Ep. 1495 - Zelensky Refuses To Give Up Power In Ukraine
Zelensky refuses to give up power in Ukraine, a new poll shows that 61% of Americans support the mass deportation of illegal aliens, and the Baltimore Board of Elections supervisor warns of fraud.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1495
- - -
DailyWire+:
Tune in TONIGHT at 7 PM ET for another Daily Wire Backstage exclusively on DailyWire+! https://bit.ly/3wK3QGW
Watch the brand new animated sitcom Mr. Birchum only on DailyWire+: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC
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:
PureTalk - Together We Can Make A Difference. Learn More at http://www.PureTalk.com/Knowles
Genucel - Exclusive Discount Just For My Listeners! https://genucel.com/Knowles
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek
The last battleground for democracy to stop super Hitler 2.0 Vladimir Putin.
Less freedom perished from the earth.
Remember that?
And then we all just kind of forgot about it.
Until, of course, our regularly scheduled payments to the Zelensky administration cropped up.
Well, something strange happened a couple days ago.
A couple days ago, President Zelensky's term as President of Ukraine ended.
But Zelensky is refusing to give up power.
Here is how Zelensky explained the situation to Reuters.
Quote, my five-year term is not over yet.
It is continuing due to martial law.
Oh, okay.
All right, that's fine.
You see, you see, had Zelensky not declared martial law and made himself dictator indefinitely, elections would have been held in March, after which he would have left office on May 20th.
But since he did do those things, he did declare the martial law, he is going to be the leader of Ukraine for the foreseeable future.
Which is why it's so important, you see, to keep giving a blank check to Ukraine.
Because if we don't, they might lose their democracy and rule of law!
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
The Baltimore Board of Elections supervisor has just warned people of Instances of multiple vote counting.
Very strange, because I was told this never happens ever.
It's no big deal.
The elections are totally fair, especially in the blue cities.
Well, now we got some evidence of it, especially heading into November.
I think we need to investigate, which we will.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
In America, we are incredibly fortunate to have brave men and women who volunteer to serve in our military.
They dedicate their lives to protecting our freedom and ensuring our nation's security.
These men and women voluntarily lay their lives on the line for us, but when their service ends, transitioning to civilian life can be difficult, especially given the current economic climate.
That is why Pure Talk proudly supports America's Warrior Partnership.
Since 2014, America's Warrior Partnership has worked with tens of thousands of veterans in its quest to stop veteran suicide and help veterans and their families live the purposeful lives that they deserve.
You can join the fight.
New customers who switch to PeerTalk can make a one-time donation matched dollar-for-dollar by PeerTalk or round up their initial order at checkout.
If you are already a PeerTalk customer, you can also make recurring donations by rounding up your monthly bill.
PeerTalk saves the average family over $900 per year.
How about we give some of that savings back to our nation's veterans who give their lives and risk their lives to protect us.
Go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
K-N-O-W-L-E-S to make the switch.
Choose a wireless company that shares your values and is half the price of Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile.
Go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
Upgrade your cell service to America's most dependable 5G network.
puretalk.com slash Knowles.
I think I would be more vociferously pro-Ukraine if we just dropped all the propaganda, all the silly buzzwords.
It's about democracy!
It's about the rule of law!
If we could just be honest and say, We are geopolitical adversaries with Russia for 100 years, and Russia is getting a little aggressive in Ukraine.
We've gotten a little bit aggressive in Eastern Europe, too, with the expansion of NATO.
But, you know, we have contrary interests.
And so in response to Russian aggression, we're propping up our own little dictator in our client state, Ukraine.
If we just put it that way, I would be much more inclined to support funding Ukraine.
What drives me crazy is all of the nonsense propaganda.
But this is The last stand for democracy!
Hitler is about to invade Czechoslovakia and we need to stand firm!
The powers of freedom and...
No, he's our little dictator there, and there is no rule of law, and there is no democracy, and Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the civilized world, and has been for a very long time.
But there are corrupt little countries, and we're using them as a way to counter Russia, and that's why we're sending him money.
If they put it that way, I probably still wouldn't be in favor of the blank check to Ukraine, but at least I could understand it.
At least it wouldn't be totally incoherent.
The globalists, though, they're on the move.
They are shaking things up a little bit.
Biggest example in the last 24 hours, Klaus Schwab, the villainous James Bond villain-sounding head of the World Economic Forum.
The man who promoted the Great Reset from his perch at the World Economic Forum.
You will own nothing and be happy!
Klaus has just announced that he will step down.
Or, he hasn't publicly announced it, but he has privately leaked that he will step down as the chairman of the World Economic Forum.
According to a WEF spokesman, the forum will change its governance structure as a result Shwab will transition from Executive Chairman to Chairman of the Board of Trustees by the start of next year.
So he's not really giving up power totally, but he's probably going to be in a less active role within the WEF.
What does this mean?
Well, it's the end of an era, certainly.
Schwab has been the head of the World Economic Forum since he founded the thing in the 70s.
So, you know, there is no World Economic Forum without Klaus Schwab.
Whether or not the WEF can continue after he leaves remains to be seen.
Most people have no idea what the World Economic Forum is.
In fact, I've spent a lot of time studying the World Economic Forum, and I'm still not totally sure what it is.
But My best conclusion that I've drawn from it is that the World Economic Forum is a fun ski vacation for prominent people in business, media, and politics.
That's what it is.
There are all sorts of theories about how the World Economic Forum is the shadowy cabal in the middle of Davos that is secretly running the entire world.
And they subvert governments, and they undermine the will of various peoples, and they're pulling the marionette strings of all of our global leaders, many of whom have taken positions and little fellowships and little guest appearances with the World Economic Forum.
I think that's all totally fake.
It's not that the WEF is not dastardly.
It's not that the WEF doesn't represent something very bad about our politics, but The people who really think that Klaus Schwab is running the world are people who are confusing the symbol for the thing that it symbolizes.
Klaus Schwab, I don't think, really has all that much power.
He throws a really great party in the Swiss Alps every year, and a lot of really rich, powerful people come, and they have fun, and they sip their hot cocoa, and they go skiing, and they hobnob, and they network, and they definitely cut some shady deals, and they conspire, and they collude, and they do all of that.
But Klaus Schwab is not the reason that we live under a globalist, liberal political order.
The real problems are just being represented by the WEF.
The WEF isn't driving the problems.
The real problems are The privatization of everything that allows business leaders and the heads of NGOs to fill the roles that were traditionally held by the civil authority.
And therefore, to take power and sovereignty away from the people.
The fact that Google effectively controls our public square, controls discourse in a republic where speech is how you're supposed to govern yourselves.
The fact that Google, a private company, a sort of a private company, controls that, that's a big problem.
The fetishization of free trade.
I like trade.
I like the fact that our GDP goes a little higher and we can all be a little richer.
I like that.
But not at the cost of losing your way of life, your traditions, and your national sovereignty.
The fact that we have a fetishization of free trade means that there are going to have to be international, supranational institutions that govern those trade regimes, that are going to take political power away from the nations.
The problem is the internet, the fact that the internet kind of flattened the whole world and eroded cultural and geographic boundaries.
The fact that we have a Westphalian system, this goes back some centuries now, the fact that we have a system of world order that cracked up Christendom, what had previously been our civilization, gets cracked up.
So, beginning really with the Protestant Revolution, no knock on the Protestants, it's just how it worked.
You had a unified Europe, you had a unified Christendom, and then the wars of religion cracked that up a little bit, and then the negotiation to stop the wars of religion was expressed in the Treaty of Augsburg and the Peace of Westphalia, which said, cuius regio eius religio, whose reign, his religion.
Which established a radical subjectivism, a radical relativism, which said there is no religious truth, there is no unifying moral reality for our civilization.
It's just based on each little nation.
Whatever your nation wants to do, that's totally fine.
Don't yuck my yum.
Well, if that's the case, then we forfeit any serious claims about truth, about human nature, about how countries ought to be run.
The problem is liberalism.
That's really what the problem is.
And so the WEF is an expression of liberalism.
Political liberalism.
Not just modern liberalism, but classical liberalism, intermediate liberalism, future liberalism, all the liberalism.
That's the problem.
And so the WEF is an expression of that.
But you get rid of Klaus Schwab, some new Klaus Schwab is going to pop up.
You get rid of the World Economic Forum, some new World Economic Forum is going to pop up.
Because rich people who exploit the weaknesses of our liberal political order are always going to want to cut new deals and gain more power and go on fun ski vacations.
And that is just going to continue to happen.
Whether Klaus is here or not.
But people don't like that.
People broadly do not like liberal globalism.
Greatest piece of evidence of this recently, a new poll from Reuters and Ipsos, which shows that 61% of Americans support the mass deportation of illegal aliens.
It's not that 61% say we need to secure our border.
It's not even that 61% say we need to maybe restrict immigration broadly.
61% support loading up illegal aliens on planes, trains, and automobiles and shipping them out of the country, millions or tens of millions at a time.
This poll surprised me because I often thought Americans' views on immigration were kind of like their views on Congress.
Everyone hates Congress, but they love their congressman.
Congress always has a very low approval rating, but individual members of Congress within their districts often have high approval ratings.
And so if all of the individual members of Congress have high approval ratings, then effectively Congress has a high approval rating.
I've assumed it was that way with illegal immigration.
Everyone hates illegal immigration.
We all know it's terribly wrong and unjust.
You like the illegal alien girl in your class from Ecuador.
You like your babysitter, who probably does not have a green card.
You like the individuals in your life who are illegal aliens.
So I'm still skeptical that once the planes, trains, and automobiles started rolling with the tens of millions of illegals out of the country, that Americans would support that.
I don't think that would be a political winner.
But if you ask Americans today, this is a big, big shift, they're saying, yeah, load them up.
Big shift.
Because what that represents is that Americans increasingly realize the only way to restore something like our traditional way of life, which a lot of people miss because the modern political order is fraying economically, socially, culturally, Internationally, they recognize that the only way to restore something like our traditional way of life is going to have to be drastic.
It's not going to be just, maybe we limit, you know, border crossings a little bit.
No, it's going to have to be drastic.
The hour is very, very late.
Now, speaking of late hours, when you're at a party, you know, when you're having friends over at your house, the hour grows a little late, you might want to check out our best-selling game at The Daily Wire, which is now back in stock.
It is Yes or no game.
You've seen me play it with my friends.
Now you can play it with yours.
Play with up to nine people.
Enjoy getting to know your friends and family members.
With 200 cards, you can get even more controversial with the Conspiracy Theory Expansion Pack.
Got all sorts of cards in here.
Let's see.
I'll pull one right off the top.
Here's one.
Princess Diana's car accident was murder.
Mr. Davies, I'm going to say that you think... Are you there, by the way?
Hello, Mr. Davies, Mr. Davies.
I'm here.
This is the highlight of my day.
Okay.
Are you... I'm going to say that you think it was murder.
Yeah, it was a little sus.
It was sus.
What about my answer?
What do you think my answer is?
I don't think you do.
I'd say no.
You're correct.
I previously did.
I previously was certain it was murder.
But if you look into the details of it, I think it was probably just an accident.
The driver was drinking at the bar.
Eyewitnesses saw that.
The paparazzi were chasing them.
They crash in this dark tunnel.
Like you say, well, what are the odds that they crashed in this tunnel where there are no cameras?
I don't know.
It's like really dark and hard to drive in tunnels.
So that would be one explanation.
And then the thing that really put me over, I think part of the reason that there were all these conspiracy theories is because the dad of Dodi Fayed, the sort of boyfriend who got killed there, He pushed a lot of them, probably because he was the guilty party, because his driver was drunk driving him.
Anyway, I have a lot more to say about this.
You need to get the Yes or No Game at dailywire.com slash shop.
Hurry before they sell out again.
People do not like losing our sovereignty.
And so we lose our sovereignty to the multinational trade organizations, we lose our sovereignty to the NGOs and the humanitarian organizations, and we lose our sovereignty to international courts.
Courts like the ICC, which just issued an arrest warrant for Bibi Netanyahu and other top Israeli officials.
It's not exactly that I predicted this some weeks ago because I think everyone could have seen this coming.
But I did technically, I guess, predict this.
And I said it won't really matter because the United States and Israel do not acknowledge the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Put Israel out of it for a second.
For the U.S.
to recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court would require the United States to permit an international body to prosecute Americans for crimes committed on American soil, which is unconstitutional.
So we just can't.
It's totally ridiculous.
Israel said, we're not giving up our prosecutorial power to some international body.
Well, now the ICC has said we have arrest warrants out for Netanyahu and the other Israeli officials.
Here is what Joe Biden has to say about it.
Let me be clear.
We reject the ICC's application for arrest warrants against Israeli media.
Whatever these warrants may imply, there is no equivalence between Israel and Hamas.
And it's clear, Israel wants to do all it can to ensure civilian protection.
But let me be clear.
Contrary to allegations against Israel made by the International Court of Justice, what's happening is not genocide.
We reject that.
We'll always stand with Israel and the threats against its security.
There he is.
How dare you, International Criminal Court, issue these warrants?
But how did the ICC come to issue those arrest warrants?
Because of Joe Biden.
Because of what Biden did.
When the ICC first came to prominence, back during the Bush administration, Bush rejected it.
Said, nah, we're not doing that.
We're not going to be part of the ICC.
Then you had a liberal president, Obama, cozies up a little bit more to these international bodies.
Then you have Trump.
Trump issues a June 2020 executive order putting sanctions on the ICC.
Why did Trump sanction the ICC?
for attempting to investigate American soldiers and allied soldiers for supposed crimes, even though American and allied soldiers are not subject to the jurisdiction of the ICC.
So Trump goes out and he not only says, we're not going to play ball with this ridiculous body.
He says, we're going to sanction you.
We're going to impose penalties on you.
And then Biden gets into office.
What does he do?
He says, we want to play nice with the ICC.
He's insinuating that we recognize the authority of the ICC, even though legally we do not.
And then what happens?
The ICC comes back and does something Biden doesn't like, and he says, how did this happen?
How did this happen?
Because you did it, man.
You did it.
That's how.
Why was Putin invading Ukraine?
Because you took sanctions off Russia.
That's what Zelensky himself said.
How is this happening?
That's so weird.
Why is Iran using proxies to go to war with Israel right now?
Because you went soft on Iran!
That's why.
And you undermined Trump's effective policy in the Middle East.
You!
You're the reason, man.
And then he's shocked that there are consequences for his actions.
Now, he says something here.
Very important.
He says, we reject that what the State of Israel is doing is genocide.
And I've noticed, just in my own commentary on the intractable conflict in the Middle East, that people have misunderstood something that I've said.
Because I've pointed out that this is the intractable conflict.
And the partisans on one side, the blue-haired people screaming, saying, from the river to the sea, we need Palestine to be free.
You know, they're out there protesting for Hamas or whatever.
And they say the way this ends is with a recognition either of a Palestinian state or just the eradication of Israel.
Then on the other side, you have the people saying, no, absolutely not.
The way this ends is when Israel totally destroys Hamas.
Okay, but how's that really going to happen?
You're not going to have a two-state solution.
You're going to have to what then?
Are you going to occupy Gaza?
Are you going to move people around?
What are you going to do?
The reason that it's intractable is because As I've said, the rational strategic objective for both parties is the ethnic cleansing of the other side.
Some people have misinterpreted this to suggest that I have said the rational objective is the genocide of the other side.
Ethnic cleansing and genocide are not the same thing.
Genocide is when you obliterate a group of people, when you kill them all.
Ethnic cleansing is when you move people out of an area.
And so it seems clear to me certain Israeli officials have actually said this on the record that they support ethnic cleansing of certain Palestinians from certain areas and it also just if you were the Prime Minister of Israel this would have to be your strategic objective because you've got this This political issue, Gaza, right there on your border.
After October 7th, you realize they pose an unacceptable security risk.
And so what are you going to do?
I guess you could say, we're going to go in and get rid of Hamas.
It's not about the Palestinian people.
It's about getting rid of Hamas.
But the Palestinian people elected Hamas.
It's not like Hamas just came in and imposed their will on the Palestinian people.
They elected, the Palestinians elected this group.
So you've got the people broadly supportive of the terror group.
You can't neatly draw a distinction between the people and the representatives of those people.
So the objective for the State of Israel is ethnic cleansing.
At least that would be the rational objective.
And then, at least the same would be true for the Palestinians.
You might go even further, because there are Hamas officials on the record saying, we basically want to just wipe out all the Jews.
So I guess they would go further for Hamas and say, perhaps their end goal actually is genocide.
But notice the ICC focused only on the State of Israel here, which Biden is rightly rejecting.
I just wish he would have rejected this globalist political order from the beginning rather than try to play nice with these groups that erode our sovereignty.
Now, speaking of Joe Biden's failures, Joe Biden is set to release oil from more American oil reserves.
So Biden is set to release.
One million barrels of gasoline from, not from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, but from a Northeast Reserve that was established to reduce prices just ahead of the election.
So we got the elections in, what, six months?
Coincidentally, Joe Biden says, okay, right now I'm going to start releasing oil from this Northeast Reserve so the gas prices can come down so that you don't totally throw me out of office.
The Biden-Harris administration, says Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, is laser-focused on lowering prices at the pump for American families, especially as drivers hit the road for the summer driving season.
By strategically releasing this reserve in between Memorial Day and July 4th, we are ensuring sufficient supply flows to the tri-state and Northeast at a time hard-working Americans need it most.
Okay, so, great.
I'm glad gas prices are going to go down a tiny little bit.
Why don't you just drill for more oil?
The Biden administration is really good at draining our reserves of oil, but they can't admit that we need the oil.
So they can't green light more drilling of oil.
So instead, we're still getting the oil.
We're still damaging the environment.
We're still polluting the air.
We're still doing all that stuff that the libs pretend they don't want to do.
But we're also strategically much less safe.
If you look, forget about this Northeast Reserve for a second.
If you look at what Biden has done to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, this is a reserve of oil that we have for our national security.
If you look at what he does, You see, okay, 1982, they're filling it up, up, up, up, up, up.
Here we go.
Then, okay, kind of plateaus in about 1989.
There we go.
Then it spikes up a little, little bit again, really after 9-11.
Plateaus, plateaus, and then dips a little bit under Obama.
And then 2022, Joe Biden just drains this thing because He wants to have his cake and eat it too.
He wants contrary objectives.
He wants more oil, but less oil at the same time.
More oil for the purposes of gas prices, less oil for the purposes of appeasing the sun monster.
And because his political views are incoherent, he ends up with the worst policy of all, which is keep up all the same pollution, but make us less safe at the same time.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to Genucel.com slash Knowles.
It is Genucel's 25-year anniversary.
Right now, our listeners will get an extra 25% off their already fabulous prices, making this the biggest Genucel sale ever.
GenuCell is offering an extra 25% off in honor of their 25th anniversary.
If you haven't tried GenuCell, a great place to start is with their most popular package.
This package features their Gen 90 serum, which instantly erases the wrinkles around your eyes, forehead, and mouth.
It also includes their top-selling under-eye bags and puffiness serum, as well as their jawline treatment for a more contoured, defined jawline.
GenuCell is so confident in their product that they guarantee you will see results in less than 12 hours, or you'll get your money back.
For a limited time, get an extra 25% off for GenuCell's anniversary.
Discount is automatically applied at checkout.
Once it's gone, it's gone.
Order yours right now.
Get the GenuCell jawline treatment for a more contoured, defined jawline.
Visit GenuCell.com slash Knowles, K-N-A-W-L-E-S.
To sweeten the deal even more, you will also receive a free spa box and two bonus gifts, plus free shipping.
Go to GenuCell.com slash Knowles.
Now, enough about Biden.
We will still stick on the subject, however, of people who were elected under dubious circumstances.
Because the Board of Elections Supervisor in Baltimore has come under fire recently for potential instances of votes being counted multiple times.
Can you explain what the human error was last week that we heard from the State Board of Elections?
That's a good question.
I'm waiting to hear myself.
Well, you're the director.
Well, I am the director.
The explanation that I've received in writing right now is not clear and not acceptable.
What do you mean not acceptable?
Well, I know what the system can do and what it's not supposed to do.
So until we get clarification from the state, I'm going to leave it there.
There are reports of concerns about a flash drive with votes on it.
Based on Jones' responses, it's unclear if the state believes a flash drive was read by a tabulator more than once.
So what happened with the flash drive?
Well, let me just say this.
Flash drive, according to the system, can only be inserted once.
And once it's put in, it cannot duplicate.
Is that what happened?
I don't know that yet.
I'm a little leery about saying human error if something can't be done but once.
Okay, so all of this insinuation of how this election last week went totally wrong.
Was it that a flash drive counted the votes multiple times?
Well, he says that can't happen.
Was it intentional?
Was it someone just going in and changing the system?
Was it a hack?
Was it human error?
He seems skeptical it was human error.
It might have been intentionally a human going in and trying to rig the election.
In any case, We know that election workers were caught last week over counting the number of votes cast.
We know that elections are rigged all the time.
So what do we do with that information?
He goes on, the supervisor goes on, and he admits, he says, look, these elections, there's always problems in elections, but we try to keep it, you know, relatively contained.
I'm glad to hear a liberal admit that, because in 2020 we were told that the election was totally, completely legit.
There were no problems.
Not one vote was miscounted.
Oh, how dare you?
If you suggest as much, you're an insurrectionist, anti-American traitor.
But we know there's always little problems with elections, so what do we do with that information?
The only reliable way To conduct an election is with paper ballots that are counted by hand.
Ballots that have been turned in by people who have to prove that they are who they say they are.
That is by far the most reliable way to conduct an election.
When you start introducing computers, when you start diminishing the opportunities for ballot watchers to supervise the counting, When you stop requiring people to prove that they are eligible voters, the credibility of the election plummets.
That's a fact.
We all know it.
Even the libs know it.
So pay attention to who opposes those basic election integrity features.
The people who oppose paper ballots want to rig the elections.
They want the elections to be rigable.
What they'll say is, oh, it's much more efficient to count on a computer.
I don't think that's true.
All over the world, people conduct elections with paper ballots.
For most of American history, we've conducted elections with paper ballots.
We can get the results on election night.
Ever since we switched to computers, it takes days and weeks and months, doesn't it?
It's really weird.
Doesn't seem very efficient to me.
Paper ballots counted by hand with ballot supervisors.
Ballots that have been submitted By people who show proof of identification.
That's how you conduct an election.
Anybody who opposes any of those, what, three basic measures, wants to rig the election.
Or, at the very least, wants the election to be rig-a-bull.
What are we going to do?
Now, speaking of people who were elected and affirmed and guided by the Holy Spirit, Pope Francis.
We had that long interview, we covered a lot of it yesterday.
There was one clip of the interview, though, that for some reason, maybe I just missed it when I watched the whole interview, maybe it wasn't released at the same time, but it did start going viral a little bit yesterday.
I do want to cover this as a little coda to the Pope Francis interview.
He was asked if we would ever see female priests or deacons in the Catholic Church, priestesses or deaconesses.
Here's his answer.
For a little girl growing up Catholic today, will she ever have the opportunity to be a deacon and participate as a clergy member in the church?
No. No.
No.
Any questions?
Can we just play that one more time?
I really like that.
It's very blunt.
This woman leading up.
Now listen.
Listen, Papa Francesco.
Come on, we're reasonable people here.
Don't you think we need to have priestesses and bishopresses and popresses and deaconesses in the church?
What do you say, Holy Father?
For a little girl growing up Catholic today, will she ever have the opportunity to be a deacon and participate as a clergy member in the Church?
No.
No.
No, of course not.
What was her follow-up question?
Pope Francis, for a little boy growing up in the Catholic Church, will he ever have an opportunity to be a nun?
No, because men and women are different.
The Holy Father's answer here is just to say men and women are different.
That's it.
There have never been lady priests in some breakaway sects over the past 50 years There have been lady priests.
It's preposterous.
When the Anglicans started doing it, you had a lot of people, a lot of Anglican priests, just say, okay, I'm done with this.
And they left, and they entered, often they entered the Ordinary, which was this way for Anglican priests to join the Catholic Church.
Because they said, no, priestesses, it's totally ridiculous.
Totally ridiculous.
There are plenty of roles for women in the Catholic Church.
Sometimes the Catholic Church is pilloried for being too pro-woman.
You know, we're quite fond of women.
The great saints whom we venerate, Our Lady, we're certainly quite fond of Our Lady.
But men and women are different, and the libs can't stand that.
Some people have asked, with this woman's question, If you want to be a priestess, why not just join any of the many breakaway groups that have priestesses?
Why not become Episcopalian?
They have priestesses.
Why not?
I assume the Methodists do now.
The Methodists have gone a little bit lavender.
You know, they've gone a little bit rainbow.
I assume they have though.
There are plenty of Christian denominations and groups that have priestesses.
Why not join one of them?
Because the desire, the demand that the Catholic Church do something which she cannot do, which is pretend that women can be priests, the demand is much less about becoming something as it is about destroying something.
If these people want to become priestesses, they can join any number of denominations, but there's a real draw here to the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church, whether you are Catholic, whether you like the Catholic Church, whether you hate the Catholic Church, I think you have to admit, it's kind of the OG.
You know, Catholic Church, been around a long time.
It is the dominant institution in our civilization.
For better or worse, even if you really don't like the Catholic Church, it is the institution that has shaped our entire civilization.
It is the only institution in our civilization that dates back to antiquity.
And if you're a liberal, You gotta get it.
You gotta destroy that institution.
You have to.
This is what so much of the liberal revolutionary politics has been about.
It is not a coincidence that when the French Revolution took off, Who did they go after the hardest?
It was the Church.
When the Bolshevik Revolution took off in Russia, who did they go after?
The Church.
In that case, the Eastern Church.
When the Communists tried to take over Spain, what did they do?
They killed nuns, they raped nuns, they killed priests, they attacked the Church.
Because the Church is this institution that will not yield.
To the fashions of modernity and the exaltation of the self, the idolatry of the self that defines liberalism.
The church will not permit it.
And thus far, I think the track record has been pretty clear and pretty great about the gates of hell not prevailing against the church, despite all odds, despite the navish imbecility with which the church has often been led at the human level.
And so that's why.
These people don't want to become Episcopalian priestesses or Methodist or whatever.
They want to finally bring that Catholic, that dirty rotten Catholics, they've got to heal to liberalism.
They have to.
And the libs will not rest until that happens.
But it's not going to happen.
That's the problem for them.
Now, speaking of celibacy, Julia Fox.
Do you remember her?
She was Kanye West's girlfriend, I think, for a while.
Julia Fox, and maybe she's an actress or a model or something like that.
Julia Fox has just come out on some show and said that she is celibate.
She is chaste, but she's taking it further because she's not married.
She says, I'm celibate.
I don't have sex.
In order to take back control in the wake of the Dobbs decision overruling Roe v. Wade.
Julia, Rachel A. texted, what's your reasoning behind being celibate and in what ways do you believe it has improved your life?
Well, I just think nothing good comes from having sex, including children.
No, I'm just kidding.
But, you know, I think with the overturning of Roe v. Wade and, you know, our rights being stripped away from us, this is a way that I can take back the control.
And it just sucks that it has to be in that way.
But I just don't feel comfortable until things change.
Wow.
Do you have an end date to this?
Honestly, it was like six months, and it was a year, and now I'm like, oh my god, it's almost two and a half years, and it's still going, and I don't know.
Do you miss it?
Do you miss it?
In the beginning, yes, but I think it's just like getting over anything, smoking, drugs, whatever it may be.
Eventually, you just forget, and then all that energy that you were putting toward sex, you can put it toward other things.
Can I ask you a personal question?
Woo!
Yeah!
You go, girl!
You go, girl!
You show those conservatives Who overruled Roe v. Wade.
You show that when you take back control by behaving in the way that we would encourage you to behave.
That is... I'm not being facetious.
I think it's great.
Because very often culture is downstream of politics and the law is a teacher.
When you change laws, you change people's behavior.
And there have been some squishes who have said, no, you can't change the law and then wait for the law to change people's behavior.
That would, one, be tyrannical, or at least, two, be totally ineffective.
Because you've got to just base the laws on how people are already behaving.
Nah, not necessarily.
The law is a teacher.
And so when you say, hey, if you have promiscuous sex, you won't be able to murder your child.
And then people are going to rationally conclude that if they don't want to have another child, they probably shouldn't have promiscuous sex.
Which is going to be good for her.
Look, she seems happier than I've ever seen her in any interview.
Not that I'm a huge Julia Fox aficionado, but she seems actually relatively well-balanced.
She goes, yeah, I'm just kind of doing me.
I'm not having sex outside of marriage.
I'm not fornicating.
I'm just kind of, you know.
And it's good.
I took back my power.
And yes, you're right, you did.
And you did that because conservatives changed the law.
And then the law changed your behavior and now everyone's happier.
Babies aren't being murdered quite as much or in the same way.
Unfortunately, we still have to work on that.
And your behavior is better and more conducive to your own flourishing and to the flourishing of society.
Get ready for something special tonight.
Join me, along with Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Andrew Clavin, and Jeremy Boring, backstage, 7 p.m.
Eastern, 6 p.m.
Central, streaming live and free on DailyWire+.
We are taking you behind the scenes and beyond the headlines at The Daily Wire.
We are being told that Jeremy has a special announcement that you will hear first during backstage.
We've been busy.
It has been way too long since we've all been together.
There's a ton to discuss.
This is your chance to hear all about it.
Do not miss out.
Watch live and free, Daily Wire Plus, tonight, 7 p.m.
Eastern, 6 p.m.
Central.
My favorite comment yesterday is from FrankS111, who says, No, no.
who says, so the Democrat star witness committed the exact crime that they claim Trump committed.
Spectacular.
No, no.
It's crazier than that.
The Democrat star witness in this New York case, Michael Cohen, committed a much more serious crime than the crime that they're accusing Trump of having committed.
And they're not prosecuting their star witness for that crime.
They are prosecuting, probably when they don't even really have jurisdiction over it, this much, much more trivial crime.
Because they gotta get that Trump.
They gotta get him, otherwise he might get re-elected.
And then if the people vote for the guy that they want to vote for, then democracy will perish forever.
Hey, stop stressing over your Father's Day gift.
How about premium Mayflower cigars and the Mayflower Cigar Cutter, guaranteed to impress Visit MayflowerCigars.com, use promo code DAD10, DAD, number 10, to enjoy a 10% discount.
You must be 21 years or older to order.
Some exclusions apply.
Now that we've figured that out, back to the discussion.
Speaking of cause and effect, there's a new report out that millennials are not taking time off.
They're not taking their PTO.
But they are going on vacation, and the way they're going on vacation is quiet vacationing, where they go on vacation, but they don't really tell their bosses.
They just don't quite work as much.
And even though they've got paid time off, they won't register their paid time off.
They'll just, they'll pretend that they're working, but they'll actually be on vacation.
Why is that?
This is based on a new Harris Poll survey.
78% of US workers say they don't take all of their PTO days.
That is highest among Gen Z and Millennials, but they do take their vacation through what they call a giant workaround culture.
Okay.
It pains me to defend my fellow Millennials, and the Zoomers, I think, are a little bit more grounded in reality than the Millennials, but the Millennials This is my generation, the Obama generation, wrong about so many things.
Here, I totally get it.
I totally get why they're not taking official PTO and why they are just kind of quietly going on vacation.
The reason is not just that they're dishonest.
The reason is not just that they're suck-ups and they want it to seem like they're always working.
The reason is that there is no such thing as time off.
Anymore.
There is no such thing as time off because of the smartphone, and because of tablets and laptops.
Because people are expected to be working 24-7.
This is especially true if you have a white-collar job.
If you have a blue-collar job, where your body is more important in the performance of the job, then it's hard for you to be working all the time.
Because the masters of the universe who control our economy haven't figured out how to bring a tractor in your pocket yet.
Once they do, though, you'll be working all the time, too.
But especially for white-collar jobs, laptop jobs, phone jobs, you have your office in your pocket all the time.
And so if you go on vacation, you're going to get calls, you're going to get emails, and you're going to be expected to respond to at least some of them.
So it seems to me what the Millennials are doing, and the Zoomers are doing, is they're just adapting to that fact.
And they're saying, okay, I will never get a formal vacation, but I'll at least be able to slack off a little bit for a week or two at a time.
Which I get.
And frankly, that is worse for them, and probably better for the company, than if they just took their time off.
But this is what we do in modernity.
We erase all boundaries.
There used to be a very firm boundary between work and home.
There used to be a very firm boundary between work and vacation.
And maybe you'd make a call from your hotel room to check in at the office once, but probably you wouldn't.
Now there's no boundary.
There used to be a very firm boundary between nation and other nation.
Now we're kind of erasing those borders.
There used to be a very firm boundary between men and women.
Now we're erasing those borders.
So much of modernity is just about jumbling everything up, just mixing it all up into this kind of gray hodgepodge of goop.
That's what it is.
So you're never on vacation and you're never really at work.
You're never at home.
You're never really at the office.
You're just always just in this kind of Gooey middle ground and in part, not to go too down the rabbit hole here, this is because modernity and liberalism Denies time, and history, and just, you're kind of in this eternal present.
This is why the libs are always talking about how we're going to upload our brains to the cloud, and this is why the libs and the moderns are so focused on never aging, and never growing up, and never getting married, never having kids, and never doing, because you just want to stay the same forever.
You just want to live in this gray middle ground forever.
Not good, not going to make people happy, but don't blame the millennials for it.
They're just reacting to the changing political circumstances.
Now, speaking of changing culture, AMC, the movie channel, has just added a trigger warning to one of my favorite movies, Goodfellas.
The trigger warning says, this film includes language and or cultural stereotypes that are inconsistent with today's standards of inclusion and tolerance and may offend some viewers.
Goodfellas is based on a true story.
This movie is absolutely unacceptable.
It depicts stereotypes that have no place in our society.
I mean, it's true.
It actually happened.
These people are real and they did behave this way.
But just because it's true doesn't mean it's not racist.
That's what it is.
And it's about my ancestral people, the Italians.
But it's about a certain Italian-American subculture that is real.
There really were mobsters.
There really were five families in New York and other mob organizations.
Goodfellas is based on a book from 1985.
It's a non-fiction book called Wise Guy by Nicholas Pileggi.
It's the story of Henry Hill, who's a real guy, who always wanted to be a gangster.
This is very, very funny.
This to me, this trigger warning is very, very funny.
Funny how?
You might ask.
Funny like I'm a clown?
Like I amuse you?
Like I make you laugh?
Like I'm here to amuse you?
How am I funny?
What's so funny about me, huh?
You might be thinking that.
I find it very, very funny.
But the funniest part of it is that it's true.
This is a stereotype.
And such stereotypes are unacceptable in today's age.
According to the cultural elites.
And it's also true.
Because all stereotypes are true.
Maybe that's the line that finally gets me cancelled.
All stereotypes are true.
That is how they became stereotypes.
Stereotypes do not necessarily apply to every single individual in a certain group.
Of course not.
But it's a type.
It's a type, it's not an individual descriptor, it's a type.
And they're all true.
That is how they obtain, that's how they gain cultural currency, because people recognize them to be true.
I love the Italian people, I have no shame about my ethnic heritage down my mother's side.
But you know, they did cultivate a certain subculture in America, and there was a little bit of crime associated with it, and it's true.
Okay, it's true.
Now, speaking of mobsters, Michael Cohen, New York, that rat, Trump's old fixer who's now turned state's witness, who's admitted to lying and stealing and all this, he's had some real credibility problems in recent days.
Certainly the fact that he's a liar, an admitted liar, but then what really shocked people in the headlines yesterday, two days ago, was that he admitted to stealing a lot of money.
We don't even know the total amount of money that he stole from Trump in the transaction that is at the heart of the case.
Michael Cohen's lawyer is now arguing that the fact that he's admitting to be a liar and a thief actually bolsters his credibility.
All of this has been, again, part and parcel of Michael Cohen providing information, trying to be cooperative, meeting with the DA's office dozens of times, as he testified to.
And so I think all of this is very much in keeping with, you know, the top line.
And the takeaway here is that he has That's good.
I'm glad, Mr. Cohen, that you are finally admitting to some of your lies.
and has decided to turn his loyalties away from Mr. Trump and towards his family, his country, and to be cooperative and to be truthful as of the time he made that decision.
And he was also truthful about the many lies and mistakes he's made along the way.
That's good.
I'm glad, Mr. Cohen, that you are finally admitting to some of your lies.
That does not bolster your credibility.
He's been very truthful about what a liar he is.
Oh, Okay, he's been a liar his whole life, but now he's being really truthful.
Yeah, no.
If Cohen is being truthful now, and I'm a little skeptical because he's a dirty rat, liar, cheat, thief.
If he's being truthful now, good.
That's very good for his individual soul.
I still wouldn't elect the guy.
I wouldn't have him babysit my kids.
Okay, I wouldn't trust him as far as I can throw him.
It's so good and admirable that he's telling the truth about being a liar.
Yeah, maybe it is, personally.
Politically, though, as a public matter, no.
This means that your star witness has no credibility.
The rest of the show continues now.
We are going to be interviewing someone who is much more credible and dignified than Michael Cohen.
