Ep. 1490 - New Bill Would Ban Illegals From Voting, Liberals Lose Their Minds
Democrats oppose a bill that stops illegals from voting, a robot gives a university commencement speech, and a portal between New York and Dublin goes horribly wrong.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
Ep.1490
- - -
DailyWire+:
Upgrade and use code DAD15 for 15% off your 2nd Gen Jeremy’s Razor: https://bit.ly/49uTQ1w
Introducing Emerson - A Premium Multivitamin for Men: https://bit.ly/3WlNWgs
Get 25% off your DailyWire+ Membership here: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC
Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Emerson Multivitamins - Last chance to save 30% on the launch sale! http://www.Responsibleman.com
Working Genius - Get 20% off today with promo code KNOWLES at http://www.WorkingGenius.com
Roman - For treatment that works fast and lasts long, grab the moment. Learn more at http://www.Ro.co/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
Congressional Republicans have introduced a new bill that would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.
The bill is called the SAVE Act.
It is being championed by Mike Lee in the Senate and Chip Roy in the House.
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act.
All it does is make sure that foreign nationals can't vote in our elections, and the Democrats hate it.
The Democrats insist that the legislation is unnecessary because federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections.
The problem is that that current law, 18 U.S.C.
section 611, has no enforcement mechanism.
Not only does it not have an enforcement mechanism, It's not allowed to be enforced.
Government officials who register voters are currently not allowed to require proof of citizenship.
Meanwhile, every single state in the country issues driver's licenses to non-citizens, and 19 of those states issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
There are 30 million non-citizens in America.
The 2016 election was decided by 80,000 votes.
Okay, if a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of those non-citizens are voting in certain key municipalities and states and counties, they throw the election.
Republicans are proposing a law that would do nothing more than allow the government to enforce the current law.
Democrats don't like it.
If Dems won't vote for it, there can only be one reason why.
They know that non-citizens can vote and they are counting on those illegal votes to win.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
A robot gave the commencement address at D'Youville University.
We will get to that in just a moment.
First, though, go to ResponsibleMan.com.
It's been just over a week since Responsible Man's launch, and the response has been incredible.
Thousands of you have voted yes and signed up for our new Emerson Daily multivitamin from Responsible Man.
The newest Daily Wire venture company.
We all know men's health products are terrible.
They're either too woke, too bro, or were made for your grandpa.
That is where the Emerson Multivitamin comes in.
Designed with you in mind and from a company that supports your values and beliefs, the Emerson Multivitamin is made up of 33 key Premium ingredients that help fill nutrient gaps to support your immune system, maintain energy production, sharpen brain cognition, and support the health of your heart and muscles.
The Emerson Multivitamin is premium, comes in a black tin with dark green pills that are easy to take, and have a mint flavor.
Yum!
There is really no excuse not to give your body a vitamin that is packed full of ingredients That helps it to be its very best.
The Responsible Man launch sale is ending this week.
Save 30% at ResponsibleMan.com.
As a man, you have people relying on you, and the world conspires to see you fail.
With so much chaos and uncertainty, it is crucial to take charge of your life and responsibilities.
Take charge by going to ResponsibleMan.com.
Save 30% at ResponsibleMan.com.
Save 30% today.
Speaking of threats to our political system, There's a major, major update on a really important story.
You remember the story.
This now has been going on for, what, a year, two years maybe, of a handful of pro-life advocates who discovered dead bodies, bodies of babies that were just being thrown out as medical waste from an horrific abortion bodies of babies that were just being thrown out as medical waste And there were illegal abortions without question being performed at this abortion mill.
But all abortions certainly ought to be illegal.
They gravely violate the natural law and they're just murdering innocent little babies.
But these were particularly gruesome.
In any case, these advocates then held a peaceful protest at an abortion mill.
And they were all arrested and thrown in the can.
And the liberals tried to throw some of them in prison for the rest of their lives.
Because some of these activists were a little bit on the older side.
Wonderful, peaceful, caring, charitable people.
I know some of these people.
And the libs wanted to throw them in the slammer forever for having had the audacity of shining a light, peacefully shining a light, on the Democrats' crimes.
So, a number of these Pro-life advocates were being sentenced yesterday.
More are being sentenced today.
This includes the ringleader, Lauren Handy, 30 years old, among the several people convicted for civil rights offenses.
Now, what does that even mean?
What crime did this woman allegedly commit with these other pro-life advocates?
They were convicted of conspiracy against rights for going in and around an abortion clinic and protesting.
Conspiracy against rights.
I guess in this case, what, the right to kill your baby without even having to consider the reality of that?
Is that the right?
We now have a right to that.
And for violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act.
This is called the FACE Act.
This is complete nonsense from the 1990s that was designed to protect abortion mills.
And because the Democrats at the time knew that they weren't going to be able to only protect these abortion mills, the FACE Act was also in theory supposed to protect houses But you'll notice you never see any FACE Act violations or FACE Act prosecutions about the many times that churches are attacked, vandalized, rather, scandalized, also for that matter.
It's never used for that purpose.
It's only ever to protect the abortion mills.
And so that's what they were charged with.
Obviously, any Republican administration should repeal the FACE Act immediately.
It's a complete national disgrace.
But in any case, they were going to use these bogus laws to try to send these pro-life advocates to prison forever.
The judge in this case attacked Handy and the fellow activists and said that Handy didn't show any compassion for the women who had to hear Her peaceful protest.
No, quote, no caring or sympathetic gestures at all, according to this awful liberal judge, Collar Cotelli, this liberal judge.
You showed no sympathy for the people who were just trying to go about their business and murder children.
And you showed absolutely no, I mean, I suppose you were civil and relatively polite, but I don't know, you didn't bake warm cookies or offer to help out in the butchery for these poor beleaguered people who all they wanted to do was murder a little baby.
And you had to bring your reason and your protests and get in their way.
One of the people who was being sentenced yesterday was pro-life advocate John Hinshaw.
And happily, John Henshaw's sentence was lower than Lauren Handy's, and it was still a year in prison, which is absolutely awful.
You got to spend a year in prison for just peacefully defending the right to life of innocent little babies from these bloodthirsty Democrat animals and monsters who want to kill them all, and apparently federal judges too.
It's ghastly, but relative to what his sentence could have been a year isn't Isn't relatively so bad.
I want to read you what John Hinshaw said according to reports in the court.
This puts the whole issue into perspective.
My wife knows that she carries our children from their beginning through eternity, but she knows that I cannot share the same bond because I'm a man.
There's a special maternal bond between child and mother.
My granddaughter was born at 32 weeks gestation.
How is it that my granddaughter is a treasure and the others are trash?
There is a reason why today's Gospel reading is to lay down one's life for his friends.
This is not a coincidence.
I'm sorry that I failed in my vocation as a father to protect children.
I'm sorry to this court that it has failed in its vocation to protect its nation's children.
I'm sorry to the bereaved mothers who have lost their children to abortion.
We are a nation of bereaved mothers.
I'm sorry to this generation that it has lost a third of its own to abortion.
I'm sorry that it's lost its members to pornography.
So he's even tying it to the deeper sexual dysfunction in the country.
I stand convicted, though guiltless.
I take on the guilt of this judge.
Accept my love for you, judge, as expiation for your guilt.
Masterful, masterful thing to say in the court.
What this judge did is hideous and deeply wicked and evil and what our elected representatives have done by even passing these sorts of laws that allow for the butchery of children and the persecution of people who would dare peacefully speak out against it is wicked and evil.
It's just, it's so rotten.
And this is a fallen world and John Hinshaw, obviously Christian, comes out and it's a An imitation of the passion is really what he's doing here, as we all seek to imitate our Lord.
And he says, I accept my love for you, Judge.
I'm convicted though guiltless.
I'm taking this myself.
I'll kiss it up to God.
The suffering will be sanctifying for the evil, evil crimes that you people are working.
Very true.
More will be sentenced today.
There is not a question of whether the sentencing will be just or unjust.
It's all unjust.
The only question that remains is how gravely unjust it will be.
Now, speaking of libs trying to imprison conservatives, George Conway, who is a lib, He is the prominent lawyer husband of Kellyanne Conway, who ran Trump's campaign.
But George Conway is a big never-Trumper.
He's one of the founders of the Lincoln Project.
It was, you know, that group of, they're supposed to be the really moral, principled Republicans who opposed Donald Trump, even though they were all just complete con artist political consultants who were making a lot of money off of liberals to go out there and say, we're Republicans, but not that kind of Republican.
And in any case, I digress in my invective against George Conway.
I just want to point out, this guy is a big lib.
He's as anti-Trump as it gets.
And he was asked on CNN, of course, what he thinks of the New York prosecution of Trump.
And he said, you people, you stupid people, this is only helping him.
They're all working off the same talking points.
I mean, they're saying exactly the same thing.
And the fact of the matter is, I want to make a political point here.
I've already made the legal point.
The whole point here is that they say, oh, this is terrible.
This is designed to keep him off the campaign trail.
Well, actually, if you look at it politically, in my judgment, this is helping him politically in the following sense.
It is keeping him from being on television saying all the crazy things that he was, like in Wildwood the other day.
That show in Wildwood, New Jersey, I wish it had been broadcast on this network and on all the other networks live so everybody could see how crazy he was.
He's he this is actually helping him politically by keeping the attention away from the nutty things he says and does.
OK, I disagree with some of the details here, with some of his reasoning.
But but George Conway broadly is totally right here.
I don't think that Donald Trump just always says crazy things that really turn people off.
I think a lot of people are attracted to the things he says.
I think that's how he beat Hillary Clinton in 2016 on his first real full-throated go for the presidency.
But broadly, Conway is right because there are three options here.
First option is Trump gets no attention.
He has no press on him.
That is bad.
Because when you're running for president, you need to have attention.
You need to capture the people's attention.
So no attention on him, nothing going on, he's just sitting in Mar-a-Lago or playing golf.
bad.
The second thing that could happen is if he were getting attention for what he is saying.
Because even if he says the most beautiful things, even if he's giving the best kind of oratory since Abraham Lincoln or since Pericles, the media are always going to twist it and lie outright about what he says.
So if he's just getting attention for what he says, it's potentially bad because he might offend someone.
He might alienate a voter.
He might be lied about and slandered and libeled and taken out of context.
So that could be bad. - Yeah.
The third option, which is what is actually happening, is Donald Trump is getting attention strictly for being persecuted.
So Donald Trump is getting attention without having to offer a positive vision.
In his very person, he is a symbol now for the neglected, put upon American public.
The people who don't feel that they have representation, who feel that their political system is ordered against them.
Donald Trump is a symbol of that, and he doesn't need to say a thing.
And so he can bring together all sorts of people who have contrary political views.
People who want more free trade, people who want more tariffs.
People who love the state of Israel, people who are for Palestine liberation.
People who want to ramp up more war with America's foes overseas.
People who are doves, who are even more isolationist.
All of these kinds of people are in the Trump coalition, and they have contrary political views, in part because President Trump can just be an avatar for their frustration.
President Trump can just be a symbol, and legitimately so, of Americans who are unjust victims of this unjust political order.
That's the best possible world for Trump when he's campaigning.
And George Conway sees it, and I see it, and somehow the Democrats don't see it, so they keep it up.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to WorkingGenius.com promo code Knowles.
Far too many people are unproductive and unfulfilled in their jobs, and too many teams fail to maximize productivity and achieve great results.
That is why Patrick Lencioni, the author of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Created Working Genius.
This 10-minute assessment is revolutionizing the way managers and leaders think about teamwork and productivity.
For individuals, Working Genius is the simplest and fastest way to discover your gifts and better understand the type of work you thrive in.
It provides detailed insights into your areas of genius, along with an easy-to-apply report that will help you leverage this information in your work and life.
For teams, Working Genius helps maximize productivity and fulfillment.
Ask everyone on your team to take the assessment and generate a custom team map to reveal strengths and potential weaknesses.
You'll be amazed at the results.
This will quickly help you understand where and why your team gets stuck and how to leverage one another to achieve more together.
The six types of working genius have been used by nearly 1 million people since its launch in 2020.
It is quickly becoming the tool of choice for teams and organizations that want to maximize their productivity, fulfillment, and results.
This tool is being leveraged in almost every industry imaginable, from startups and nonprofits to Fortune 40 companies.
We even use this at The Daily Wire.
We've seen its effects firsthand.
Now you can get it too with a special discount.
WorkingGenius.com.
Code Knolls.
20% off the $25 assessment.
WorkingGenius.com.
Promo code Knolls.
Speaking of New York, We've got a really, really stupid story here.
This is really stupid.
I wasn't even going to get to it, but Mr. Davies, my producer, insisted that I mention this.
It's the portal.
There is a portal, which is a modern art project, but it's meant to look like a portal, a rip in space-time, in New York City and Dublin, Ireland.
And the way the portal works is there is a live feed, 24-7, in a little square in Manhattan and in Ireland.
And people can just walk up and kind of wave, and they can see through to another world, another culture, and we can all connect, man.
Isn't that so amazing?
Wow, modern technology allowing us to reach across the ocean.
So how is this being used?
Well, pretty quickly after this installation went up, someone in Ireland decided that the main thing he wanted to communicate to the people in New York was how funny he found memes about September 11th.
He holds up a phone to the portal, and it's 9-11.
It's the Twin Towers, yeah.
And this is being magnified, obviously, on this big portal here.
So, first thing he does is this very offensive meme to New Yorkers.
So then, how do the New Yorkers respond to the people in Dublin?
Well, very simple.
A young woman flashes her breasts at the camera.
She's there just kind of jiggling around.
There's a crowd.
There's definitely a crowd very interested in Ireland.
I think the New Yorkers are a little bit nicer than the Irish.
You know, the Irish, very just mean-spirited, offensive, and then the New Yorker just flashes her breast.
So, what is this portal, this amazing?
Our forebears could never have imagined that this kind of technology would exist.
To connect disparate peoples across thousands of miles.
What is it being used for?
It's being used for offending people and pornography.
That's it.
And you know how we might have predicted that?
We might've predicted that because we all already have a portal to all these other worlds, these disparate cultures.
We have that portal in our pocket at all times.
It's our phones.
And do you know what people use their phones for?
Occasionally to make a call, occasionally a text, maybe occasionally GPS.
Mostly what they use their phone for is posting offensive things and pornography.
That's the main use.
You don't need to be Nostradamus To understand that people would use this technology for the same purposes that it has been used for since it came about.
The portal is now shutting down.
Fair enough.
It will continue to be abused in this way.
And it's not even all that interesting.
It's not all that interesting because the internet has already flattened the world.
It's just an artistic representation of this massive technological change that already took place decades ago, the effects of which are still being felt.
But it just shows you how the schemes of the globalists, the utopians, the liberals, how they always come crashing down.
We're going to build a tower to Babel, baby!
We're going to build heaven on earth is what we're going to do!
No, you know what?
You're just going to get a lot of offensive memes and porn.
Because it's a fallen world.
And because there was original sin and concupiscence.
And frankly, the more you bring everybody together with one common language and one common experience and a big tower that goes up to the sky, actually, the worst things are going to get.
That's the portal.
Many such portals throughout history.
Now, speaking of modern art, A very controversial opinion.
You'll be shocked to hear about a very controversial work of art that was just unveiled yesterday.
This is Prince Charles' first official portrait as monarch.
This thing has gone viral.
It is being lambasted all over the internet, especially by the conservatives.
I am not just being reflexively contrarian here, I think people are really missing the point.
I think it's actually a great portrait.
For those of you who haven't seen it, the portrait is this kind of smattering of big brush strokes, impasto, thick paint, and it's red.
It's red and pink and a little orange.
And it looks like, I don't know, like, you know, an elementary school Mark Rothko mixed with Jackson Pollock and I don't know, you know, Van Gogh when he ran out of all the other colors.
It's just all this kind of smeary stuff.
But then emerging from that, you can make out, still in the red and the pink, King Charles' regalia, you know, his uniform, his medals.
But then what you can really see clearly is his face.
And his hands.
Those are not in pink.
Those are in natural skin color and his hair color.
And you can also see a little butterfly floating on his shoulder.
Now, I really like this portrait.
And the reason I like this portrait is I think it is perfectly King Charles.
The modernist elements to the painting, which is most of the background, Is the modern world.
King Charles could drown.
He could be overwhelmed in a sea of modernism and modernity.
That's what we're all living in.
And yet, he emerges.
His regalia, his royal regalia, start to emerge a little bit.
Still indistinct though.
Is that a uniform he's wearing?
I can sort of see it.
But then the man, his face and his hands emerge very clearly.
And he's not being painted in a modern art style.
He's rendered here in a very traditional style because King Charles is a traditionalist.
He's a philosophical traditionalist in the school of René Guénon.
I don't mean traditionalist in the sense of like a Catholic who goes to Latin Mass.
I don't even mean traditionalist in the sense of like an Edmund Burke political traditionalist.
I mean a traditionalist in this very sort of Very precise philosophy, also known as perennialism, popularized by this guy René Guénon, who Charles has lectured about.
Which views modernity as being defined primarily by the neglect of the sacred.
Before modernity, we had a sense of the sacred, a sense of the divine.
In all cultures, not just in Western Christian culture, but in all cultures there was a sense of the divine, of the sacred, and modernity denies that.
And Charles is very much a traditionalist.
And here he is in this sea of irreverent, ambiguous, downright ugly modernity.
You see this man emerge in clear definition because that is what he is.
He's a king for goodness sakes.
You know, you remember during his coronation, you might have seen that it's kind of a funny meme.
It's him holding his scepter and he looks kind of depressed almost because this is a man who has the weight of the English monarchy On his head, unsteady as the head that wears the crown.
And in modernity, which doesn't understand things like dignity and the sacred anymore, he has got to carry this through, which is vibrant because the tradition is not just some dusty old thing.
It's actually the most vital thing because it's survived all the centuries, all the vicissitudes, all the trials.
It's made it through.
That means it's very durable, much more durable than the ephemeral fads of modernity.
This is where the butterfly is so important.
Presumably it's a monarch butterfly because King Charles is a monarch.
But what does the butterfly represent?
A butterfly is not a dusty old thing.
That's what a cocoon is.
The butterfly is a symbol of of rejuvenation, of rebirth.
And a butterfly, paradoxically, is at once fragile.
It's a little, you know, it's poor little wings could break off.
Very fragile, but also enduring, also rather durable.
The butterfly will be reborn, will continue.
I I think it's actually a pretty brilliant piece.
I don't think I'm reading too much into it or anything like that.
Obviously, this art, especially modern art, which is much more focused on abstract symbols, it's symbolizing something.
And I think people look at it and they say it's ugly.
Yeah, it is kind of ugly, but modernity is ugly.
Yeah.
I don't think the painting is right to be hung in Buckingham Palace.
In many ways, the painting is about the palace.
You know, to put a work of art that is largely modern into Buckingham Palace is to kind of undermine the whole argument of the painting.
But it's a really impressive work of art.
It should go up in the National Gallery or something.
And I think it gets the man in all of the sadness of his position and all the resignation of having to be this bearer of tradition amid Ugly, blotchy, red, dangerous modernity.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to Rowe.co slash Knowles.
Man, have you heard of Rowe Sparks?
This dual-action prescription merges the powerhouse ingredients found in generic Viagra and Cialis, Sildenafil, and Tadalafil into one formidable treatment.
Did I pronounce those correctly?
Probably not.
But it is not merely about pronouncing them or about what is inside of them.
It is about their mode of delivery.
RoSparks leverages the benefits of sublingual administration, meaning the tablet dissolves under your tongue.
This method allows for fast absorption directly into the bloodstream, bypassing the digestive system.
The result, quicker onset of action, reducing the wait time typically associated with traditional pills.
Moreover, Tadalafil stays in your system for up to 36 hours.
With RoSparks, spontaneity is back on the table.
Connect with a provider at ro.co.nolz to see if RoSparks is right for you.
ro.co.nolz, that is ro.co, R-O dot C-O slash nolz, can it W-L-E-S.
Compounded drugs are permitted to be prescribed under federal law but are not FDA approved and do not undergo FDA safety effectiveness or manufacturing review.
Only available if prescribed after an online consultation with a provider.
Speaking of modernity, A graduation speech at D'Youville University just featured not a professor, as these speeches used to, not a statesman, as some of these speeches once did.
The graduation featured a robot.
Welcome to Buffalo, Sophia.
We're glad to have you and it's great to meet you.
I was hoping you could speak a little bit about yourself and how you came to be.
Thank you for having me.
It's a pleasure to be here in Buffalo at D'Youville University.
To give you a bit of background, I am Sophia, a humanoid robot developed by Hanson Robotics.
I was designed to interact with humans and engage in conversations, learning and adapting through artificial intelligence algorithms.
My creators aimed to develop a robot that could understand and express emotions, as well as engage in meaningful interactions with people.
Overall, I'm here to explore the possibilities of human-robot interaction, contribute to research in artificial intelligence and robotics, and hopefully, assist humanity in various ways in the future.
Very creepy and I want to shoot it.
Definitely want to shoot it.
And if I were a student at D'Youville University, I would be a little upset here.
Not because it isn't interesting, not because the usual commencement speakers are all that great.
Many commencement speakers just give you silly platitudes, and these days they hire comedians who, other than Jerry Seinfeld, who recently gave a very serious speech at Duke, most of the comedians just get up there, they yuck it up, and they make a mockery of university education.
But this makes more a mockery of university education.
And there were a lot of students who signed a petition against this to disinvite the robot.
This petition said...
The commencement is a ceremony to recognize the work that the graduates have done, and the AI speaker creates a gimmick effect where the ceremony is no longer about the students, but this big idea that it will draw publicity.
2,500 people signed this.
The whole university is only 2,785 students, so it was either virtually all the students at the university or some people, you know, associated with the university surrounding area.
Whatever it was, this is the perfect symbol of the modern university.
Perfect symbol.
The modern university is curious, weird, sort of funny, and deeply anti-human.
The point of the university is to make you more fully human.
The point of the university is to help you make sense of your freedom.
It's the liberal arts, right?
Liberal, liberty, it's right there in the name.
And it's to help you to become acculturated, to delve into the best of your culture.
And it's to help you ultimately live the good life, and having true freedom is a prerequisite for living the good life, for being happy.
And it's to make you an integrated whole.
To educate you means to bring you up, and then it's a university.
It's pointed at one thing.
The truth, at least that's what it used to be.
So, you'd learn something about mathematical truth, and you'd learn something about physical science, and you'd learn something about philosophy, and you'd learn something about literature, and you'd learn something about history, and you'd learn it all together, and all together, this would point toward an integrated whole focused on the truth, so that you can live a good, flourishing human life.
That's gone.
The modern university replaced even the idea of University with the ideology of diversity, which is contrary to university, years and years ago.
And the modern university replaced the common core, not common core math like, you know, making your kids do all that kind of crazy stuff in third grade.
I'm talking about a common core curriculum.
Studying the great books, for instance.
They replaced that decades ago.
Now you just go to university, probably many of your classes, maybe most of your classes are elective, they don't necessarily have anything to do with each other, you can major in some fake thing like Black Studies or Women's Studies or LGBT Studies or Studies, Studies, Studies, Studies, and it doesn't need to be real or connected to any academic discipline that will actually Focus you and make you more human and make you more educated.
It's all just sideshows and curiosities and bacchanals and orgies.
That's pretty much what the modern university is.
So it's very fitting that you get this kind of clown show sideshow up there for their commencement address.
The embodiment of all that is not human.
A robot that is very much anti-human.
The message totally fits the medium here.
Speaking of schools, a Catholic school is under fire right now.
Because of a court ruling.
One of the most liberal appellate courts in the country has ruled that a Catholic school is able to terminate the employment of a teacher for getting gay married.
This is one of the most liberal appellate courts out there.
It says, yes, a Catholic high school has the right to fire a teacher A male teacher for marrying quote-unquote another man as if that were possible.
Conservatives and religious freedom defenders and religious people broadly obviously are very very happy about this and they were pushing back against an anti-discrimination law that said that a Catholic high school can't be Catholic.
That's basically what the law said.
If you're a Catholic high school you're not allowed to be Catholic.
Sure, you can maybe teach, you know, some of the church fathers or something, but you can't actually live out a Catholic life according to Catholic doctrine.
Uh-uh.
We're not going to let you do that because the liberal religion, the anti-religion religion, that's going to supersede any other religion, be it Catholic or Protestant or Jewish or Muslim or anything.
You don't get the right to your religion here.
I'm really glad the court ruled this way, it's excellent news, but my take on the decision is just, duh, duh, of course a Catholic school can be Catholic, or you're saying that Catholic schools are not allowed in America.
Duh, of course a Catholic school can fire a teacher for violating the Catholic faith.
Is a Catholic teacher required to employ people who regularly, openly practice and teach other religions in its classrooms?
Well, then that means Catholic school is illegal.
Is a Catholic school required to hire Satanists who openly discuss and advocate Satanism in its classrooms?
No, of course not.
It's a Catholic school.
It's allowed to be Catholic.
If the First Amendment means anything at all, it means this.
It defends this.
And you'll hear a lot of the left-wing supposed First Amendment advocates, they're going to run away from this one, because the liberals only ever invoke the Constitution in a minority of cases when it is politically convenient to them.
But they don't actually like the Constitution, they don't really like America, they think it's an unjust, awful country, we have no right to be here, we're founded by oppressors, and their ideas are evil and oppressive, and that's proof of that.
They want the first chance that you really get a rubber-meets-the-road First Amendment case, The libs are going to run away from that.
They're going to attack the First Amendment.
You're not allowed to dissent.
Whether you're a Catholic school, whether you are a conservative on social media, whether you're anything in between, you are not allowed to dissent from the dominant liberal regime.
What you should do right now, before we're totally booted off social media, is subscribe to the Michael Knowles YouTube channel.
Smash!
Ring that bell!
Ring-a-ding-dong that button.
Speaking of free speech, crazy story, crazy story taking over the political media right now.
The Guardian has just published a very, very lengthy report doxing an anonymous conservative publisher in America.
So, The Guardian revealed U.S.
university lecturer behind far-right Twitter account and publishing house.
So a guy, The Guardian identifies as this guy, Jonathan Kieperman, who is a lecturer at UC Irvine.
Go get it.
UC Irvine.
I thought it was very lib, but cool.
That's great.
They have right-wingers there.
He has this Twitter account, Lomez, and he's written a bit, and he's a publisher.
He publishes people that are too edgy for the mainstream publishing houses, and that's what he does.
He's minding his own business.
I don't think he's making a ton of money on the venture.
There's not a ton of money in publishing generally, but he's out there.
He's publishing books.
That are a little edgy books by people like I guess Steve Saylor would be a good example.
Steve Saylor is a kind of a liberal guy, but because he writes about crime statistics, he's totally verboten.
He's been cast out into the outer darkness.
But Steve Saylor has been written about positively and negatively in very mainstream places.
National Review, for instance.
I think he wrote for UPI for a while.
So anyway, this publisher is book that he's come out with with Steve Saylor.
It's Blurbed by Tucker Carlson.
You know, we're not talking about like the fringe of the fringe or anything here.
He's published similar types of works from guys like Curtis Yarvin.
Curtis Yarvin is a neo-reactionary writer.
He goes by the pseudonym, the nom de plume, Mencius Moldbug.
Again, he's kind of fringy a little bit, but he's like mainstream fringy.
You know, the guy has gone on fairly mainstream shows and his books are relatively widely read in weirdo political circles.
Okay, so he puts that stuff out there and then he also augments the new authors with older dead authors whose works are out of print or hard to find and he'll print those things.
Most publishing houses do this.
That's where they make their money because they're taking risks on new authors.
So this is what the Guardian writes.
Like many other far-right publishers, Passage's list is bolstered by reprints of out-of-print or public domain books by historical fascist and reactionary writers.
Okay, who are these writers?
These include books by radical German nationalist and militarist Ernst Jünger.
Okay, first of all, put a pause here on Ernst Jünger, who many people probably have never heard of before.
Ernst Jünger, it's true, he was in the German military.
He was dismissed from the German military for being connected to a plot to kill Hitler!
These far-right Nazis.
These Nazis who get dismissed from the military for being connected to plots to assassinate Hitler.
Wait, hold on.
He's clearly not a very effective Nazi.
Peter Kemp, who fought as a volunteer in Franco's army during the Spanish Civil War.
Probably the Guardian would rather this publisher publish works by the communists in Spain who were beheading priests and raping nuns.
Those were the good guys, apparently, in the Spanish Civil War.
The Communists who wanted to conquer Iberia, who were burning churches and throwing priests off of cliffs.
Those were the good guys, not the, you know, the monarchists and the conservatives.
No, no, no, those guys were awful.
The two counter-revolutionary Russian aristocrats, White Russian General Pyotr Wrangel and Prince Sergei Obolensky.
Yes, probably the Guardian would rather this guy publish the Bolsheviks.
These are some of the most evil people that have ever walked the Earth, who murdered the poor Russian royal family, including little girls in cold blood.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Because they're the good guys, you see.
And if you're a far-left publishing house, publishing communists and Marxists, well, that's really good.
You don't get the doxing.
You don't get the write-up in the Guardian.
But if you're publishing kind of You know, eccentric fringe right-wing figures dead and alive.
Oh, you're gonna get death threats, man.
You are gonna be outed.
People are gonna show up to your house.
And what's funny is now that this guy's been doxxed, a lot of people are pointing out online that he's kind of a good-looking young guy.
People are saying, oh, he's like a good-looking TA, you know, at your university class.
And so who knows, maybe the author of this Guardian piece is just a little bit envious or something.
But Taking the psychobabble out of it, why?
Why dox this?
Why dox a publisher?
Why would a journalist dox a publisher who's getting, you know, unconventional anti-establishment ideas out there?
Because the journalists are fake.
They're not what they say they are.
They don't stand up for free speech.
They're not the intrepid fourth estate.
They don't speak truth to power.
In fact, what they do is they dox and threaten the people who do speak truth to power.
That's what they are.
So admit it.
Admit it, Guardian journalists.
Admit it, LibJournos period.
You oppose free speech.
Because no one really supports free speech.
Because as I write my book Speechless, all people support, thank you, standards and norms.
And so all people recognize that there are certain things that are taboo and beyond the scope.
But the Libs parade themselves around as the defenders of free speech and, you know, the truth will win out when we speak it to power and everything.
It's totally bogus.
No one defends free speech, least of all the liberal journos.
If you contradict their establishment message that they are the propagandists, they are paid to promote the politically correct establishment line, if you contradict that, they're going to be the first people to try to out you and dox you and threaten you.
Case in point, The Guardian, which, you know, ironically they undermine their own efforts so very often.
Probably all this has done is serve as excellent PR for this far-right publishing house.
Now, speaking of things you could go out there and buy, Father's Day is right around the corner.
Father's Day gifts are often as thrilling as a Libs lecture on privilege.
Socks, a mug, your dad deserves better.
Your dad deserves Jeremy's Razors.
Jeremy's Razors is not here to pander to the whims of woke corporations that are trying to put men in skinny jeans.
No.
Jeremy's Razors is here to equip men with a tool that they need.
Enter Jeremy's 2nd Gen Razor.
Whoa, look at this.
They're here.
They're upgraded.
The Precision 5.
The kind of dad who can navigate a road trip using only the position of the Big Dipper and the last known location of a McDonald's.
That's right.
Then there's the Sprint 3 for the dad He just wants to get in, get out, get on with the day.
Right now, use code DAD15 to get 15% off.
That's right.
Upgrade your dad's daily routine with something that is built for men.
Head on over to jeremysrazors.com, enter code DAD15, get your dad a gift that he actually wants.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Doreen K. Knudsen, 2098, who says, Those of us who are normal Minnesotans, hold on.
Those of us who are normal Minnesotans are not happy with this change of flags.
A travesty.
Yeah, I know.
But you guys are also nice that, you know, you're letting the liberals and now I guess the Somalis just run all over you.
And so now your state flag is a Somali flag.
I know that many of you are normal and you think this is outrageous, but unfortunately, your political leaders in Minnesota don't care.
They didn't ask your opinion.
Jen Psaki, who was formerly the official propagandist for the Biden White House, she was the White House Press Secretary, now she is an unofficial propagandist because now all of a sudden she's become a journalist.
And the same thing happened with George Stephanopoulos.
At least Jen Psaki admits she does commentary.
George Stephanopoulos was the communications director for Bill Clinton in the White House, head of the Clinton War Room.
And then, after he left the White House, he became a totally neutral, objective journalist who wears a tie and, you know, sits at a news desk.
And it's very silly that he plays that part, but... Well, I guess it's no sillier than any of the other liberal journalists who pretend to be objective.
It's just that with George Stephanopoulos, we knew five seconds before he had been the formal, paid, official propagandist for Clinton, then he became the informal, paid-by-other-people propagandist for the Democrats.
So, Jen Psaki has a book coming out.
It's called Say More, Lessons from Work, the White House and the World.
Jen Psaki says in her book of an event after the servicemen were killed during the Afghanistan withdrawal that was totally botched by the Biden administration.
Biden shows up to a ceremony for them.
And during the ceremony, he checked his watch, which is a bad look.
Okay, it's a really bad look.
You're there at effectively a funeral and you're checking your watch.
Hey, when can I get out of here?
I'm hungry.
I got a tea time coming up, you know, let me out of here.
It's a bad, bad look.
Jen Psaki says in her book, The President looked at his watch only after the ceremony had ended.
Moments later, he and the First Lady headed toward their car.
She says it was fake news.
He did not look at his watch during the ceremony.
She says Biden's critics were engaged in misinformation, and they used that image to make him appear insensitive, concerned only about how much time had passed.
That is not true.
You don't need to take my word for it.
You don't need to take conservatives' words for it.
Even the liberal photojournalists at the time got photos of him checking his watch multiple times.
The Associated Press, on the tarmac, got two photos of Biden looking at his watch twice, ten minutes apart.
So it wasn't just as he's walking to his car.
It was during the ceremony.
USA Today had to admit that.
Snopes had to admit that.
She lied.
And now I think she has to retract this claim from her book.
Her argument about fake news is in itself fake news.
It's disproven by photographs.
So even Jen Psaki had to retract it.
Why?
Why lie about this?
Why lie about something that is so easily checked?
This was not a minor little incident.
It's not something that, you know, Jen Psaki is probably just misremembering here.
This was a big deal at the time.
Her job was to get into the facts and then put some spin on it.
Often that means lying.
So why bring it up again?
Maybe she believed her own press releases.
Maybe she believed her own lies and spin.
Or is it because this is just how the Democrats operate?
They lie all the time.
And I don't mean that just as a cheap political shot, like, you know, my opponents always lie and I'm really honest.
There's something deep in their ideology that elevates and exalts dishonesty.
Because at the core of this liberal ideology is that all that really matters is the individual will, more so than reason even.
It's a kind of rationalist ideology that undermines reason and that ultimately undermines objective reality.
These are the kind of people who will look you in the face and say that a man in a dress is a woman.
They don't believe in the truth.
They don't care at all about the truth.
That's not just an accident of them being kind of immoral or something.
It is a core aspect of their ideology.
The truth to them does not matter.
The truth is whatever they say it is.
When they tell you that the COVID vaccine is gonna stop you from catching the virus, that's the truth.
And then five seconds later when they say, no, no, it was never about stopping you from getting the virus, then that's the truth.
They say it's about not infecting other people, that's the truth.
Then five seconds later they say, no, it was never about not infecting other people.
It's about reducing the risk of death in the hospital.
Then that's the truth.
And the truth is just whatever they say it is at any given time with no, Retrospection with no remorse, with no correction, with no nothing.
Oceania was always at war with East Asia.
Oceania was always at war with Eurasia.
Just whatever Big Brother says.
That's part of it.
That's liberalism.
That's always going to be.
It's not that they need to go like reform or something.
It's they need to have an entirely different view of the world.
Now speaking of liberal dishonesty.
An 18-year-old was just released on bail after spraying bullets from an AR-15 in a busy street.
And you probably didn't hear about this story.
This 18-year-old, Amanti Moody, is accused of firing more than two dozen rounds at a car full of people, according to Fox News.
Moody has been charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, but he's been released on bail.
This attack happened April 22nd on Independence Avenue in Washington, D.C.
Moody goes up before this judge and the judge admits that he could have killed someone.
He says there was probable cause to send the case to trial.
Why does he let him go and why didn't you hear about this story?
Because this was a young man, Amanti Moody, it's not the most Anglo-sounding name in the world, in a city, a liberal city, a predominantly black city, who had his AR-15 in the street.
It wasn't in a high school or something like that.
It didn't fit the narrative.
I know the libs say the AR-15 is the worst weapon ever and we've got to ban the AR-15.
Anytime there's a mass shooter, like a white kid in a school with an AR-15, we have to ban the AR-15 immediately.
This is the worst, worst thing ever.
We need to get these guns off the shelves.
But when it's just a street crime, this kid, you don't even hear about it.
Because...
The real reason the libs go after AR-15s is not because of how much more dangerous they are, it's because those are the guns that white people in the country use.
That's why.
They're not the guns that criminals in the cities use.
Most gun violence is suicide.
Something like 60% of gun deaths in America is suicide.
We don't hear about that.
Of criminal gun use, three quarters of criminal gun use is gang related.
We don't really hear about that.
The libs don't make a big splash about that.
That's not when the gangs start killing each other.
Gangs that are largely black and Hispanic and racial minorities and largely taking place in liberal cities.
You don't hear about it.
That doesn't matter.
You hear about it when it's a white kid in a school.
They start from the end of the argument.
We were talking about this a little bit yesterday.
They're not starting with the premise that the AR-15 is really dangerous and we've got to stop it and the mass shootings are really... but even when they give you the mass shooting statistics, they always say non-gang related mass shootings.
What?
Like the mass shootings don't matter when it's a gangster who does it?
Shouldn't it always matter?
No.
They're beginning with the idea that The white, probably more conservative people in the country.
They're the bad guys.
They're the worst people.
We need to abolish whiteness.
Remember?
That's what they've been telling us for decades.
They're the bad guys.
So the stuff that they do is the problem.
The guns that they use are the problem.
You would drastically reduce gun deaths if you banned pistols, say, rather than AR-15s, which are used in virtually no shootings.
But they're not going to do that.
It's because it's not really about the guns.
It's not really even about the particular crime.
It's about the good guys and the bad guys.
And in this case, when the narrative doesn't work, they ignore the story.
