.
The practice of so-called surrogate motherhood, which represents a grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child based on the exploitation of situations of the mother's material needs.
Pope Francis goes on to say, a child is a gift and, quote, never the basis of a commercial contract.
And he has called for a global ban on surrogacy, quote, to prohibit this practice universally.
To prohibit what he calls, quote, uterus for rent.
Totally, totally right here.
Three cheers for what the Holy Father has said.
Very, very important.
And the fact that Pope Francis has some cachet among liberals and non-Catholics and non-Christians and big lib atheists.
I hope we'll allow this message to resonate more because it's a new bioethical issue.
We don't have 2,000 years of experience of surrogate motherhood.
It's just a development that came about because of modern technology.
So a lot of people don't know how to think about it bioethically.
And in our modern culture, even many conservatives Have just accepted, as if by osmosis, so many premises of liberalism and the commercialization of everything.
We don't think about it, but that's just the world we live in.
And as a fish is unaware of the water in which he swims, so too we are unaware of so much of the liberalism and the commercialism and the materialism that we walk around in.
But Pope Francis says it very well here.
He says, a child is never the basis of a commercial contract.
It is a grave violation of the dignity of the human person to do this, even when there are the best of intentions, even when it's a couple struggling with infertility.
I know, we briefly went through it.
Fortunately, there was a very mild intervention that worked, and so it was no big deal.
But for a couple years, we went through it, and so I know how profoundly painful that can be, what a strain that can put on marriages.
And people will say, well, look, if a couple's struggling with infertility, what's the big deal of using a surrogate?
The big deal is, you are treating a child as a commodity to be purchased, rather than a gift from God.
The only person who can be said to have any rights when it comes to procreation is the child.
And the child has a right to his natural mother and father, joined together in holy matrimony, and to be the product of the conjugal act of his parents.
The more we tinker around with this, the worse things are going to be because we will be, and we are not even aware of this, but we will be establishing the domination of technology over the very origin and destiny of human life.
A good example, I think, of this is a lawsuit that came up just this year.
It was back in April, I think it was, where a couple struggling with infertility went to one of these quack doctors and You know, they managed to collect the sperm in a way that is gravely immoral and they got an egg in a way that's extremely invasive and all extremely expensive, by the way.
And then, whoopsie-daisy, they mixed things up and they created a child with the wrong sperm and egg.
So this is not just even a case of embryos being mixed up and, you know, the black baby comes out of the Chinese lady and, you know, white baby comes out of the Mongolian, I don't know, whatever.
This was a case of a human being was created whose parents had never met.
And whose parents, I believe in this case, were married to other people.
At least one of them was.
I think both of them were.
What do you do about that person?
Well, it's a fringe case.
Yeah, it's a fringe case because you've engaged in an action that is intrinsically disordered and gravely immoral.
And so what do you say?
Well, you know, look, well, if this happens one time out of a thousand, that's just life, right?
No, you've created a human being because you've reversed the order of responsibility of parent to child.
And you've treated people like property to be purchased.
A person is never a property to be purchased and owned.
You've disrespected the rights of a person, and you've done so for the best of intentions.
Sure, the road to hell is paved with very good intentions, and this is a great clarification.
It's sad that it's even necessary, but it's a good clarification from Pope Francis.
As a father, I am particular about the kind of content that my kids are exposed to.
That is why I am thrilled to present BentKey, our new kids' entertainment app from The Daily Wire.
Right now, you can check out the world of BentKey for free for 14 days.
BentKey is the only kids' streaming app that you can trust to provide quality content that aligns with your values and worldview.
Try BentKey for free for 14 days.
That is 14 days of unlimited access to BentKey's world of adventure.
Use code UNLOCK at checkout and get 14 days of free access to BentKey.
No strings attached.
You can cancel anytime.
Once you see the amazing content that BentKey has to offer, you are going to be hooked.
So do not wait.
Go to bentkey.com, use code UNLOCK at signup to start your trial today.
My favorite comment yesterday is from CheekyChimp who says, Aliens in Miami?
I prefer the more politically correct term Californians.
That's fair enough.
That's a good point.
I assumed you would say, you know, Hondurans or something like that.
But no, California, actually, you're right.
There's probably a greater mass migration of Californians into Florida than there are of foreign nationals.
Very true.
Speaking of weird sex stuff, it's that time of day.
We should just have a segment on this show.
Every day or every other day, you know, it's a five-minute segment.
Weird sex stuff.
There is a scintillating story going around.
This is what we've been waiting for.
The Jeffrey Epstein files are going to be unsealed.
We're going to find out all this new juicy information.
Some of us told you at the end of last year, this was just a week ago, that we weren't going to get any really new information.
No, Michael, we are!
And the next day they say, we are, we're getting, we're going to find out about Prince Andrew.
Oh, the guy that we already know about?
The guy that we've known about for years?
He actually lost his job working for his mom because we know so much about his relationship with Epstein?
Oh, okay.
We're going to find out about Bill Clinton.
Do you know, this is one of the juicy tidbits, Bill Clinton likes young women.
Oh, stop the presses!
Okay, well now we got new stuff.
Epstein documents allege sex tapes of Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Richard Branson.
This woman, the accuser, Sarah Ransom, claims that her friend was approached by special agents sent directly by Hillary Clinton, who ruffled her up after she went to police with her accusations.
Ms.
Ransom later said she made up the tape's existence.
Okay.
Now, I don't know.
Maybe that's true.
Maybe Hillary sent some goons after this lady.
Maybe not.
I tend to think if Hillary sends goons after you, you don't generally live to tell the tale.
But maybe.
Yes, maybe.
And so then she goes to the cops.
And she says, I have all these tapes in my possession.
Now, are there secret sex tapes of at least some Epstein clients?
Maybe including Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Richard Branson?
Yeah, I bet so.
I don't know about those guys in particular, but certainly Jeffrey Epstein videotaped his very wealthy, influential, powerful clients Doing weird sex stuff with underage girls.
Guaranteed.
The tapes exist.
But is it these tapes?
Does this woman, this Epstein accuser, who obviously got kind of messed up as a young gal, does she have those tapes?
I kind of doubt it.
I kind of doubt it because in 2019, this is what, two years after she made these accusations, this woman told the New Yorker that the tapes were made up.
She said that she made this up to raise intrigue into Epstein's affairs and to convince Jeffrey Epstein that she had evidence that would come out if he harmed me.
So this is just according to her in 2019.
What do you believe?
Do you believe her in 2017 and then they intimidated her and she recanted because she didn't want them to kill her?
Or do you believe that the whole reason she said that she had these tapes Was to create a kind of dead man switch and give herself some apparent leverage so that they wouldn't kill her.
And then when she's talking to the police, it is difficult to lie to the police and the story fell apart and she said, okay, I didn't, that didn't really happen.
I, someone who believes that there are sex tapes of all these weirdos on Epstein Island.
I, who have believed the Jeffrey Epstein story long before many mainstream voices believed in it.
I don't think these tapes are real.
I think it's the latter.
I think she was a scared, confused woman who had a kind of traumatic upbringing, and she made it up, and then she admitted she made it up.
I think that's true for a lot of this testimony.
All of this testimony, the unsealed Epstein documents, it's all just testimony.
Isn't that convenient?
It's all just stuff that could be false.
Some of which has The accusers have admitted was false.
Now, to me it's just so convenient.
The only people we're hearing about, really, are the ones that we already knew about.
And all of the stories that we're hearing, titillating, scintillating that they may be, can easily be denied because they're not findings of a court.
They're not the conclusions of an investigation.
They're just what some lady said.
Witnesses who may or may not be credible.
I just think the whole thing is a limited hangout.
I think it's all fake and silly to get us all chattering.
Ooh, I think we finally got to the bottom of this Epstein thing.
No, we didn't.
No, we didn't.
The bottom of the Epstein thing is who was he working for?
In whose service did he cultivate these relationships, operate the weird sex mansions and islands, and film the tapes?
Who, if anyone, was he blackmailing?
And more importantly, in whose service was he doing the blackmailing?
That's what this is about.
And none of the Epstein news of the last two weeks has gotten us one inch closer to finding out that information.
Very, very convenient.
Okay, one more, at least, weird sex stuff story.
I don't know, sometimes these stories come in droves.
The World Health Organization Has picked someone, among others, to set guidelines for how they will approach child sex mutilations.
And one of the people that they picked is a lunatic transvestite.
Remember when, like, Libs of TikTok, Jordan Peterson, and etc.
got really pissed at me for saying, as a criminal law professor, I feel compelled to tell you to be gay and do crimes on my TikTok?
Well, guess what I did about it?
Oh yeah!
I got a be gay do crimes tattoo about it!
That's what I did about it!
If they thought that was going to get me to back down, they know nothing at all about me.
No, no, no, no, no.
Their hatred just makes me be gay and do crime even harder, including by now having a permanent Be Gay Do Crime tattoo on my arm.
Be gay, do crime.
That is the mandate that came from the liberals, right?
Certainly within the last six or seven years.
Everything they said, be gay, read gay porn in elementary schools, have pride marches everywhere, have coming out day, have guidance counselors and teachers keep all the weird sex stuff that the kids are up to, that they're being encouraged to do, from the parents, and also do crime!
And it's unrelated to the gay stuff, but go out there, rob, loot, pillage, burn, set courthouses on fire, Just do a bunch of crime and kill dozens of people because of BLM and racial justice and be gay and do crime.
I guess it makes perfect sense that they would pick this person.
Call me old-fashioned, call me crazy.
Shouldn't the first requirement for a position in public health be that you are not a crazy person?
Shouldn't the job requirement, and there should be others, this would be necessary but not sufficient, Include sanity, you have to be sane.
I don't even mean this to mock, obviously this person's completely nuts and some of it has to do with his or her, whatever, you know, behavior and discipline or lack thereof, but some of it might just be This person was born with a little bit of a screw loose and didn't receive support from the community and so ended up this way.
It's often the case that psychologists are the craziest people out there.
Maybe it's because people with a kooky psychology are disproportionately drawn to the field of psychology.
I don't know.
But in any case, these are not the sort of people who should be running public health.
It seems that when it comes to the way our liberal political order is structured, the people who are running the show Are the very last people who should be in those positions of power.
Not just that they're a little unqualified, they're like the very last, they're the opposite of the people who should have those jobs.
Weird how that works.
The rest of the show continues now.
You do not want to miss it.
Become a member, use code NOELSKIN at WLAS at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.
