Ep. 1401 - Suspected Jan 6th FED Gets Shocking Sentence
A suspected fed gets sentenced for jAnUaRy SiXtH, an Epstein accuser recants her recantation, and a Zoomer girl complains about having to work.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
Ep.1401
- - -
DailyWire+:
Shop the NEW Jeremy’s Women’s Collection here: https://bit.ly/3RCphRM
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, kids entertainment and more: https://utm.io/ueMfc
Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
American Financing - Call (866) 569-4711 for a FREE mortgage review, or visit https://www.americanfinancing.net/.
HIMS - Start your free online visit today! https://www.HIMS.com/Knowles
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek
Ray Epps, the most prominent and vocal instigator of the riot at the Capitol on... January 6th!
has finally been prosecuted and sentenced.
Years after countless peaceful demonstrators such as Midwestern grannies and smiling selfie-takers were locked in the clink, some in solitary confinement for months and even years on end, the guy who most clearly egged the supposed insurrectionists on went uncharged.
This strange fact led some people to conclude that Epps was actually a plant working for the federal government.
In fact, many Trump supporters suspected that Epps was a Fed the moment he started making his incendiary demands before January 6th.
Tomorrow, we need to go into the Capitol!
Into the Capitol!
No!
No!
Fed!
Tomorrow, I don't even like to say it because I'll be arrested.
Well, let's not say it.
We need, we need to go.
I'll say it.
All right.
We need to go in.
Shut the **** up, Boomer.
To the Capitol.
Based Fed posting?
We need to go into the Capitol.
I didn't see that coming.
Okay.
We are going to the Capitol where our problems are.
It's that direction.
All right.
No, Dave, but one more thing.
Can we go up there?
No.
When we go in, leave this year.
You don't need to get shot.
Can you arrest us all?
Pretty weird, huh?
But years later, he was finally charged.
And now he's been sentenced.
So that probably should shut up the right-wing conspiracy theorists, right?
Ray Epps has been convicted and sentenced to a year of probation.
And some community service.
Unlike all the far more peaceful insurrectionists, Ray Epps will face no jail time, no solitary confinement.
He won't even be called a traitor by the media.
In fact, he will be praised.
This is how the Associated Press is reporting on EPSA's sentencing.
Quote, a man targeted by right-wing conspiracy theories about the US Capitol riot was sentenced on Tuesday to a year of probation for joining the January 6, 2021 attack by a mob of fellow Donald Trump supporters.
Joining?
Joining is what he was doing?
He basically led the damn thing, and now he's a victim?
Earlier this year, after the security camera footage was released contradicting the earlier narrative of a violent insurrection, here is how the AP reported on that.
Quote, handed some 41,000 hours of January 6th security footage, Fox News' Tucker Carlson has launched an impassioned new effort to explain away the deadly Capitol attack.
Now, however, it is the AP that is explaining away and even excusing the actions of one of the main guys who led the supposed attack.
I was previously on the fence about Ray Epps being a Fed.
I kind of thought he was, but I was a little bit on the fence.
The purpose of the prosecution, it seems, was to prove to people that he was not a Fed.
And as with so many machinations of the geniuses who run our government, the actual effect has been the opposite.
If I didn't think that Ray Epps was a Fed before, I am now 100% convinced that he is.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
A Gen Z girl is complaining about working.
There's something more going on here.
People are either defending her or they're just mocking her as a silly little snowflake.
I think there's more going on.
We'll get to that in a second.
First, though, speaking of the feds not sending their best, You remember when that airplane just kind of like exploded the other day?
An American airplane.
This was an Alaska Airlines flight that was going from Oregon to California.
And they get to 16,000 feet and part of the wall just blows off the plane.
And they managed to land safely, but obviously it was a very dangerous situation.
So now, the National Transportation Safety Board is explaining how that kind of third world accident could happen in America.
Now our systems group began looking at all the aircraft systems.
They documented the entire flight deck and they asked about the auto-pressurization fail light that did illuminate in three previous flights.
There was a decision by Alaska Airlines to a restriction, actually, they put in place.
They call it an ETOPS restriction that prevented that plane from being flown to Hawaii over water.
So that if some light did illuminate, it could return very quickly to an airport.
So they knew about this?
What the NTSB is saying is Alaska Airlines knew that there were major mechanical problems with the plane.
So much so that they feared that if they flew the airplane over the Pacific Ocean, where there was nowhere nearby to land, the plane could go down and everyone would die.
They knew that there were pressurization problems.
They knew that the side of the plane could blow off.
So they said, okay, the thing we should do here is not retire the plane and get a new plane.
What we'll do is we'll just fly it from Oregon to California.
This happened multiple times.
I said, well, you know, look, it'd be very awkward if a light were to go off while we were over the ocean.
What if half the plane blew off?
I don't know.
Wouldn't that?
That seems like that's the real fear here.
And that's what happened.
Not a whole half the plane, but a major chunk of one side of the plane blew off.
Someone's shirt was ripped off of him.
A teddy bear flew out the window.
The air masks came down.
Everybody started freaking out.
And they luckily, thankfully, thank God, managed to land the plane.
What?
What kind of incompetence is required at private industry and at the level of the federal government to allow this many warning signs to go completely unheeded?
Things are breaking down.
If you've ever traveled anywhere around the world, in Europe, in certainly in third world countries, you'll notice that one of the The big things that we take for granted in America is just that things kind of function.
For all the ideological strife and all the battles and all the policy preferences that we might have and we might not get and blah blah blah, at least things kind of work.
The cops, at least a few years ago, Would show up on time, at least.
Until a few years ago, food supply systems worked just fine, at least.
Until a few years ago, there was generally rule of law.
At least the airplanes worked, you know, and the roads worked, and things, the society just moved.
And we are in for a very rude awakening, because for decades now, We have eschewed basic competency training in favor of highly ideological so-called education systems, just indoctrination and a bunch of liberal gobbledygook.
And we've neglected the basic functions that allow society to work, expect more doors to blow off more airplanes.
Now, speaking of infamous airplanes, the Jeffrey Epstein saga gets even more bizarre.
They start teasing around New Year's Eve that there are new revelations that are going to come out about Jeffrey Epstein, new documents to be unsealed by the courts.
And I said, don't get your hopes up.
This is going to be a big distraction.
And then I was proven completely correct about that.
And all the news that we got was just stuff we already heard.
Oh, yes.
Donald Trump knew Jeffrey Epstein.
Oh, yes.
Prince Andrew was photographed with girls and Jeffrey Epstein.
Oh, yes.
Bill Clinton likes young ladies.
Wow.
Shocking.
Stop the presses.
The new information that came out, at least semi-new information, was that one of Epstein's accusers, who said that she had first or at least second-hand knowledge of Prince Andrew, with these girls, of Bill Clinton, of all the big high-profile clients, she said she had tapes.
That Jeffrey Epstein recorded these people, that we already knew, but she said she had tapes.
She had access to the tapes.
Seen them, her friend recorded them, whatever.
She got a hold of them.
But that turned out to be fake news because she made that accusation in 2017.
By 2019, she said, oh, no, I made up the story about having access to the tapes.
That wasn't real.
I just did it to spook Jeffrey Epstein so that he wouldn't come and try to kill me.
And I also did that to bring more attention to the Epstein story.
Well, now she's recanting the recantation.
She said yesterday, these are videos that exist.
The people that know they exist, I'm sure, are very frightened of them being released, meaning the guys like Prince Andrew.
There were apparently hidden cameras all over Epstein's island.
She said, it's no secret that everything was recorded.
Multiple victims have come forward confirming my account along with others.
I have also seen recordings in his office.
She said, in the time that I was with Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, among others, regularly enforced that if I ever did come forward, myself and my family would be harmed.
She said she's willing to testify in court that she has seen CCTV footage Allegedly recorded by Epstein, showing these high-profile men doing naughty things with her unnamed friend.
So now she's saying, I have seen this footage.
It exists.
I have seen it.
I can testify about it.
She goes on, when my friend had sexual intercourse with Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Richard Branson, sex tapes were in fact filmed on each separate occasion by Jeffrey.
Thank God she managed to get a hold of some footage of the filmed sex tapes, which clearly identify the faces of Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Branson having sexual intercourse with her.
But she goes on to say, frustratingly enough, Epstein was not seen in any of the footage, but he was clever like that.
Okay.
So this actually is new information.
We already knew the tapes existed.
It would appear that the FBI, when they raided Epstein's place, took the tapes because a safe went missing, and we don't have the tapes, and that would be the evidence that you'd want to collect.
So Epstein's not in it, but all these high-profile guys are.
Okay.
Now the next question is, where are the tapes?
And this ties in with the point I made earlier.
I actually don't really care that much.
I really don't want to see Bill Clinton doing anything naughty on a videotape.
It's okay.
I lived through the 90s.
I remember the stories.
We all know what happened.
I don't need to see it.
I don't want to see Prince Andrew or Richard Branson for that matter either.
I don't really even care about the Epstein client list being unmasked.
I mean, it's good.
It should be unmasked.
The people should be brought to justice.
I think that would be great.
But what is much more politically relevant is who Jeffrey Epstein was working for.
So the way this plays into that is someone has those tapes.
Someone is covering those tapes up.
Whoever is in possession of those tapes, if they are a law enforcement agency or an intelligence agency, is protecting the clients of Jeffrey Epstein.
We know that Ghislaine Maxwell is the daughter of Robert Maxwell, who is a spy for maybe three intelligence agencies, Israeli intelligence, British intelligence, maybe even Russian intelligence.
We know that from British intelligence, actually.
We know that Jeffrey Epstein Was very likely connected to American intelligence because of the testimony of Alex Acosta, the U.S.
Attorney who prosecuted him in Florida and then was up for Labor Secretary under Trump.
The next question is, where are the tapes?
Who is holding those tapes?
Which agency, very likely, is holding those tapes?
Why is the agency holding those tapes?
What was that agency's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein?
Before he was arrested the first time, before he was arrested the second time, before he totally killed himself, and afterward.
Even if they had no relationship with Epstein beforehand.
It seems unlikely, but let's say they didn't, and they just found these tapes.
Why are they hiding them now?
What is that all about?
Now, speaking of Holmes, When you want access to financing to streamline the way that you are making credit payments, you've got to check out American Financing.
Right now, go to AmericanFinancing.net.
It's 2024.
It's time to get our finances in order.
There is some great news for homeowners.
Interest rates have dropped down to the fives.
A lot lower than where they were last year.
What was it last year?
In the sevens?
Eight percent?
If you have been buried in high-interest credit card debt, Now is the time to break free with American Financing.
American Financing can help you access the cash in your home to pay off your high-interest debt.
Last year, their salary-based mortgage consultants helped customers save an average of $854 a month.
That is a great way to start the new year.
If you start today, you might be able to delay two mortgage payments.
Call American Financing today at 866-569-4711.
That's 866-569-4711.
866-569-4711.
That's 866-569-4711.
Or go to AmericanFinancing.net.
NMLS 182334.
NMLSConsumerAccess.org.
APR for rates in the five start at 6.406% for well-qualified borrowers.
Call 866-569-4711 for details about credit card costs and terms.
Speaking of matters of the heart, not sure that what was going on on Epstein Island was exactly a matter of the heart, but I guess it's somewhat related.
There's a study out, breaking study, Love really does change how the brain works.
An amazing study just came out of Australia says that romantic love has a connection to the release of oxytocin, often called the love hormone, and this helps to explain why we seem to go all kooky when we fall in love.
It is thought that romantic love first emerged some 5 million years ago after we split from our ancestors, these researchers conclude.
Love can be an elevating and amazing, but also a traumatic experience.
Wow, really, that's a really interesting finding of the study.
They find out that when people fall in love, our brains react differently, and our romantic flame becomes the center of our lives.
And this study sheds light on the mysterious mechanisms that underlie that experience.
According to Dr. Phil Cavanaugh from the University of Canberra, He says that romantic love is associated with changes in behavior as well as changes of perception and emotion.
He says, we know the role that oxytocin plays in romantic love because we get waves of it circulating throughout our nervous system and bloodstream when we interact with loved ones.
The way that loved ones take on special importance is due to oxytocin combining with dopamine.
That's another chemical that our brain releases during romantic love.
Meaning that, quote, love activates pathways in the brain associated with positive feelings.
You can read more about this groundbreaking study in behavioral sciences, except it would be a total waste of your time because it doesn't tell us anything new about love.
And I mention it not just to make fun of this study or these researchers or anything, but to make fun of the scientific, modern scientific endeavor broadly.
Modern science is supposed to shed new light on all the mysteries of the universe.
It's going to unlock all the keys to all those mysteries.
And yet, we didn't learn anything new there.
Yeah, anyone who has ever had a crush on the girl in math class in seventh grade knows that love makes you feel different and behave different and talk different.
Yeah, we all know that.
So many of these scientific studies do not tell us anything new.
They don't explain anything.
They just code common sense in scientific jargon.
Well, you see, our new groundbreaking scientific study shows that you get a rush of dopamine and oxytocin when you see that pretty girl that you love.
Oh, you mean I go a little gaga?
Okay.
Can you tell me anything more about it?
No, not at all.
We don't know anything about why that happens or how that came to be or the purpose that it might serve.
But listen, we're very scientific, so stop talking about elation and infatuation and love affairs and start talking about oxytocin and dopamine.
That's going to explain it.
It actually does the opposite.
Oxytocin and dopamine mean nothing to me.
I don't know what that means.
I know what love is.
I don't know what those things are.
You see this even in the gender debate.
What is a woman?
The question that fascinated the entire world for a year, but maybe still it's fascinating the world.
And not only the liberals, but even the conservatives were giving all the stupidest answers.
Well, a woman is someone with two X chromosomes.
I don't know what X chromosomes are.
That means nothing to me.
When I think, hey, close your eyes, think of a woman.
Did you think of two X chromosomes?
No, you didn't.
Sugar and spice and everything nice goes a lot further to describe a woman than 2x chromosomes or a human person with a uterus or whatever.
The problem here is not that the left attacks us for being anti-scientific or uneducated or rubes or idiots or not curious or whatever.
I think conservatives are much more curious.
I think we're much more intellectually engaged generally than the leftists and the materialists and the libs are.
The problem here is that the whole modern scientific endeavor that comes out after the Enlightenment, after the Scientific Revolution, which Doesn't expand our horizons of perception.
It narrows them.
It tries to pretend that everything in life is just material.
It's just chemicals and stuff.
But that isn't true.
We know that that isn't true.
We know that there are things beyond the physical, beyond matter.
We know that there is form.
We know that there is metaphysical reality.
We know that there is a moral order.
We know that there's mathematics.
I can't touch mathematics.
I can't pull mathematics out of the air.
We know mathematics exists.
We know morality exists, even if Reddit-tier atheists want to deny that.
We know it exists.
We know that there's a natural moral order that we can all know, everybody on earth, using his reason.
We, I think we know that our reason is pretty reliable.
Some people deny that, too.
They say, oh, it's just a delusion, or what we consider to be our reason, what we consider to be our perception of objective reality is just socially constructed.
But we don't behave that way.
We all behave as though it's objectively true, and we argue, and we debate, and we have all sorts of policy battles based on the assumption that these things are true.
Even the most silly materialist lib will, in moments of weakness, appeal to human rights and to what's good and even what's true.
The takeaway here is that there is a lot more to knowledge than modern science.
There's a lot more to science than what we call modern science.
Now, speaking of the science and that gender debate, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, who is a Republican, allegedly, He made waves last week when he vetoed a bill that would ban the sexual mutilation of children and that would keep dudes out of the women's locker room.
He vetoed it.
He said, no, we can't do that.
Totally squished on the easiest political issue of our time.
Well, now he's trying to walk that back.
He just signed a limited executive order on Friday banning transgender surgeries on children.
That is just one week.
After vetoing the bill that would have gone much further and actually gotten the job done.
Why?
Why is he doing this?
Well, he's been absolutely excoriated by every sensible person.
The right, the middle, even centrist liberals.
He was attacked by Donald Trump.
Trump said, I'm done with this stiff.
This guy's a complete joker, which he obviously is.
So he tries to undo it with an executive order.
An executive order is much weaker than legislation that he could sign.
If he's having regrets here, then go back, have the legislature pass it again, and he should sign it.
He should override his own veto if he's realized that he was wrong.
But if he's trying to find a middle ground on transgenderism, it's not going to work.
Transgenderism is all or nothing.
When you try to find a middle ground, you give up your entire argument.
Because what the libs say is, we're not charitable, we're not nice, we're cruel and we're mean.
And that's why we won't let young trans people live their truth because we're just mean-spirited and nasty.
And the conservative response to that is, no, no, no, we're the charitable ones.
We're the ones who are being kind to these people because it is simply a fact that a man can't become a woman.
And so if we pretend to any degree that a man can become a woman, we're going to hurt this person.
We're going to lead him further into delusion.
We're going to deprive other people of their legitimate rights within society, like the right of girls to have their own bathrooms and their own sports teams and whatever.
But we're also going to be engaging in a very cruel act toward the trans-identifying people because a man can't really become a woman.
It's all or nothing, as I pointed out at CPAC almost exactly one year ago.
Can't wait for my speech this year.
On certain issues, you've got to be clear.
Clarity is always charity.
And on certain political issues, there's no middle ground.
Mike DeWine wants a middle ground.
He's going to upset everybody.
And he's, in fact, digging that hole he started digging even deeper.
Now, speaking of male sexual issues, this is the most perfect transition I think I've ever had in the entire history of the Michael Knowles Show.
You gotta check out HIMSS.
Right now, go to himss.com slash Knowles.
HIMSS is changing men's healthcare by providing access to affordable and discreet sexual health treatments, all from the comfort of your home.
HIMSS provides access to clinically proven generic alternatives that are up to 95% cheaper with options as low as $2 per dose.
The process is simple, 100% online, Meaning you don't have to endure any uncomfortable doctor's visits.
Simply go to hymns.com slash Noles Canada WLAS.
Answer a series of questions on their site.
One of their medical providers will determine the right treatment option for you if prescribed your medication ships directly to you for free in discrete packaging.
Because some guys are going to get a little embarrassed about that.
You don't need to worry about that anymore.
Hems does not require insurance.
You will pay one low price for your treatments, online visits, ongoing shipments, and provider messaging.
Hems has hundreds of thousands of trusted subscribers, so if ED is getting you down, it's time to change that.
Start your free online visit today at Hems.com slash Knowles.
That is H-I-M-S dot com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, for your personalized ED treatment options.
That is Hems.com slash Knowles.
Prescriptions require an online consultation with a healthcare provider who will determine if appropriate restrictions apply.
See a website for details and important safety information.
Subscription required.
Price varies based on product and subscription plan.
Speaking of weird trans stuff, gotta give a hat tip here to our friends over at Libs of TikTok.
There is some kind of queer identifying person who demands that if you have genital preferences, you are transphobic.
Yes, genital preferences are always transphobic.
You're welcome.
No, but seriously, deciding that you don't want to be intimate with someone because of the genitals they have is transphobic.
Particularly, like, if you think about in this case, this means that this person is not open to dating trans women, which invalidates their womanhood.
Not only that, it makes assumptions about the way that trans people are going to want to use those genitals.
The idea that trans people use the body parts that they have in the same way that cis people with those same body parts do is transphobic.
Say it with me.
Genital preferences are always transphobic.
Obviously the point that this individual is making, I can't quite tell.
I think she is a woman.
With short hair?
I don't know though, especially when the camera's really up close.
It's sometimes hard to tell.
I guess that's the point of this gender-bending androgyny that we're all living in.
Surface level, yes, she's making a stupid argument.
If you're a man and you like women, that makes you normal.
That doesn't make you a phobe of any kind.
But there's something more interesting to this video, and it gets a little deeper at the gender issue, which is Have.
The verb have.
If you have this, if you have that.
The key to understanding this error is the view of the body as something that you have rather than something that you are.
And the most extreme version of this from some of the trans activists is they'll refer to penis owners or uterus owners, as though you own part of your body, which gets at another problem, this liberal premise of self-ownership, which even libertarians like.
But let's not even get into that debate right now, not even get into that issue.
The body, your body, is not something that you have, it's something that you are.
You're not merely your body, but you're also not merely your soul.
You are your body and your soul together in a hylomorphic union.
This person probably has not given this very much thought, certainly not much rigorous thought, and the way that we speak can be very, very slippery.
This is why I wrote this book, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds.
Thank you.
Language not only allows us to communicate the ideas that are already formed in our heads, language forms our very picture of reality.
Language forms our very consciousness.
Language sets the boundaries of what we are even able to conceive of.
And so when we regularly use language such as, I have this body part, I have that body part, we are implicitly Alienating ourselves from our bodies.
And once we've done that, we've conceded the transgender debate.
The whole transgender debate hinges on, do you have anything to do with your body?
Does your actual identity have anything to do with your body?
If it does, then transgenderism is fake.
Because it's completely nonsensical in that case to say, well, you have the body of a man, but you're not really a man.
Because you are identified with your body.
If you have nothing to do with your body, then transgenderism is very likely true.
And the arguments against transgenderism by the Christians and the Jews and the Muslims and every reasonable person ever, then those arguments are fake.
So which is it?
You don't just have, and this gets down to the very liberal assumptions of self-ownership.
Do you own yourself?
Are you your own god?
Or are you an island unto yourself?
Are you totally self-sovereign?
Or are you actually responsible to and accountable to some other reality?
Are you accountable to your family, to society, to the moral order, to your country, to biological reality?
Is your ability to choose your own adventure circumscribed by those limits?
The answer is yes, it is all circumscribed, but the politics of liberation is gonna blow up all of those limits, and the language that we use, the language that liberalism has foisted upon us, is going to trick, I don't know if that person's so normal, but even normal people into accepting those premises without even thinking about it.
Speaking of young people, a young Zoomer girl has just broken down in tears in her car on TikTok because she doesn't like working.
I cannot stand how the news has been dogging Gen Z and calling them lazy for not wanting to work a 9-5 for the rest of their lives.
Let me put it in perspective for everybody who's a little confused here, okay?
I work 5 days out of the week, 40 hours a week, okay?
I do not make enough to live on my own.
I would not make enough to pay rent, water, electric, and eat.
All by myself.
I would not be capable of doing that.
20 years ago, when you were getting started, you could live on your own.
20 years ago, when you first started, you were able to do everything that I am now struggling to do.
Let me add another perspective here.
You've been working for 20 years.
You have 20 years of working experience behind your belt.
You have 20 years of experience in a career that has allowed you to gain raises, to get more money, to profit you in an economy that you created.
You can sit here and you can call Gen Z lazy all you want, but I've been working my tail end off just to barely make it by.
And respectfully, I don't want to do that for the rest of my life.
So the usual talking points, conservative cable news reaction to this is, listen to this crazy snowflake.
She needs to learn how to work hard.
Nine to five, that's only eight hours of the day.
That's not even all that much work.
You know, I worked 16 hours a day.
I walked uphill both ways in the snow and the sleet.
I worked in the coal mines when I was eight years old, and I worked my way... Okay, fair enough.
Yeah, that's true.
I work more than eight hours a day, and... Well, maybe I don't, though.
Technically, I do.
And if you just log the hours that I'm working on something that pertains to my professional life, it's way more than eight hours a day.
But in another sense, I really don't work at all.
Because I love everything I do, and I'd probably do it for free, and so that's great.
Now, it wasn't always like that.
When I was in my early 20s, I was working plenty of jobs that I didn't really want to do, and I wasn't being paid that well for it, and I was so sure.
And over time, if you keep working at a career, and maybe you catch some lucky breaks here or there, then You know, your professional life gets a little bit happier, but it doesn't for everybody.
Some people work a job that they hate for their whole lives, and they just do it because that's their responsibility, and all of that is fair enough, and we've heard all of that commentary before.
The part that no one's focusing on is that part she says right at the beginning of the video.
She says, I'm working eight hours a day, I'm working 40 hours a week, and I can't even afford all of the things that I need to live alone.
Why does she want to live alone?
Why do you want to live alone?
A lot of people do live alone.
Some people do it because they don't have any other choice, or they don't think they have any other choice.
Some people do it because they think that they want to do it.
But living alone is not ideal.
That's not really what you want.
Doesn't this girl want to get married?
Man is a coupling creature.
Don't you want to get married?
Marriage is great.
Most people are called to marriage.
Not everyone is called to marriage.
Some people are called to religious life, let's say.
But you don't live alone when you're in religious life.
You're not going to get married, but you're going to go live maybe with a religious order.
You're going to go live in a rectory with a full community around you.
Some people are not called to marriage.
Some people are also not called to religious life.
Some people live a single life for whatever reason.
But often they'll have a roommate, or maybe they'll live with some family member, or at the very least they will live within a community to be around people.
Man is not meant to live alone.
Modern liberal society says we're supposed to be totally alone, as independent as you can possibly be.
Independence, good.
Dependence, bad.
Do whatever you want whenever you want to do it, good.
Constrain yourselves to the rules of society, bad.
But that's just wrong.
You are not supposed to be completely 100% self-sufficient and go live in the woods somewhere.
It's not how society is supposed to work.
This woman is complaining about something that she thinks she desires that is totally unnatural and not conducive to her flourishing.
I'm not saying there aren't problems with the political economy, and I'm not saying there aren't ways to, I don't know, have debates over wages.
In the good old days, families lived together.
They were bigger families.
They lived together for longer, and then they got married much, much younger, and then they built new families, and they built strong, thriving communities, and we lived as citizens and social creatures.
Now, we don't, and it creates all sorts of problems.
Yeah, you're right.
There is something really wrong with working full-time and not being able to have everything that you need.
Maybe we need different things than modern society tells us that we do.
Now, speaking of judgment, I mean, it's a little bit of a weak transition.
Judge Judy has just made her political endorsement for 2024.
I know you were all waiting, bated breath, drumroll please.
Judge Judy is endorsing Nikki Haley.
Yes, What do you think?
I didn't really know.
I assumed she was a little bit right-wing, but not totally right-wing.
You know, she's a New Yorker, and actually it makes perfect sense that she would endorse someone like Nikki Haley.
Why is she doing it?
She said, I'm proud to endorse Nikki Haley because she's whip-smart, has executive credentials, and was a superb governor.
I truly think she can restore America and believe she is the future of this great nation.
There are a lot of people like Judge Judy out there.
For everyone who wrote off Nikki Haley early on because she's more centrist and she is more inclined to compromise on issues that are really near and dear to conservatives, so a lot of conservatives don't really like Nikki Haley, there are a lot of people like Judge Judy out there whose political views are maybe not totally coherent, but They're still kind of popular.
You know, these days, if you run in really plugged-in political circles, politics is getting a little more polarized and extreme.
The conservatives are becoming more conservative, the leftists are becoming more leftist.
Gone are the days of the Bill Clinton New Democrats.
Gone are the days of Tony Blair, New Labor.
Gone are the days of the Social Liberal Fiscal Conservative, which was a mainstream way to identify yourself, especially in yuppie and urban circles.
I'm not sure it ever had a ton of cachet ideologically throughout the rest of the country, but it was popular.
Bill Clinton got elected to two terms, the Bushes.
One was socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
He got elected at least one time.
And Bush, too, was a little more socially conservative.
Still, he gets elected twice.
And that view, which is deeply unsatisfying to people who are really, really plugged into politics, I think remains fairly popular still.
Ever since Tony Blair, that has defined the politics of the United Kingdom.
Even when the right-wingers win, it's usually on a fiscally conservative, socially liberal platform.
I think a lot of people look at that today, they say, that's passé.
That kind of view has led to so many of the problems that we have today.
It's led to all the economic problems that the left complains about.
The inequality of wealth and the depression of wages and the outsourcing of jobs, which that's an issue that the right complains about.
But it's also led to all the social problems that the right complains about.
The breakdown of the family, the redefinition of the basic building block of society.
All the weird sex stuff.
In some ways, this fiscally conservative, socially liberal thing, it's the worst of all political views.
And yet, electorally, it still seems to have some power.
And the 2024 election is going to be a bellwether.
Are we moving into a new political era?
Or does that view that really took shape in the 1990s, is that still a holdover?
The really plugged-in political people, the ones who are terminally online, they say there's no way that sort of thing could work.
We'll find out.
Was the radicalism of Barack Obama and the reactionary radicalism of Donald Trump, was that an aberration?
And now we're returning back to regular old Clintonians.
Center-left kind of politics or was there a real break and there's a new political era dawning?
We will see.
Judge Judy will be one of the markers to see whether or not that is the case.
You may have noticed that we here at the Daily Wire are big fans of facts and logic and biology.
We know that there are only two sexes.
We're not afraid to say it.
That's right.
Come get me.
I'll say it.
Darn it.
That's how courageous I am.
But some of our loyal customers pointed out a flaw in our Jeremy shot.
We only catered to one sex.
Well, Jeremy's Razors is all about equal opportunity to shop the woke-free economy.
That is why we now have Jeremy's Razors for women.
Because the sugar and the spice and the everything nice in life deserves the same quality woke-free blades as men.
Plus, we have a line of personal care products for our better halves, including moisturizing shaving cream, lotion, body wash, and deodorant.
Ladies, go over to jeremysrazors.com to get your razor and personal care products today.
My favorite comment yesterday is from the Drummer's Workshop, Norm's Music, who says, maybe there was a giant tablet buried under that synagogue and Indiana Jones was trying to take a look.
It could be the case.
You know, I'll tell you, I have been dragged online.
Little bit in the comments section on the on the show and all over Twitter and for suggesting that I am skeptical.
That the Jews were committing human sacrifice and trafficking babies and harvesting organs in the little tunnel by the Chabad place.
I have been dragged.
I've been called all sorts of names.
I've been called an idiot and a rube and I don't know.
It seems to me, I could be wrong.
I guess I've been wrong on occasion before.
It seems to me unlikely.
That the Chabad Lubavitcher rabbis are sacrificing babies and trafficking children and committing human sacrifice and stuff underneath that little area of the synagogue.
It could be, I'm not saying it can't be, but I don't really see any evidence for it.
You know, the piece of evidence that keeps going around is they say that in the video where the cops show up and they say, clean up this hole, people take a stained mattress out of the tunnel.
So I go back to the tape and they don't though.
They take it out of the space between the wall paneling and the closed off part of the tunnel.
It's not in the tunnel.
The tunnel isn't open there.
So I don't know.
If you have evidence, That the Chabadniks are doing human sacrifice in this tunnel from one building they had to another building that I think they used to have or it was closed down or whatever, like a block down.
I'm open to seeing it, okay?
The tunnel is weird, I'm not gonna deny that the tunnel is weird, but without any good evidence of that, I don't know.
It seems to me the prudent and reasonable thing to err on the side of not human sacrifice.
I don't know, I could be wrong.
But that seems reasonable to me.
Now speaking of complex political shifts, as actually pertains to the Hebraic people and their enemies over in the Middle East, some pro-Palestine protesters a couple of days ago were vandalizing a U.S.
military cemetery and blocking highways.
So you might have seen the videos going all around this free Palestine stuff.
Graffitiing at cemeteries and then And then blocking all sorts of highways.
And there was a great video of a guy, he's pulling up and you got these pro-Palestine people shutting down the highway.
And this guy pulls up and he screams at them and he says, hey, I got a daughter in Brooklyn.
I want to get to Brooklyn.
Get out of my way.
You're destructing traffic, idiots!
You can't do that!
That's against the law!
Get away from my car, bro!
I'm not going to start the wrong business, bro.
I'm not going to run you over.
Get away from my car, bro.
Okay, go!
Go!
Get away from my car!
What you got there, brother?
Hands up, baby!
Get away from my car!
Don't touch him!
Bro, get away from my car.
I have a daughter in Brooklyn!
Don't touch him!
Get in your car!
Get the f*** out of the way!
Run him over!
Run him over!
He pushes him over.
They're still not really moving.
One of them went down like a ton of bricks, but the other ones don't move.
And then he just starts slowly driving his car.
He has a lot of restraint, this guy.
Slowly driving.
But he's kind of like tapping them a little bit and then he just goes.
Which is very admirable restraint and the right thing to do.
Absolutely.
You got to go get to your daughter.
You are not going to let these wackos slow you down.
Or stop you from doing it entirely.
The reason I bring it up is The Israel-Palestine conflict is not the biggest issue for me.
I'm not saying I don't care about it at all.
I do care about it in a general way, but it's not very high up the list.
There are other political priorities that I have.
I care about other international conflicts, too.
I care about the Ukraine war to some degree.
It's kind of low on my list.
I care about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia, the oldest Christian nation in the world, and the Muslims in Azerbaijan.
I care about it.
It's still not Way at the top of my list, and there we're talking about the oldest Christian nation, so I'm inclined to care about it even more.
But I can look at the way that these issues are coded.
Political conflicts tend to be coded left-right.
In the case of the Israel-Palestine issue, it doesn't map perfectly onto U.S.
politics.
It's a foreign conflict.
But inasmuch as it is bleeding over into U.S.
politics, the pro-Palestine side is left-coded.
Those people blocking traffic are not conservatives.
They disagree with us on everything.
Those people who are vandalizing military cemeteries, they're not right-wing.
They're not conservatives.
So, it seems to me, just as a matter of practical prejudice, I'm not going to go down into the weeds of every single political issue.
I'm not going to go write a 150-page thesis on every issue to really figure out what I think about, especially international conflicts that don't really involve me all that much.
I'm just going to use rules of thumb.
I'm going to use little heuristics.
And it seems to me that in this case, all the most ardently pro-Palestine people with the Palestine stuff in their Twitter bios are left-wing.
Now, I'm sure there are plenty of pro-Palestine people in the Middle East who would not call themselves left-wing.
I'm just saying that's how it codes onto American politics.
And so, I'm not going to join the pro-liberate Palestine protest in America.
Because, frankly, the pro-Palestine protests in America aren't even really about Israel and Palestine.
When some purple-haired transsexual shows up and says, we need to free Gaza!
You know, it's obviously ridiculous, and the person would be thrown off a rooftop in Gaza.
But they're not really protesting anything about Gaza or Israel.
They don't know anything about it, and they don't really care.
They're protesting American conservatives.
They're protesting the white man.
They're protesting the patriarchy.
They're protesting George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, okay?
And they're using the Israel-Palestine conflict as a way to express their anger, probably at their own fathers, but at all of the rest of us.
So that's the issue that's really being debated here.
The Palestine liberation protests in America, like around the world, it probably does involve a land conflict in the Middle East, but in America, it's not so much about the Palestine as it is about the liberation.
And the ideology of liberation is very, very bad, and it's very, very leftist, and it has to be opposed.
They are the same people who are toppling statues of George Washington, who want to abolish the prisons, who want to let the criminals roam the country, who want to get rid of our borders, who want to upend everything.
That's the way I think about it.
I've said from the beginning, the American interest in the Israel-Palestine war is to contain the war so that it doesn't expand throughout the region or, God forbid, become a major world war that drags us in because I have no interest in the U.S.
getting a particularly military involved in that.
Particularly militarily involved in that.
But when it comes to blocking roads in Brooklyn, that's not what we're dealing with.
We're dealing with the same people that show up to the Antifa rallies, the same people that tried to blow me up in Pittsburgh, the same people that shut down the country, that rioted over George Floyd.
George Floyd wasn't even over George Floyd.
It was all just over the same The same enemy that they perceive themselves to have, which is us, which is normal people.
Speaking of racial and ethnic conflict, Joe Biden has been a race hustler for a long time.
It's gotten worse in recent years.
He launched his 2020 presidential campaign on a lie that Donald Trump called neo-Nazis, very fine people in Charlottesville, it's totally fake.
Now he's explaining, he's giving a damning example of that systemic racism that he's been fear-mongering about for years.
So a home owned by, today, a home owned by a black family on one side of a highway, built by the same builder on the other side of the highway, and a white guy living in it.
The white guy's home is valued more than the black guy's.
No, I know you know it.
But guess what?
That's how you build generational wealth.
Now, there's a guy standing there on the side of his home, around the house.
I think the point If there was a point in that, he said, you got two homes in two different parts of town.
One on one side of the highway, one on the other.
You know, the right side of the tracks and the wrong side of the tracks.
And they're both built by the same architect.
But one is worth more money than the other.
Uh-huh.
You know they always say in real estate, they always say, the three most important words in real estate are architect, architect, architect, right?
Is that what they say?
No, they say it's location, location, location.
So he's saying, yeah, this one house in a nice neighborhood is worth more money than the house in the bad neighborhood.
And the bad neighborhood is a bad neighborhood for all sorts of reasons.
Maybe it's not as geographically ideal, and there's probably a lot of crime going on, and maybe it's economically depressed.
And the good neighborhood is nice and safe, you know, and it's beautiful to look at, and it may be more accessible to certain places, but yeah, that's true.
Where's the systemic racism?
Where's the example of that?
I don't quite see it.
As with many things Joe Biden says, I don't quite see it.
