Ep. 1413 - These Naughty Taylor Swift Images Show The Real Problem
Taylor Lorenz whines about the collapse of MSM, RNC committeeman proposes declaring Trump presumptive nominee, and Taylor Swift gets bombarded with naughty AI images.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
Ep.1413
- - -
DailyWire+:
Watch the BRAND NEW series The Divided States of Biden on DW+ : https://bit.ly/4999W1e
Get 20% off your Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/433ytRY
Get your Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Tax Network USA - Seize control of your financial future! Call 1(800)245-6000 or visit http://www.TNUSA.com/Knowles
PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month at https://www.puretalkusa.com/landing/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
But rather than rattle off some of the statistics myself, I will allow a liberal Washington Post columnist to do it.
The entire journalism industry is basically in a freefall.
Today, the Los Angeles Times laid off 115 employees.
They wiped out their entire D.C.
bureau in an election year.
They laid off pretty much all of their sports teams.
They killed their entire tech and business section.
They laid off raking news writers, social media editors.
The list goes on.
But what's really dark is this is just the latest in months and months and months of layoffs in the media industry.
In fact, tens of thousands of journalists have been laid off in the past year.
Major media companies like BuzzFeed News have completely shuttered their news operations.
Time Magazine also just laid off a ton of people and, oh, Sports Illustrated basically shut down last week.
Pretty much the entire digital media ecosystem that myself and a lot of other millennial journalists came up in has been completely hollowed out.
And it's not just digital media sites.
Local news has been obliterated.
The newspaper industry is cratering.
Cratering.
For a reaction, we turn now to me when I first heard this news.
That was me.
It's the truth.
It's actual.
Everything is satisfactual.
I'm Michael Knowles.
That was me.
It's the truth.
It's actual.
Everything is satisfactual.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Taylor Swift is preparing to sue after a bunch of creeps made AI porn of her at football games.
We will get to that in just a second.
First, though, The establishment media are collapsing precisely as we near the brink of civil war.
I don't throw that term around lightly.
We hear a lot in recent years about how we're about to have civil war, we're gonna have a national divorce, we're gonna have this, we're gonna have that.
We started to actually approach The brink of some kind of constitutional crisis or even potential civil conflict when the Libs started to prosecute Trump, the former president, the leader of the opposition party, now presumptive Republican nominee.
Now we've got a situation in which the federal government is allowing an invasion of our country, specifically in Texas, but all along our southern border.
6.2 million illegal aliens have poured into the country during the Biden administration.
That's three years.
That has increased every year.
One point something million the first year, two point something million the next year, now over three point something million.
So the problem is getting much, much worse.
Biden is actively encouraging this invasion of our country, which could permanently change the voting demographics of the country, and that's why the Democrats are doing it, because statistically and historically speaking, that will give them a permanent electoral majority, no matter what wishful thinking the Republicans want to present about no matter what wishful thinking the Republicans want to present about So Texas comes in and says, "Hey, forget about your political scheming here, you Democrats, and you think you're gonna have
We just need to protect our country from the cartels, from the drugs that are killing our people, from the prostitution, from the crime, from the invasion of our country.
We have a right, as a state in the United States, to protect our border.
So they build two and a half miles of razor wire fence.
This is nothing.
You're talking about a border well over a thousand miles long, and they build a tiny little bit just at some of the worst places for the crossing.
And what happens?
Joe Biden sends his thugs in to pull out the razor wire.
I feel bad calling them thugs because these are border agents who probably signed up to do a good thing, to help their country, to serve.
But the political leaders in Washington, D.C.
are weaponizing them and using them as tools, not to stop the invasion of our country, but to encourage it.
So they start cutting down the border.
They say, no, no, no, hold on, guys, we need more invasion.
So then Texas sues the Biden administration, goes up to the Supreme Court, and Amy Barrett, a supposedly conservative justice, sides with the liberal justices in a 5-4 decision and says, no, the Biden administration has every right to tear down the modest amount of fencing that Texas put up to protect its border.
So, Governor Greg Abbott down in Texas, what does he do?
He says, okay, Supreme Court can go pound sand.
Same thing goes for Joe Biden.
We have not only a moral right, not only a natural right to protect our state, we actually have a constitutional right to do it.
It's laid out right there in the Constitution that in the case of an invasion in particular, we have the right to secure our borders.
To say nothing of the fact that the states created the federal government.
Now, this is not even a matter of states' rights versus federal rights.
It goes right back, as Governor Abbott has pointed out, to the supremacy clause of our Constitution.
So, the Constitution is the highest law of the land.
It overrides state statutes, it overrides federal statutes, it overrides even federal statutes and policies that pertain to the Biden administration's immigration policy, and the Constitution itself Gives Texas the right to build this border fence, as Governor Abbott has said.
So he made, I believe, a persuasive argument.
And the reason I think it's persuasive, in part, is that half the states at this point roughly agree with him.
My own state here of Tennessee, Governor DeSantis, down in Florida, he signed on and supported what Governor Abbott is doing.
Georgia, Virginia, bunch of other states now.
And then beyond the states, you've got the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump.
He just came out and supported Texas.
He came out and said, quote, We encourage all willing states to deploy their guards to Texas to prevent the entry of illegals and to remove them back across the border.
So he's saying not only do we support Texas's right to build this fence, not only do we encourage all the other states to support them too, other states you should send your guard troops down there to actually remove these illegal aliens.
He goes on, all Americans should support the common sense measures by Texas authorities to protect the safety, security, and sovereignty of Texas and of the American people.
When I'm president on day one, instead of fighting Texas, I will work hand in hand with Governor Abbott and other border states to stop the invasion, seal the border, and rapidly begin the largest domestic deportation operation in history.
Those Biden has let in should not get comfortable because they will be going home.
I hope that's the case.
I mean, we'll see if it happens.
I'm always somewhat skeptical of these grand plans to stop liberal schemes that have gone on for decades and decades.
In any case, though, really, really good stuff.
The irony of all this, as was pointed out by Logo Daedalus, a very interesting ex-account, the ironic part of all this Is that Civil War II might start over Texas refusing to allow the unlimited importation of slaves into the United States.
It's amazing.
You're seeing a breakdown of the country into this coalition of states, many of whom are in the South, though there are some others, and those are the conservative states who want to stop the invasion.
And then you've got the liberal states, largely in the North, though geographically it's a little bit all over the place.
But in this case, it's the southern states that don't want slavery, and it's the northern states that do want slavery.
And Logo Daedalus makes this point, I think, quite well.
We don't use that word slavery anymore.
We use the term mass migration.
But mass illegal migration is actually just human trafficking.
I don't mean that to be polemical.
I mean, that's just how it works.
These people go in, they pay the cartels, and they're smuggled and trafficked across the border.
And when it comes to women, most of the time they're raped or sexually assaulted along the way.
Once they get into America, the cartels don't just say, okay, well, nice to meet you, have a good life.
They're often in debt to the cartels, and they'll pay off that debt with service, like running drugs, or through prostitution, or other kinds of organized crime, or they'll be on the hook to them as debtors for the foreseeable future.
Maybe forever.
So, it's human trafficking.
But even that phrase, human trafficking, doesn't get to the heart of what we're really talking about.
Human trafficking is just another term for slavery.
That's what it's about.
Is it exactly identical to chattel slavery from 1858 in America?
No.
But slavery represents a relatively broad array of coercive labor relationships.
And that's what this is.
That's what it is.
And when you get the liberals talking about this candidly, I'm not even in a smoke-filled back room.
I'm talking about candidly on television.
They've said this before.
They'll say, well, what do you think?
You want Americans to pick those grapes for extremely low wages?
What, you think Americans are going to go clean toilets for pittance, tiny little wages?
I don't think so.
That's why we need to import a bunch of peasants from the third world to act as our slaves so that they can do jobs and we can exploit them for labor.
Yo, cool it, man.
Excuse me?
You're not supposed to say that quiet part out loud.
I'm glad they are though.
Because that's what this is about.
The reason the Chamber of Commerce went along with mass migration is for that reason in particular.
You can exploit third world peasants for extremely cheap labor, and it drives down labor costs for everybody.
This is the reason that the hardcore socialists in American politics, guys like Bernie Sanders, traditionally opposed mass migration.
Because Bernie views himself as a working class hero, and if you're a working class hero, then you want wages to remain high, and mass migration directly cuts against that.
That's one of the ways that liberals want to exploit these poor people from the third world.
But the other way they want to do it is just through their votes.
They recognize that, statistically speaking, illegal aliens and their kids and their grandkids and their great-grandkids are statistically much more likely to identify as Democrats, and so they're going to bring them in for that purpose.
And just because it will destable the country and chaos breeds opportunity, especially for political radicals.
So that's what it's about.
It is extremely ironic.
The best part of what Abbott has done here, though, beyond the justice of it all, is it puts Biden in a horrible spot.
We've come up to the deadline.
Texas is supposed to comply and let the federal agents in.
You got this huge border.
And yet, for some reason, the federal agents really, really need access right now to this one tiny little sliver of it.
Why?
So that they can open it up and allow the mass invasion to continue unabated.
Abbott says no.
So Biden has two choices.
He can either back down and look super weak, or he can send in federal troops to arrest the Texas National Guard.
And to open up the border and to roll out the red carpet for a mass migration of criminals who are poisoning our country through drugs and who are bringing in a ton of crime and who are rapists and murderers and some, I assume, are good people, to quote a great man.
Neither choice is particularly good for Biden.
I'm not sure he even knows that this is going on right now, which is even more damning, that the supposed geniuses running our country in Washington, D.C., the smart set of technocrats, think that this is a smart move.
Either way, They lose.
We'll just see if they lose in a way that is merely unpopular for them but helps to destroy our country even further, or if they lose in a way that is somewhat embarrassing but gives a big win for states' rights, citizens' rights, and sovereignty.
Now, Speaking of financial issues, you gotta go check out Tax Network USA.
Right now, go to tnusa.com slash knolls.
Are you struggling with back taxes or unfiled returns this year?
The IRS is escalating collections by adding 20,000 new agents.
In these challenging times, your best defense is to use Tax Network USA.
Along with hiring thousands of new agents and field officers, the IRS has kicked off 2024 by sending over 5 million payout letters to those who have unfiled tax returns or balances owed.
Tax Network USA, a trusted tax relief firm, has saved over $1 billion in back taxes for their clients, and they can help you secure the best deal possible.
Whether you owe $10,000 or $10 million, Whether it's business or personal taxes, whether you have the means to pay or you're on a fixed income, Tax Network can help resolve your tax burdens once and for all.
Seize control of your financial future now and don't let tax issues overpower you.
Contact Tax Network USA for immediate relief and expert guidance.
Call 1-800-245-6000 or visit TNUSA.com slash Knowles.
Turn to Tax Network USA and find your path to financial peace of mind.
That is TNUSA.com slash Knowles.
Speaking of unpopular Democrats, Mitt Romney is very, very upset that President Trump has sided with Texas and has stated that all the states should back Texas here and they should fight Joe Biden.
According to Senator Romney, Trump has gone further than mere social media posts.
He has actually called up Republican senators and told them not to work with the Biden administration here, to stand firm, don't cave, don't give an inch on the illegal immigration issue.
Mitt Romney could not be more upset.
Former President Trump has indicated to senators that he does not want us to solve the problem at the border.
He wants to lay the blame for the border at Biden.
And the idea that That someone running for president would say, please hurt the country so I can blame my opponent and help my politics is a shocking development.
Do you think this is what he wants?
The issue?
Donald Trump?
This is what he's doing?
I think the border is a very important issue for Donald Trump.
And the fact that he would communicate to Republican Senators and Congress people that he doesn't want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Biden for it is really appalling.
The only thing that's appalling is Mitt Romney's either deception or ignorance of the border issue.
I can't tell which.
I want to be charitable and just assume it's ignorance, but Mitt Romney's a smart guy, so it's difficult for me to believe that.
The entire premise of Mitt Romney's comments are ridiculous here.
The Senate has nothing to do with this border issue in Texas.
There is no new deal that has to be reached.
There's no grand compromise and agreement that is a delicate negotiation between the Republicans in the Senate and the Biden administration.
The law is already very, very clear.
Illegal immigration is already illegal.
The federal government already has a right and a responsibility to secure the border.
Texas already has a right and, as far as I'm concerned, a responsibility to secure its border when the federal government refuses to because it wants to encourage a mass invasion of foreigners.
There's no new law to pass.
There's no new compromise to reach.
It's already been done.
Sometimes there are compromises where the Republicans have to negotiate with the Democrats, but this isn't one of them.
The law is on the books.
The issue is that the Biden administration refuses to enforce the law because they don't like the law.
The Biden administration is the one acting lawlessly.
And it would seem to me that the only people here who don't want to actually solve the problem are Republican squish senators like Mitt Romney, who are trying to cave to Joe Biden for no reason whatsoever.
We are legally in the right on this topic.
We are politically on the winning side of this topic.
Among not only Republicans, but among independents and a lot of Democrats too.
We are morally in the right on this topic?
What compromise?
The only reason you would compromise when you're right on every single level and politically the winner is to lose a little bit, which I guess is Mitt Romney's inclination.
This is why James Carville just two days ago came out and he said, we got to stop normalizing Trump.
This Trump, we can't normalize him.
He's not a normal Republican like Mitt Romney and John McCain.
By normal, I guess he means Someone who loses.
Someone who presents the simulacrum of opposition to the liberal establishment, but then at the crucial moment loses.
That is what they mean.
Well, Trump doesn't want to do it.
Greg Abbott doesn't want to do it.
Ron DeSantis doesn't want to do it.
Glenn Youngkin doesn't want to do it.
Bobby Kennedy Jr.
is on Texas's side here.
The Democrat, whose last name is Kennedy, who actually is a liberal, who's running as an independent candidate for president, he's on Texas's side.
Virtually every reasonable person in the country, and even most powerful people in institutions, are on the stop the invasion side here.
No reason to give an inch.
Now, speaking of Congress and presidential nominees, Cocaine Mitch McConnell, Has just held, reportedly, a closed-door session during which we got two very juicy little bits of information.
The first one, he says, is we are in a quandary because Trump's campaign is apparently going to be largely focused on immigration.
McConnell says the politics here have changed.
We can't have infighting on this thing.
We don't want to undermine the campaign platform here of Trump.
So, well boy, we're in a real tough spot because this immigration issue is going to be really touchy and there are squish Republicans like Mitt Romney who don't want to actually fix it.
That's the first juicy bit of information.
Oh boy, we're in a quandary on immigration here.
We got to hold the line a little bit further.
But number two, apparently in this conversation, cocaine Mitch McConnell, Republican leader in the Senate, referred to Trump as the nominee.
He says Trump is the nominee of our party, for all intents and purposes.
And so, you might love Trump.
You know I really like Trump.
I've never made any bones about the fact that I really like the guy.
You might hate Trump.
As Mitch McConnell certainly does.
And as a lot of Republicans do, especially Republican politicians.
But it's just a fact that he's the nominee.
I said this from the beginning of the primary.
I really, really like Trump.
I really, really like Ron DeSantis.
I'm really impressed by him.
I really, obviously I've been friends with Vivek for quite some time.
I really, I like Nikki Haley personally.
I like a lot of these guys, okay?
Trump's going to be the nominee, so that's that.
You know, politics is the art of the real.
The art of the possible.
It's the art of the second best, as Otto von Bismarck claimed.
I'm not saying that Donald Trump is the second best choice here.
I'm just saying that politics is about reality.
And Trump was always going to be the nominee because we were in this bizarre situation that we haven't seen in over 100 years.
So if Mitch McConnell, of all people, can get on board with, okay, it's going to be Trump, then the rest of the GOP probably ought to do that as well.
Now, what does that mean in practice?
There is a Republican National Committeeman Who is proposing right now declaring Trump the presumptive nominee, passing a formal resolution saying we, the Republican National Committee, are going to act as though Trump is the nominee and Nikki Haley can keep running her campaign, but we are going to just move on and turn to the general election.
While I agree with this RNC committeeman's analysis, I don't think this is a good idea.
You don't want to make us look like the Democrats here.
The Democrats have gone to federal court to defend their right to rig their own election, in the case of this one particular suit, to rig it against Bernie Sanders.
And the courts have said, yeah, the parties have the right to pick their nominees.
We think of it now as a popular election where the people have the right to select the nominees of the parties.
That's not true.
The parties have the right to select the nominees, but the parties give the people a large say in it, if you're a member of the party.
I would let it play out.
We've only had two states so far, the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire.
Trump has won decisively in both places.
Now the number two guy from Iowa is out of the race.
So it's Trump, the far and away winner of Iowa, versus the number three candidate.
And then the race was a little bit tighter when it just got down to two in New Hampshire.
But still, Trump won pretty decisively by, what, six or seven points.
And that was Nikki Haley's best shot.
Next up is Nevada.
She's not even on the ballot there.
She's not going to get any delegates.
Then after that is South Carolina.
Trump's leading her by 30, 40 points there.
And then you get to Michigan.
Trump is leading by a landslide.
And then that's, you haven't even gotten to Super Tuesday yet.
I would just let it play out.
I understand the desire to say, all right, let's move on.
Nothing's going to change here, barring some lightning bolts.
So let's go fight Joe Biden.
But I just think the primary actually helps Trump.
And it helps people who have legitimate problems with Trump.
And people who have illegitimate problems with Trump get through the grieving process and come to grips with reality, which is that this guy, love him or hate him, is the nominee.
And he did a good job when he was elected in 2016, and he exceeded everyone's expectations.
And he's going to be the nominee again.
And he's certainly the best president of my lifetime.
We've had a few Republican presidents in my lifetime.
He's by far the best one.
So we're going to come to grips with that as we do it.
It's kind of like the lawsuits, or rather the prosecutions.
The prosecutions, I think, seem like they hurt Trump, but they actually help him because they make his case before the American people.
And I kind of feel that way about the primary.
Let the voters see a choice between President Trump and Nikki Haley, who has really embraced the more centrist, moderate establishment lane, and let them have the choice and let them vote as they will.
Got to talk about these things and debate and when you want to talk you got to check out Pure Talk.
Right now go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
My friends over at Pure Talk are beating today's inflation and making it easier than ever to connect with the people in your life.
Pure Talk gives you phenomenal coverage on America's most dependable 5G network.
It is the same coverage that you know and love, but for half the price of the other guys.
With unlimited plans starting at just $20 a month, the average family saves almost $1,000 a year.
As a veteran-owned company, last year alone, they raised $10 million toward veterans' debt.
What's more, Pure Talk's customer service team is located right here in the United States and can help you make the switch in as little as 10 minutes, I'd like.
I love Pure Talk, I have my Pure Talk phone, and now I get to take my Pure Talk phone overseas, actually, because they've just added an international component to it, so you're already getting the best network in the United States at half the cost, and you get to take it overseas, too.
So I challenge you to stand with a company that champions your beliefs today.
Go to puretalk.com slash KnowlesCANadaWLAS to make the switch.
Right now, our viewers will save an additional 50% off your first month.
puretalk.com slash KnowlesCANadaWLAS today.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Heant7972 who says, 6.2 million illegal aliens per the Congressional Budget Office means 10 to 12 million illegals in real life.
Maybe?
I'm not so sure about that, actually.
I... I...
I tend to respect the CBO estimates.
I'm not saying they can never be low.
I just... I would be surprised if the numbers were much higher over three years.
Don't forget, we're talking about over three years.
6.2 million in three years is insane.
Because that's just illegal immigrants.
We then take another million illegal immigrants, legal immigrants every single year.
So that means 9.2 million people, minimum, have moved into the United States over the past three years.
We're a country of only 330, 320 million people.
That's crazy.
No government, no polity can possibly sustain that amount of migration.
That just leads to social chaos.
In the best of circumstances, when there's a lot of pressure to assimilate, there's no pressure to assimilate now.
In fact, there's a discouragement from our pop authorities to assimilate.
The movement of people into the United States from 1965 until 2015, that's 60 million people.
That is the largest movement of human beings in recorded history.
All because of the Democrats' migration bill in the 1960s.
Further exacerbated by the Democrats refusing to enforce the border.
And now, you're 60 million people.
Now you've got another more than tenth of that.
Just in three years.
Illegally.
At least.
We don't need to inflate the numbers.
The numbers as they are being reported are shocking.
Enough.
Now I want to turn to a much more politically important question.
Forget about the border and whether our country is going to exist.
People are much more concerned with Taylor Swift.
She's the most popular woman on the planet.
She might well be the most famous woman on the planet at this point, and creeps are making weird AI porn of her.
I'm not going to show the pictures.
I haven't seen the pictures.
I've seen like tiny little corners blurred out of the pictures and I'm not even going to show those.
Very, very creepy, and reportedly some of the pictures involve Taylor Swift in degrading sexual acts at football games, because she's dating that football player, and all sorts of other things.
But really, really vile, degrading stuff.
And Taylor is threatening legal action here, and I hope taking legal action.
This is a form of sexual violence.
I know I'm going to sound like a huge feminist, and a swifty I guess, but it's a deeply conservative perspective that this is not just some funny thing, this is not just harmless, this is not just, oh well, some pranksters on the internet.
This is a form of sexual violence.
And the reason it's a form of sexual violence is because sex is about more than the body.
I guess in recent years, conservatives have adopted a relatively liberal view of sex, which is, oh, it just doesn't matter, it's whatever, you know, hook-up culture's fine, it's just a couple of people bumping uglies, you know, no big deal, we can stay friends, move along, move along.
No, sex is about much more than the body, sex is also about the soul.
Because people are about more than their bodies, people are about their souls, and you can't separate the two.
You can't really be a friend with benefits.
You can't really have a casual hookup, because people are more than their bodies.
And your soul is always going to be part of it.
And you can't do things with your body without that affecting your soul.
And vice versa.
We're a unified being.
If sex were no big deal, then sexual assault, rape, would not be any worse than just punching someone in the face.
But it is.
We all know that it is.
I hope Taylor Swift pursues legal action.
I don't know exactly how she'll do it.
I guess she could sue over unlicensed use of her image by the AI companies.
You couldn't really sue the randos on the internet, but you probably couldn't even track them down.
But you could maybe sue the AI companies for Unlicensed use of her likeness in their learning models.
And if you sued the AI companies, I guess there would be a commercial aspect to it that would permit her to bring a lawsuit.
But probably what's going to need to happen, I mean, look, if that's the way in, great, but probably what's going to need to happen is you're just going to have to pass new laws to deal with a new technology that we've never seen before.
For the conservatives to say, oh, it's no big deal, or it's kind of funny, or I hate that Taylor Swift shows up at football games, so, you know, she gets what's coming to her.
Imagine it's your daughter.
Imagine it's your wife.
Statistically, it's going to be your daughter someday.
As I have been saying from the very beginning of the development of these AI programs, I said, the issue here is not going to be, the big issue is not going to be that someone makes fake porn of Taylor Swift.
The issue is that someone's going to make fake porn of that girl in your ninth grade math class.
And that's going to be way more heinous, it's going to be manifestly far more criminal, and it's going to be ubiquitous.
Going to be ubiquitous.
For the people who have the flippin' attitude about the Taylor AI porn.
Oh, whatever, just kids having fun.
Yeah, it's gross, but it's kind of like drawing a doodle.
It's not like drawing a doodle.
It's like a photorealistic image or video.
Certainly, if it's not a video already, it soon will be.
But would you have that flippin' attitude if some creep in your daughter's ninth grade math class were making that stuff about her?
Because that will happen if it is not happening already.
So can we all agree this is not protected speech?
Can we all agree that this is not just a you-do-you, laissez-faire, you know, come on, man, live and let live?
It's not really hurting anybody.
It is hurting people, because people are more than their bodies.
And even if it weren't, it's an offense against art, nature, and God.
It's just intrinsically wrong, and we should ban it and seriously prosecute people.
I'm with the Swifties.
I'm with Taylor.
You go, girl.
Take them to court.
Drag them, slay queen.
All right, that's enough.
Speaking of violence and women, really, really awful story out from Yahoo News.
This is a woman from Southern Pennsylvania who's facing multiple counts of aggravated animal cruelty for torturing and killing animals and filming herself doing it and uploading the videos to her YouTube channel.
Pretty psycho stuff.
Her name is Anagar Mansi.
She's 28 years old.
Authorities have accused her of producing and distributing at least four videos involving the killing of frogs, a rabbit, a pigeon, and a chicken.
She was arrested on Friday and charged with four counts of aggravated cruelty to animals.
Really awful story, huh?
How can we punish a woman for this when we permit abortion?
I agree it's wrong.
I don't believe in animal rights or anything like that, but I agree this is very wrong.
This should be criminal.
We should prosecute her for it.
You should not be allowed to torture animals.
You should not be allowed to just kill animals willy-nilly outside of a proper use of animals like food or nice leather jackets or something, but certainly not to create this kind of creepy psycho content.
But how can we really prosecute her for this?
If instead of torturing and killing puppies, she had tortured and killed a baby in her She would not be prosecuted.
She would be hailed as a hero of women's rights and liberation.
So are we saying puppies matter more than babies?
Puppies matter, animals matter more than human beings?
That is what we're saying.
But it's completely incoherent.
Animals can't reason about these things.
Animals can't pass laws and stand trial and have abstract thoughts about morality.
Human beings can.
We're saying human beings, innocent little babies, are lower than puppies?
Yeah, I guess that's what we are saying.
Doesn't make any sense.
As long as our country tolerates abortion, I just don't see how anyone with two functioning brain cells can, with a straight face, call for laws against the torture and killing of animals.
Doesn't make any sense.
And the torture part's important, too, there, because surgical abortions involve torturing these kids.
Babies can feel pain certainly by 22 weeks, 24 weeks.
Liberals once tried to argue it was 26 weeks, but they keep moving those weeks backwards.
Might be 20 weeks, might be before 20 weeks.
And it's extremely painful, it's torture, and then it ends up with killing them.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
There are some people Tangentially related to the story who argued that this woman's videos are free speech I remember there was a case about 15 years ago the Supreme Court forget the name of it the court ruled eight to one that Pornography involving I think was torturing little kittens was protected Protected speech only Sam Alito said it's obviously not we need to recognize that this is in no way covered by the First Amendment a lot of confusion
On every aspect of this case.
The video part, and just the heart of it.
Puppies matter more than babies.
Really weird place we're in.
You know, America, you may have heard, is currently experiencing an unprecedented invasion with millions of illegal immigrants flooding the border under Joe Biden.
As Texas fights the surge, Arizona's governor remains eerily silent.
Ben Shapiro traveled to America's southern border to uncover the truth and the depth of the crisis.
What he discovered is shocking and criminal.
At The Daily Wire, it's our job to share that truth that others are unwilling to reveal.
Take a look at Invasion on the Southern Border.
America is currently experiencing an invasion.
A lot of people coming in from Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria.
Is there a fair bit of gang affiliation among them?
Always.
These people are just crossing the border illegally, waving their hands in the air at our cameras, saying, hey, here I am, come get me.
We're no longer the Border Patrol.
We're the Welcome Patrol.
The number one site in America for fentanyl trafficking across the border.
And if Joe Biden remains in office, it's only going to get worse.
I'm Ben Shapiro, and this is the divided states of Biden.
Invasion on the southern border.
Watch now on Daily Wire Plus.
Our southern border is wide open.
The blame rests squarely with Joe Biden.
Join Ben on the ground as he sheds light on one of the most destructive presidencies in American history.
Watch Invasion on the Southern Border streaming now on Daily Wire Plus.
Finally, finally, we have arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag.
Our mailbag is sponsored by PeerTalk go to peertalk.com slash Knowles Canada WLAS to save an additional 50, 5-0% off your first month.
Take it away.
Hey Michael, it's Camille.
I have a bit of a moral quandary I would love for you to weigh in on.
So, I was on Instagram recently and came across an ad looking for egg donors, and according to all the prerequisites, I fit the bill to get $100,000 per egg donor cycle.
I'm over 5'8", I'm under 30, I'm educated, and I am athletic in build and not obese.
Some might say I have primo eggs apparently.
Is this totally immoral?
I would love to have $100,000 in cash but also the thought of having a bunch of little Camils running around without me being a part of their lives seems a bit odd.
Would love to hear your advice and thank you as always.
Good question.
Let me, before describing all the different moral aspects of this and getting into all the little nuances, let me just, I'm gonna bring my mic a little bit closer here so you get my, yes, it's extremely immoral!
What's the matter with you?
Don't do that.
Do not, under any circumstances, do that, you crazy woman.
Ah, okay.
Sorry, I don't mean to be too harsh here, but I felt clarity is charity.
Your moral intuition that it would be a little odd to have your children running around out there and you totally unaccountable to them.
You just made them intentionally so that you could get some money and buy some nice doodads and go to fancy brunches.
Yes, that is wrong.
Deeply, deeply wrong.
Very different situation from, say, adoption.
Adoption is a case where a woman finds herself pregnant, and rather than murder the baby, she feels that she is not able to raise the child on her own, and so she gives the child to a loving couple.
Perhaps she can have some say in what couple is chosen.
With the egg donors, you are commoditizing human life.
You are selling your children, no different than any other depraved person in all of history who just sold his children out.
Except in those cases, sometimes people would sell their children into slavery or sell their children off in a depraved form of marriage because they needed to eat.
They didn't have enough money to feed their kids or bread or they were just totally impoverished.
It's a very, very, very, very In your case, you say you're fine, you're young, you're educated, and you just want some more money to just buy some nice stuff.
Like you could buy a nice bag or something, you know, or maybe jewelry.
Wouldn't that be cool?
So you're gonna sell your children for jewelry.
Don't do that.
Very, very, very wrong.
And I know it's tempting because you say, oh, it's a hundred grand.
And a hundred grand is a lot of money.
From one ankle, a hundred grand, that's a ton of money.
But no, it's not.
No, it's not.
First of all, a hundred grand now buys you what, like three trips to the grocery store?
But also, a hundred grand, yeah, it's a ton of money.
So what?
Is it worth a child?
Uh, no.
I don't think so.
Don't think so, Camille!
Don't do it.
Next one.
Hey Michael, so throughout the primary process, you and several others have constantly referred to the election process as candidates having to pick a lane and run with it.
But I personally feel like that is too narrow of a description of how elections actually work.
I don't see elections as being like a paved road where you can take this lane or that lane.
to make it to the end.
And it's not really about, oh, I'll play to the conservatives, I'll play to the moderates.
The only way that someone can win is they've got to be able to build a coalition from all the various groups in the party.
And so I was hoping you could explain what exactly you mean when you say it's about picking your lane, because that really does feel like way too narrow of A way of looking at it and I personally feel that Trump and Haley are the last two people standing in the primary because they are the only two that didn't see it as picking your lane.
Uh, no, I think they picked their lanes.
But maybe the misunderstanding here is your view that the lane represents something singular.
But it doesn't.
The lane represents the coalitions you're talking about.
Nikki Haley is not running in the Chamber of Commerce lane.
She's running in the centrist lane.
And the centrist lane includes the Chamber of Commerce, and the neoconservatives, and the Lalbertarians, and the Never Trumpers.
And so within that lane, there are all sorts of people who disagree with one another.
But they all agree that they really hate Trump.
And they can all agree on enough to come together and do work.
With the Trump lane, he's got the conservatives basically locked up.
Some conservatives also liked Ron DeSantis, and there's still some bad blood because it was a nasty primary.
But he's basically got them locked up.
The polling shows that people who liked Ron DeSantis would also vote for Donald Trump.
So, you know, he's basically got that locked up.
And he's got the traditionalists locked up.
And he's got the uber-libertarians, the Rand Paul types.
And he's got the populists.
The populists and the libertarians often don't agree with one another.
But they both agree that they don't like the Chamber of Commerce and the neocons and the Lalberts and the Nikki Haley side, so they're going to come together with Trump.
And so you see the coalitions kind of coming together.
The issue for Ron DeSantis, I think is a perfect example of this, is his natural lane to run in was the lane that Trump had.
But because Trump already had it, he couldn't really run in that lane.
And so he attracted people, at least initially, who were just totally anti-Trump.
The neocons and the Chamber of Commerce and the Lawberts and the Never-Trumpers.
But they also didn't really like him because he wasn't a good fit for their lane.
And one of the best pitches for him was he was the better version of Trump, but they don't want any version of Trump.
So he was left as a man without a home.
That's why he collapsed.
You know, he wanted to form the broad coalition of the whole party, and he was left with no one.
He was left with essentially no voters.
Whereas Trump and Haley were willing to settle for a clearer Hey there Smokey Mike, this is Base Cigar Enjoyer.
I'm a 22-year-old man, and I've been attempting to live a virtuous and honorable life.
I've desisted in my use of pornography.
I work out six days a week.
I have a career with my family's company, but I have the issue of having an absolute void when it comes to my love life.
I've had zero conversations above five minutes with any women my own age, barring perhaps family members.
And I was wondering if you had any advice for me in regards to dealing with women and interacting with them.
I might concede to having a bit of fear towards women as a result of having very limited interactions with them, and I was hoping I could get any advice.
Thank you.
Good question.
Many people in your place.
Relax, it's alright.
When I was in maybe 9th grade, my biology teacher, he said, You all are worried about the test that you're about to take.
You're all afraid that you're going to get a bad grade.
Don't worry about losing points on the test.
Look at the test as an opportunity to gain points.
Oh, it's a great opportunity.
Thank you, teacher.
Thank you, Mr. So-and-so.
I have the opportunity today to gain points.
That's how you got to look at love life.
Dating is fun.
Women are fun.
It's great.
Women are fabulous.
You don't want to date forever and become some cad, you know, degenerate, some 50-year-old, you know, lech, who just has no intention of getting married ever.
But, while you're dating with the intent to marry, You can have a good time.
It's nice.
Girls are nice, you know?
Kind of fun to talk to, fun to look at.
It's nice to go get drinks with them.
There's even more fun that one can have later on.
So, what should you do to actually meet the girls?
Go where they are, I often say.
Go where the kind of girls that you want to meet are.
Maybe that involves some digital stuff because people date online.
Now, I don't like it, but I never did it, but that's how people do it.
So maybe you look there.
Maybe you look around your church.
Maybe you look around this group or that group or whatever.
My broader advice, and maybe more practical, is you can only ever take the next step in front of you.
You can't take 20 steps in front of you.
You got to take the very next one.
And then the next one, and the next one, and the next one.
So if you're saying, I just have no exposure to women, then what I would do is not think about your perfect ideal woman in outer space.
I would say, okay, who do I know who knows a woman who I might like to date?
Who do I know?
Maybe that's gonna be my brother.
Maybe that's gonna be my co-worker.
You gotta be a little careful when it involves work, but maybe it's my co-worker.
Maybe it's my friend at church.
Maybe it's my... whatever, I don't know.
Maybe it's my mother, for goodness sakes.
Maybe it's my old classmate.
Maybe it's my this, that, or the other thing.
And I would just go to them and say, I need to date more.
I'm not dating enough.
Look, it's a crazy time in our culture.
It's not all my fault.
No one's getting married.
No one's having kids.
So, it's a social problem.
But anyway, I want to fix it.
So, who should I talk to?
Who should I meet?
And maybe you do the online stuff too.
But that's how you do it.
And be excited about it.
Don't... I'm shy.
I'm nervous.
I'm worried.
Other girls might... What are they going to do?
They're girls.
We're stronger than them, okay?
They're not going to beat you up.
It's okay.
If you get rejected, it feels bad, but move on.
It's okay.
It's no big deal.
It's fun.
Have fun.
Next one.
Hi Mike.
I work for an architecture firm in central New Hampshire.
There's about five people.
It's a small business and we're having to sign a new employee handbook because we're rebranding.
And there's a section in the handbook, they've asked us for our input by the way, there's a section in the handbook that is about gender identity, gender pronouns, and it says that you can pick your gender pronouns that correspond with your gender identity, whatever that means, and I would like to argue that this doesn't need to be there because we are a small business and therefore we're not subject to Title VII's restrictions that are now subject to Biden's executive order that says that transgender people are protected by civil rights.
So, these are pretty reasonable people.
They just don't like conflict.
They want to avoid conflict, and I think that's why it's there.
On the off chance that we were to hire a trans person or have a trans client, that I'd have to just say their pronoun.
Now, they probably know my position on this.
I'm a pretty outspoken conservative.
I just make it kind of funny, like, yeah, I like Trump.
And they're okay with it.
I would just like you to advise the best way to get this taken out of the handbook, being respectful and just calling out the absurdity.
So, thank you.
Good question.
Probably this is just boilerplate HR stuff that they pulled off a website somewhere.
From what you're telling me about your company, that's probably what it is.
If you feel comfortable with it and you have a good relationship with it, you might say, hey guys, this is not really a problem.
And also, it's kind of legally thorny to require employees to violate their conscience and say something that they know that isn't true.
You know, I'm perfectly happy to be accommodating to my employers and, you know, if some weirdo transvestite walks into the room, I could maybe perhaps try to avoid using pronouns or whatever.
I can't lie, you know, and so I don't think it's practically a problem at all.
And I would just, maybe we clean up that language here.
I think that might be helpful.
So you could do that if you feel really comfortable.
Or you could just accept the handbook for whatever they hand you the handbook.
You say, okay, you put it on your desk and then you cross that bridge when you get to it.
And defer the problem later if you're really confident that the problem is never going to come.
Either way though, you know, I think they're probably just the victims of a pop culture that's pushing this, and they're probably relatively unthinking about it, as are most people.
