Ep. 1524 - Soros-Backed Group Spends $10M To Destroy SCOTUS
Dems invest $10 million to destroy the Supreme Court, Hunter is urging Joe to stay in the race according to a new report, and a Black Olympic track and field runner says she is paving the way for Black athletes.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1524
- - -
DailyWire+:
Buy one year of DailyWire+ and get a second year FREE! Join here: https://bit.ly/3L1kc1o
Get 10% off your tickets to Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot at http://angel.com/MICHAEL
Check out my new candle collection, available now: https://bit.ly/3VrZ6Ot
Get your Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
American Financing - Call (866)721-3300 for a FREE mortgage review, or visit https://www.americanfinancing.net/.
PureTalk - Get 50% Off Your First Month! http://www.PureTalk.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
Democrats have suffered some major setbacks since their presidential nominee suffered rigor mortis on national television.
But they've got a new strategy.
Destroy the Supreme Court.
According to fawning reporting from Politico's Heidi Przybyla, the liberal Soros-funded activist group Demand Justice will now spend $10 million attacking the Supreme Court for doing its job.
If the name Heidi Przybyla, I'm probably mispronouncing that, sounds familiar, it is because she was featured on this show not long ago demanding that Christians shut up and stay out of the political process.
And the one thing that unites all of them, because there's many different groups orbiting Trump, but the thing that unites them as Christian nationalists, not Christians, by the way, because Christian nationalists is very different, is that they believe that our rights as Americans, as all human beings, don't come from any earthly authority.
They don't come from Congress.
They don't come from the Supreme Court.
They come from God.
That left-wing activist masquerading as a reporter has obviously never read the Declaration of Independence, or the Bible, or one suspects any serious political philosophy of any kind.
And she has outlined, in what is basically a press release, how the money is going to be spent to destroy the Supreme Court.
Democrats will, in her words, conduct, quote, opposition research on potential Supreme Court picks, and, quote, work to mobilize key constituencies affected by the court's decisions.
That last phrase is particularly interesting because Supreme Court justices are not elected.
They're appointed, and they're appointed for life, so they're not even reappointed.
They're just, they're there.
Mobilizing key constituencies could not serve any legal or constitutional purpose.
All it can mean is encouraging threats against the court.
The kind we saw in the lead-up to the Dobbs decision, when leftists illegally protested outside the homes of conservative justices, one of whom was nearly assassinated and another one of whom was forced to flee his home.
These are not fringe groups or activists.
This is a well-funded mainstream liberal group promoted by a national reporter for Politico.
This is not an idle complaint.
It is a declaration of war against a co-equal branch of government.
The sort of thing one might call an insurrection and an existential threat to our democracy.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
A black Olympian runner.
Has just declared through tears that she is so happy that she was picked for the Olympics because she's now making a way for everyone who looks like her.
So I dug into some of the numbers on how rare black runners are in the Olympics and the results might shock you.
First though, you got to go to thecandleclub.com to get your Sicilian summer candle before it runs out again.
Was very sorry I had to report to you.
You couldn't get the Sicilian Summer Candle.
It sold out too quickly.
Well, here we go, baby.
It's back in stock.
You asked.
We delivered.
TheCandleClub.com.
You need the the in there.
Otherwise, I don't know what it's going to do to you.
You got to go to TheCandleClub.com.
Get your Sicilian Summer Candle, or your PSL Candle, or your Wise Man Candle, which is a version of Smells and Bells, or Old Soul, or Crème de la Crème, or the Mayflower Candles, a lot.
Please, allow my scent and musk to just fill your entire home.
We'll blitz through the latest round of bad polls for Biden because it's very newsworthy, but then it tells you about all the machinations.
The political ground right now is moving very, very quickly under our feet, and nobody really knows what's going to happen.
But the reason that the ground is moving is because Biden showed himself to be half a dead guy during that national debate, and the polls are reflecting that.
So these are some of the earliest polls that have come out after the presidential debate.
USA Today's Suffolk University poll Shows 41% of Democrat voters want Joe Biden to drop out of the 2024 race.
Now, okay, that's the headline that everyone's reporting.
However, the flip side of that is 51% of Democrats want him to remain on the ticket.
So it's not good for a guy who's now, who's an incumbent and who's supposed to be the nominee of the party.
51% seems low, but it's a bare majority.
And so Democrats, if you remove Biden now, that is a threat to our democracy.
I- how dare you undermine our sacred, beautiful democracy!
You can't.
He's your nominee.
No takebacks.
You gotta stick with him.
The poll also shows only 28% of Biden's supporters said that he won the debate.
You know, usually after these things, a guy could show up on stage, start speaking gibberish, and bang his head against the podium.
His partisans will still say he won the debate.
Well, here, Biden's performance was so bad, just a little over a quarter of his own supporters say he won the debate.
And then when you look at independents, 64% Of independent voters want Biden replaced on the ballot.
So these are people who theoretically could vote for Biden.
You know, not the hard partisan Republicans you're never going to win.
Not the hard partisan Democrats you're never going to lose.
It's those independents that both parties are going to fight over.
A clear majority of them say they want Biden gone.
There's another poll CBS News YouGov shows 72% registered voters Believe that Joe Biden does not have the mental and cognitive health to serve as president.
Almost three quarters of registered voters think that this man's brain has turned to mush and he can't even do the job today of being president, much less get a second term.
Why that matters is not that people recognize Biden's in decline.
Some of us have pointed that out for some years now.
It's the movement because they took the same poll back on June 9th.
Only 65% of registered voters said that Biden was senile and not fit to be president.
So that's a huge number too, but then you see a spike like that, a 7% spike that's more than a 10% spike over where it had been.
Yikes.
That's not good news.
I looked at the New York Times website yesterday, something I tried rarely to do, and four out of the five top op-eds on the website were calling on Biden to drop out.
And one of the op-eds was still kind of, it was touching on the Biden issue, but it wasn't explicitly calling on him to drop out of the race, but four out of five of the op-eds on the New York Times, you know, the house organ of the liberal establishment.
Brutal news.
Meanwhile, you get Carl Bernstein, who is one of the journalists, it was Woodward and Bernstein, to take down Richard Nixon.
It was really just a deep state coup to take down Richard Nixon, but that's a conversation for another time.
Bernstein, you know, goes on and for the last 50 years, his job has been to go on cable news and whoever the president is, usually a Republican, say, this is President so-and-so's Watergate moment!
He's brought on, trotted on by the liberal establishment.
He has carried water for the liberal establishment since the 1970s.
And even Carl Bernstein is coming out here and saying, actually, my sources say Biden is even worse than you think.
Well, these are people, several of them, who are very close to President Biden, who love him, have supported him, have been among them, or some people who've raised a lot of money for him.
And they are adamant that what we saw the other night, the Joe Biden we saw, is not a one-off, that there have been 15, 20 occasions in the last year and a half somewhat as he did in that horror show that we witnessed.
Okay.
Fifteen times at least in the past year that Carl Bernstein, intrepid reporter Carl Bernstein's sources say he appeared just as bad.
My question is where was that reporting before the debate?
Where were all these intrepid journalists who have all their well-cultivated sources before the debate?
If this has been going on 15 times, that Biden looks slack-jawed and drooling in the past year in front of people, how come those reports didn't come out before the debate?
One, because the journalists are not fair reporters.
They are radical left-wing activists like that lady Heidi Prozibilla, who's writing press releases for groups that are designed to take down the... that are left-wing funded, left-wing billionaire funded groups designed to take down a co-equal branch of government.
And they are Propagandists for the liberal establishment who go on TV and carry the Democrat Party message when it's convenient.
And they were trying to squeak Biden across the finish line.
Either they just didn't know, they just hadn't talked to those sources, they weren't doing their jobs.
Or they did know and they were covering up for Biden because they thought, you know, we'll just call it a childhood stutter.
The American people are so stupid that they're not going to figure out that we're lying to them and then we'll get him across the finish line and then whatever.
If he falls down a flight of stairs, then we'll have Kamala and it doesn't even matter.
Kamala is no good.
We'll just have all of our apparatchiks in the administration and we'll get the policies we want.
And then when it was undeniable on national television, now all of a sudden the intrepid journalists know how to pick up a phone and talk to their sources.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to AmericanFinancing.net.
Food cost is up about 20%.
Insurance costs are out of control and rising.
Childcare is through the roof.
Many Americans have no other choice but to put those expenses on credit cards.
Do not be in panic mode.
Call American Financing today.
If you're a homeowner, they're helping thousands of people in the same situation pay off that debt and break free from financial stress.
Their salary-based mortgage consultants are saving homeowners an average of $854 a month.
Call today and you may delay two mortgage payments.
American Financing, 866-721-3300.
That is 866-721-3300.
Or visit AmericanFinancing.net.
NMLS, 182334.
NMLSconsumeraccess.org.
APR for rates in the fives start at 6.799% for well-qualified borrowers.
Call 866-721-3300 for details about credit costs and terms.
1-823-34-NMLSConsumerAccess.org.
APR for rates in the 5 start at 6.799% for well-qualified borrowers.
Call 866-721-3300 for details about credit costs and terms.
For those who are more digitally inclined, go to AmericanFinancing.net.
That is AmericanFinancing.net.
Do not let these concerns keep you up at night.
Stop worrying about those annoying phone calls.
AmericanFinancing.net.
At least one person wants Joe Biden to stay in the race.
This, according to the New York Times, Hunter Biden is one of the strongest voices urging his father to stay in the race.
I'm just quoting now from the Times.
One of the strongest voices imploring Mr. Biden to resist pressure to drop out was his son, Hunter Biden, whom the president has long leaned on for advice, said one of the people informed about the discussions who, like others, Spoke on condition of anonymity to share internal deliberations.
Hunter Biden wants Americans to see the version of his father that he knows scrappy and in command of the facts rather than the stumbling aging president we saw on Thursday night.
Gee, I wonder why Hunter Biden might want his dad to remain president.
I wonder why the guy Who has been found guilty of all sorts of crimes and who has not even yet been prosecuted for the serious crimes that he obviously committed.
We have his own records, we have pictures, we have videos of it that he took from his laptop.
Wonder why that guy might want his dad to remain president.
Hey, Dad.
Hey, don't listen to every single other person out there.
No, no.
Come on, man.
Come on, Jack.
Need you to stick in there.
Give old Big H the pardon power, baby.
Come on.
Let's do it.
Let's do it, Dad.
We have to.
This is a classic example of the dark side of political regime.
Going back to our good friend Polybius, the ancient writer.
He says there's good forms of government and bad forms of government, and they look like mirror images of each other.
So the good form of government by one man is a monarchy.
The bad form of government by one man is a tyranny.
Good form of government by a small group of people is aristocracy.
The bad version is oligarchy.
The good version of government by the people is democracy.
The bad version is mob rule.
What distinguishes them?
In the good versions, you rule for the common good.
In the bad versions, you rule for private interest.
This is obviously just about private interest.
If Hunter had any care for his father, he would stop this embarrassment.
But Hunter wants to avoid putting on an orange jumpsuit, and Hunter, having been the bag man apparently for the Biden family for some years, feels that this is owed to him, one suspects, and so he's saying, hey dad, you got to stick in the race.
One of the strongest voices urging him to stay in.
No surprises there whatsoever.
Meanwhile, the persecution of the Trump-affiliated conservatives is ramping up.
Steve Bannon is going to jail, and for his jail, for his sentence, he has chosen Danbury Correctional Facility in Connecticut.
Why did he choose it?
Here is Steve Bannon in his own words.
Look, folks, if it took me going to prison... Remember, the reason I chose Danbury, I asked for Danbury for a very specific reason.
Back in 19... The only other person that's ever been sent to prison for a congressional subpoena, not going to a House subpoena for contempt, held in contempt, was Reagan Lardner, Jr.
Back in the 1940s, during the House Un-American Activity Investigation, Columbia Studio fired him, okay, because of his political beliefs.
And then he was found guilty.
They sent it to the DOJ.
He was sent to prison.
He was sent to this prison.
That's why I requested Dan Burke, because there's no difference in his fight than in our fight.
I'm a political prisoner of Nancy Pelosi.
I'm a political prisoner of Merrick Garland.
I'm a political prisoner.
I'm a political prisoner of Joe Biden and the corrupt Biden establishment.
Okay, obviously we support Steve.
We support anyone who's being unjustly persecuted for being a conservative.
But what he said here isn't true.
He said there's no difference between that communist being sent to prison and Steve Bannon being sent to prison.
There's a big difference.
The big difference is that guy was a communist, and Steve Bannon is a conservative.
Steve is not giving himself anywhere near enough credit.
There's a big difference.
The people who are putting Steve Bannon in jail right now are communists, or communist sympathizers, or at least we would say radical leftists.
Why would Steve Bannon draw a comparison between himself and a communist, and express sympathy for the communist?
His speech here is taking a liberal line of argument to say, look, it's not about the particulars of political philosophy or the particular political ends we want to achieve.
All that matters is procedure.
I am being targeted for my political speech.
Forget about the substance of that political speech, the substance of goods we're after.
No, no, it's just about procedural norms.
I'm being targeted by the government for things that I'm saying about politics, and that's why I'm the same as a communist.
Now, Steve Bannon is a very intelligent guy, so I suspect that he didn't just make this argument accidentally.
Probably he is intentionally making a liberal line of argument here in order to persuade more liberal and moderate, centrist, independent voters.
But it is kind of funny to hear him say this because here he's criticizing the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
The HCUA was great.
It was fabulous.
There were actual communists, not only in Hollywood, there were communists in the State Department.
We know this for a fact because Richard Nixon doggedly pursued one of them, who was a very senior member of the State Department, who helped found the United Nations, for goodness sakes.
That was Alger Hiss.
And this was based on the testimony of Whitaker Chambers, a former communist who left the Communist Party, wrote an excellent book called Witness, and nobody believed Whitaker Chambers other than Richard Nixon, and no one believed Nixon, they always mocked Nixon, and Nixon and Chambers and the hardcore conservatives and McCarthy, a man who was defended by William F. Buckley Jr., so urbane a conservative as that, in McCarthy and His Enemies, and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
They were all right.
There were communists who had infiltrated the government who were trying to destroy the government from within.
And we nabbed at least one of them.
We nabbed Alger Hiss.
We got some other spies too, you know, during the effort to root out communists.
For goodness sakes, we were in a Cold War with the Soviet Union that was trying to subvert our country and install communism as they did in a number of other countries around the world.
Very curious that Steve Bannon would take this line of argument here.
He's appealing to a liberal sensibility, and maybe this is what the Republicans are going to do moving forward.
I'm not sure this is the wisest strategy.
In fact, I think it's better to draw a clear distinction between us and communists, and I think it's important to focus on substantive goods rather than merely procedural norms.
I think that the liberal lines of argument actually have hurt us, but maybe, Steve Bannon is thinking, It's an election year.
Just say we are being politically persecuted.
Forget about what we believe and what we're trying to achieve.
Forget about that.
If you're a leftist and you even have sympathy for the communists, you need to have sympathy for me.
It's a bold strategy.
We'll see if it pays off.
I don't mean that in a snarky way.
It very well might.
In fact, if the polls are any indication, it is paying off.
When the vast majority of Americans, including a lot of Democrats, including a lot of centrists, believe That Trump is being prosecuted primarily for political reasons.
Now, speaking of liberal lines of argument, there's this black Olympic runner.
Her name is Alaysia Johnson.
She's the runner in the women's 100 meter.
She has just come out, tears in her eyes, so happy that her selection for the Olympics will maybe help to carve a path for people who look like her.
It was all God.
I already knew.
I already knew before the season started what was coming for me.
I literally, I knew it was the easiest thing to do.
Because everybody all the time said that I wasn't good enough.
Said that I didn't deserve.
And so I did this my way.
She's making a way for everyone who looks like her.
to be.
This is for the hood babies.
This is for the people who are poor that come from nothing.
This is for everybody that looks like me, that was ever doubting and not did it with a black designer on my chest.
This is what I stand for, and I'm making a way for everybody in my position.
She's making a way for everyone who looks like her.
People are told, you can't do this because you're black.
Couldn't be because she's a woman, because the event is actually only for women.
So It's gotta be because she's black and black people, they're told they can't succeed in running.
So I'm looking at the video of her.
Doing the 100-meter hurdles, and every single person running is black, except for one.
There's one white lady, but then all the rest of them are black.
And then that got me thinking.
I'm not the biggest athlete in the world, you know, I don't watch the Olympics really, but I said, well, how many runners, just runners generally, in all these different events, how many of them are black?
Is it true that there is a dearth of black people running?
So I looked over just the last 60 years, that's as far as I went back, in the men's 100-meter running, I don't know, whatever the race is.
Nine out of 10 gold medalists have been black.
And one out of 10 was Italian, and the Italians are kind of like 50-50.
They're the Africans of Europe.
10 out of 10 silver medalists, black.
10 out of 10 bronze medalists, black.
I looked at the men's 200 meter.
Nine out of 10 who won the gold, black.
One out of 10, 1 out of 10, the one who wasn't black was Greek.
And you know, the Greeks invented the Olympics and they've been running for a long time.
And they're also a little racially kind of ambiguous.
10 out of 10 silver medalists, black.
9 out of 10 bronze medalists, black.
Men's 400 meter.
I kept going down the list on the wiki page.
9 or 10 of the gold medalists were black.
One of them was ethnically ambiguous, might have been a little bit black.
I said, okay, let me look at the women.
So I look at the women, 100 meter, 8 out of 9 gold medalists black, 9 out of 10 silver black, 7 out of 9 bronze black.
What about the women's 200?
10 out of 10 gold medalists black, 9 of 10 silver medalists black, 9 of 10 bronze medalists black.
I don't know, I could probably fill up the whole show listing the events in the Olympics, especially running, where virtually every winner has been black for a very long time.
The only people who might think that they can't make it in Olympic running Are the people who do not look like that runner.
The people who look like that runner, the one, you know, she's carving away for people who look like her, they should feel the most confident about being able to make it into the Olympics.
So why is she saying this?
Because this is the ideology that forms our views of everything now.
If you are black, you are always at a disadvantage for everything.
If you are white, you are always at an advantage for everything.
If you are black, anytime you do anything, it is the greatest triumph ever, you've overcome such odds.
If you are white, nothing you ever do is worth any kind of praise.
Actually, it's worth derision, even if you achieve something that's good.
That's just the ideology.
And the ideology has permeated the culture and it's set in for everyone such that a woman who is an Olympic runner herself Could actually believe, say it with a straight face, I have overcome such odds because of my skin color, I am paving a way for black people in running.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
For years, people have been switching their wireless service to Pure Talk to save money.
$20 a month for unlimited talk, text, and tons of data.
It's a no-brainer.
But over the past few weeks, Pure Talk has reported a surge of new customers signing up to help them support a charity that is near and dear to all of our hearts, America's Warrior Partnership.
Many of my own listeners have chosen to step away from Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile to switch to Pure Talk and help this great charity get to do business with a company that shares their values.
That is why Pure Talk has decided to extend their support for AWP through Independence Day.
From now through Independence Day, which by my count is tomorrow, Pure Talk will match every dollar donated.
Switch your cell phone service to America's most dependable 5G network with Pure Talk.
Go to puretalk.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, to start saving on wireless today.
Head on over there, support a great company, a great organization, get exceptional service, help support this show too, puretalk.com slash Knowles.
Speaking of incoherent statements, Joe Biden was incoherent again.
He just gave a climate speech and it's, I don't know, see if you can make this out.
So folks know these resources are available to them and anyone who needs them.
You got, I was telling the group who briefed me earlier, my brother has an expression, you got to know how to know.
You do have to know how to know.
I guess that's epistemology.
Maybe Joe Biden is lecturing on epistemology here.
That was the only part I could really catch clearly.
The rest of the sun, so much sun, but going back down, a swimming pool in Scranton, Pennsylvania.
We got my little corn pop, got the hairy legs on ice cream.
And he's sitting in the mind.
I got my brother, my brother, Jackie, tell me you got to know what you know.
You know what you know, Mayor Chief?
It's almost blending into Kamala Harris speaking jive.
I don't know, you know, we out here in these streets, Jive Turkey, you know, we got, you know what I'm talking about, Slim Jack?
We ain't here out pimping, it ain't easy, no man.
You dig what I'm saying in that blood?
My brother Jack, my brother Jack, he know how to know, he know what you know, how to don't know what you don't know.
So who knows?
Maybe there actually will be a relatively smooth transition if Biden steps down and Kamala Harris becomes the president.
In any case, this is not fixing Biden's problem.
To fix the problem.
I see why Biden gave this speech.
Biden has to give a lot of speeches right now.
And he has to give the speeches because to fix the problem that was created by his dismal performance at the debate, he needs to show people that he knows how to talk.
This is the only skill Joe Biden has ever possessed.
He's a talker.
That's what politicians do.
They talk.
And he's been talking pretty well since the early 1970s, when he was elected to the Senate below the constitutional age requirement to be elected to the Senate.
He's been in it for a long time, very ambitious guy, and he's a slick talker.
But he's not a slick talker anymore, so he's lost the one skill necessary for politicians.
So to fix it, he's got to go out there, he's got to show people he can talk.
Problem is, he can't talk.
He no longer can speak.
And Democrats have known this since at least 2020.
That's why they invented this story about the childhood stutter, which whether or not Biden had a stutter as a child, it disappeared for 47 years of his national political career.
No one ever heard of it.
No one ever suspected it.
It came roaring back with a vengeance somehow.
And it came roaring back because it was not a return of a childhood stutter.
It was the onset of dementia.
So he can't win for losing.
If he does nothing and stays on his porch, as he did during the 2020 race, he's going to lose.
All the polls show it.
If he goes out and speaks, he is going to lose even more.
As of right now, it seems there is nothing Biden can do to win.
He can't even rig the election and change all the rules because there's no bad batch of bat soup coming out of Wuhan.
It's a little late probably to do a global pandemic.
So what's he going to do?
The entire liberal establishment has said his brain has turned to pudding, so what's he gonna do?
Nothing.
Everything he does and says makes it worse.
This is true even for his spokesman.
He's got this terrible spokesman, Corrine Jean-Pierre, who's not that great at speaking herself, but they can't fire her because, speaking of identity politics, she's not only a black person, but a black woman, not only a black woman, but a black lesbian.
And so she has total job security.
Her predecessor, Jen Psaki, was okay.
She was fine in the role.
There have been many better press secretaries.
There have been many worse.
One of the worst ones is Corinne Jean-Pierre.
But Corinne Jean-Pierre is going to have that job as long as she wants.
Because she's not she's not fireable.
She's not good at the job, but she's a member of identity groups that just simply can't be fired, certainly on the left.
So whenever there's a really important announcement to make, they always trot out John Kirby, who's just like the plainest looking white guy you ever saw in your life.
But John Kirby, who in any other situation would already be the White House press secretary.
Because he's a white guy, he can't replace a black lesbian.
So he just remains the National Security Council spokesman.
And they trot him out when they've got important announcements to make.
Here, they put out Corinne Jean-Pierre.
She's asked, okay, can you give us any explanation about the bad debate performance?
I know that Biden had a cold or something.
Was he on cold medication?
Is that why he was slurring his words and slack-jawed drooling?
And her answer actually makes it worse.
You just reminded us that President Biden had a cold on Thursday.
What medications was he taking in the days or hours leading up to the debate?
And I know that question has come in a couple of times to us.
He was not taking any cold medication.
Was he taking any medication that would have interfered with his performance?
He was not taking any cold medication.
That is what I can speak to.
I've asked his doctor, and that's what he stated to us.
After the debate, did the president get examined by a doctor, or did he get a neurological scan?
A neurological scan?
Look, what I can say is that, just to take a step back, It was a bad night.
We understand that it was a bad night.
And the president has spoken to this.
And he understands that.
And so I cannot speak to anything beyond what I just shared.
The president has regular annual physicals that we release in a thorough report.
Okay, just end it.
Just get her.
I can't even bear to watch this brutal performance any longer.
Almost as bad as the presidential debate.
But what's she gonna say?
Says he wasn't on any cold meds.
Okay, follow up.
Normal question.
Was he on any kind of medication that would interfere with his performance?
That's specific.
It's not was he on any other kind of medication.
Joe Biden is in his 80s.
I'm sure he's on plenty of medication.
Who knows?
Maybe he's on blood pressure medication.
Maybe he's on this medication.
Maybe he's on that.
So the question specifically is any medication that might have interfered with his performance.
That is any medication that alters one's state of mind or radically alters one's behavior.
Is he on any senility medication?
Any dementia kind of medication?
And Corinne Jean-Pierre's implicit answer is yes.
Says, he wasn't on any cold meds, that's all I can tell you.
Now, she could have said, look, no, he's not on any medication that would have interfered for his performance.
And that would have covered all the normal meds that all sorts of old people are on.
Like blood pressure meds, for instance.
But she couldn't say no because, I guess the implicit admission here is, yeah, he was on a lot of medications that might have affected his behavior and his speech and his performance.
Yeah, he's senile.
Yeah, that's what it is.
When the White House has to make the statement she made, look, we know it was a bad night.
You know things are bad.
This woman's job is to never have to say, Such and such that the president did is bad.
That's her whole job.
Everything the president does is good, nothing he ever does is bad.
When the White House spokesman is forced by circumstances to say, it was bad, you know it's real bad.
It's even the subject of jokes on SNL.
We have our biannual funny sketch from Saturday Night Live came out specifically on the question of, are they gonna replace Biden?
But if Biden's not gonna run, Who will?
Just when you thought the terror was over.
I don't know.
I don't know.
Kamala?
You realize it's just beginning.
There's gotta be someone.
Cory Booker!
He's corny!
Mayor Pete!
Listen to yourself!
From the producers of Smile and the twisted minds of Morning Joe.
For those not...
For those listening right now, it's at Beto 2024.
Bernie on the wall.
Look at Bernie.
I have the perfect candidate.
Babe?
A superstar who can go all the way.
In the ring.
Who's it going to be?
It's funny, it's the biannual funny sketch from SNL because it's true.
I had actually forgotten when I did my own version of that sketch, not having seen SNL or maybe before the SNL one came out, I had actually forgotten about Beidou.
Remember they tried to make Beidou happen?
Bernie?
Yeah, here's one weird trick how Bernie can really, it's gonna be 2072, we're gonna be saying.
No, there's actually a chance Bernie could still win it.
So, there's really no one.
Really, the only even semi-plausible answer they've got right now is Kamala Harris.
The reason being, if Biden says he won't seek re-election because he's demented, he has to resign the presidency.
Doesn't he?
If he's saying, I'm not going to run again, not because, like LBJ, you know, I don't want to deal with the politics of it, or I don't think I would win re-election, or I'm just sick of the job.
He would be saying, I'm not running anymore because I'm not up to the job.
Well, if you're not up to the job in November, you're not up to the job today.
So, then he would have to step down, or they'd have to 25th Amendment the guy, and then Kamala would be president, and then Kamala would be the presumptive nominee.
She obviously wants the job.
And so if the Democrats skipped over her, they would be violating one of their sacred dogmas, the dogma of intersectionality and black women being right about everything.
So they couldn't replace her with a white guy.
They couldn't replace her with a lot of the candidates that they might consider.
So it's got to be Kamala.
And Kamala almost certainly loses to Trump, I think, and probably does worse against Trump even than Biden does.
What are they going to do?
So it's a horror show.
It's a horror show for the Democrats, and it's very funny for the rest of us because of how well this is working out for Trump.
For now, you know, to quote Trump, we knock on wood, we knock on wood, wherever we might have wood.
Now, speaking of entertainment, there's a story that I'm surprised that I am as interested in as I am.
This is the rumor, now months-long rumors, of a divorce between Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez.
Now, if you have not been following this story, you might think you were just transported back to 2003 or something.
No, you haven't been.
Ben Affleck dated J.Lo back in the early 2000s.
Then, they were engaged at one point, famously.
They did that A terrible movie together, Geely, and it was a big tabloid thing.
Then, they break up.
Ben Affleck gets married to another actress, Jennifer Garner.
He's married her for 13 years, from 2005 to 2018.
Then they break up, and he starts dating J-Lo again a few years ago, and then they got married, and now the rumor is they might get divorced.
Why do I care about this story?
Because it reminds me of words of a great poet-philosopher, Don Henley.
The words are, There's danger in the embers and you have only yourself to blame if you get burned when you try to rekindle that old flame and you skip down a few stanzas.
Speak to me plain, tell me the truth.
Is it really me you miss or just your long-lost youth?
The J-Lo-Ben Affleck story.
It speaks to me in part because I was a kid when they were a big tabloid feature when they were dating and then I thought it was so weird.
Oh man, you were just married to this other woman for 13 years and then you're going back to your old flame and then what do you know it doesn't actually work out.
Why?
Because time moves only in one direction and we are pulled back by nostalgia and nostalgia is a really insidious temptation.
Nostalgia, my friend Father George Ruttler says, nostalgia is history after a few drinks.
Oh, it all seems so rosy in retrospect.
But nostalgia can be a real danger, because you can't go backwards in time.
This is actually an area where the liberals and the progressives are probably a little more grounded to reality than the conservatives are, a lot of the time.
It pains me to say it, because the leftists are not all that grounded to reality on pretty much any other issue, but on this one they are, and it's that time only moves forward.
I joke and I say, I'd like to go back, not to 2012, but to 1220.
And I do, I look into the past, I see there are a lot of great things about the past, but I don't actually want to get in a time machine.
I just want to re-establish certain conditions and re-habituate people to certain behaviors and beliefs in the present.
But moving forward, because time only moves in one direction, you know, for Christians, for those of us in the West.
The Eastern religions don't really believe in time the way that we believe in time.
They think time can be cyclical, or there can be cycles of reincarnation, or certain pagan groups thought that time was kind of eternal, you know, and that nothing really ever changes, and the universe is eternal, and there are all sorts of views on it.
But that's not what Christians believe.
Christians believe the universe was created.
There's an act of creation.
We know how the story begins.
We know the turn of the story, the pivot of history, is the incarnation, and the crucifixion, and the resurrection.
We know how the story ends.
And we know it will end one day, in the apocalypse.
We've got to fill in the gaps in the meantime, but the time moves in one direction.
Marriage here, in fact, the Christians raise it to a sacrament.
Christ raises it to a sacrament.
It says marriage is a symbol between Christ and his church.
Christ the Bridegroom, the Church the Bride.
And it's a symbol of Christ's love for His Church.
So that marriage, from the Christian perspective, is permanent.
And it moves in one direction.
And as we lose our Christian sense of society, you're going to see, as you are seeing, a lot more divorce.
But you're also going to see a lot more nostalgia, kind of paradoxically, I suppose.
Because you're going to see people forgetting that you got to move forward.
This is a very important thing for us here at The Daily Wire.
We got to move forward.
We got to build the future.
We don't want the libs to build the future.
We don't want the progressives to build the future.
We want to build the future that we want to see in keeping with the best of our traditions and moving in the direction that we ought to move.
So this week, DW Plus is not only celebrating freedom.
We are giving it away for a year.
Buy one year of Daily Wire Plus, you get one free.
That's a good way to look two years into the future.
That means you get an additional year of The Michael Knowles Show, you lucky duck.
Uncensored, unfiltered, 100% ad-free, along with all of our daily shows from the most trusted voices in conservative media.
You gain access to our extensive library of compelling films, groundbreaking documentaries, hard-hitting series, and in-depth investigative journalism that you won't find anywhere else.
Purchase one year of DailyWirePlus, we will give you another year at no additional cost.
The deal won't last long.
Do not delay.
DailyWirePlus.com now.
Secure your two years of DailyWirePlus for the price of one.
Then return to your 4th of July festivities.
Join us today as we fight the left and build the future.
That was a great transition, huh?
My favorite comment yesterday is from Becky Faith, 1070, who says, If Biden can't debate at 9pm, how can he make critical decisions at 2am?
Yes, exactly.
This is the problem.
And this is why the moment he steps down for re-election.
He's got to resign the presidency, and then Kamala's president, and then what do you do?
Then what do you do?
Maybe you have to nominate her.
Speaking of marriage and the fruit of marriage, a really sad story hits the news, and it's not only a story of great sadness, it's a story of great hypocrisy.
This is coming out of the UK.
A British nurse has been convicted of killing seven babies and trying to kill an eighth baby.
This is a nurse, Lucy Letby, who works in a neonatal unit at a hospital.
So this is Countess of Chester Hospital.
It's in northwestern England.
This 34-year-old woman tried to kill a baby girl in his child, Kay, back in February 2016.
She had already killed a lot of other kids, allegedly.
And the kids she's killed were very premature girls.
The one she tried to kill was a very premature, in the words of the court, baby girl, and she's killed others because she's in the neonatal unit.
In the UK, it is currently legal to kill these babies as long as you kill these babies in the womb.
But the babies could be the exact same age as the babies that this woman killed.
They just happened to be inside the womb and their parents don't want them.
Their parents consent to murdering the babies.
And so, had this woman just moved from the neonatal unit into the abortion unit and killed the exact same type of babies at the exact same age, those babies might have looked almost identical.
This woman not only wouldn't be brought up on charges, she'd be hailed as a hero of reproductive rights and freedom and gender equality.
But because the babies delivered prematurely were outside the womb, the babies that she killed and tried to kill, allegedly, could actually have been younger, in some cases significantly younger, than the babies that are legally killed inside the womb in the United Kingdom.
Because the UK really doesn't place Well, almost any limit on abortion at all.
Most abortions are supposed to take place before 24 weeks in the UK.
But an abortion can happen at any time.
We played a clip on the show a couple days ago of a woman who was told full term, 38 or 39 weeks, that in the UK she could still abort her baby because the baby had Down syndrome.
So in the UK there's a carve out here.
If there's a threat to the life of the mother, one.
But two, if the baby has disabilities, so if the baby's handicapped or a little mentally impaired or something, then you can kill the baby, you know, just seconds before the baby would have been born otherwise.
So why is this woman being brought up on charges?
Well, she's being brought up on charges because it's one of the most heinous crimes you can possibly imagine, and the parents are demanding justice, and, you know, the blood of the innocent cries out to God for justice.
That's why.
We all know it.
No even semi-sensible person would suggest this woman should face anything other than the most severe consequences possible for these crimes.
But then, if you want to be consistent about that, you've got to outlaw the abortions.
You either have to let this baby murderer off the hook for all of the babies she's killed.
This woman's allegedly killed, what, seven babies?
Tried to murder an eighth?
That's nothing!
That's child's play compared to any Planned Parenthood.
They do that kind of thing between breakfast and lunch.
Actually, they kill many more babies between breakfast and lunch.
So, you either have to let the murderer off the hook and keep your abortion, Or get rid of your abortion, outlaw your abortion, and you prosecute this woman, if you want to be consistent about it, if you want to be fair and equitable, which obviously the libs do not.
Speaking of aberrant sexual behavior, really sad story was going around the internet yesterday from The Guardian.
Another UK story, and it was hitting a lot of the aggregators and social media feeds and it stuck out to me in part because I receive a lot of mailbag questions about this very topic.
Headline, The Secret Lives of Porn Addicts.
I am meticulous about covering my tracks.
As pornography use soars, some men feel their behavior is moving from a compulsion to an addiction.
They describe how this affects their health, happiness, and relationships.
Just the first paragraph.
Tony is in his 50s and recently did a rough calculation of how much of his life he has spent looking at pornography.
The result was horrifying, he says.
It was eight years.
I can barely think about it.
The sense of failure is intense.
He's not saying that he looked at pornography sometimes over the course of eight years.
He spent eight full years of his life looking at pornography.
So almost a fifth of his life, so about a sixth of his life, I guess, looking at pornography.
Porn and he's he says look he's got a total double life no one suspects this you know he's told a couple of therapists and now this this reporter and then the reporter interviews other people health officials and who are who say look this is obviously an addiction but it's not treated as an addiction because it's politically incorrect it's not very sex positive to say that this is an addiction but it obviously is in part
One doctor says that it is because it escalates.
It's not like, you know, you just look at porn and then you're good.
You keep seeking out harder and harder forms of it.
Like with a drug, you start out with a soft drug, and then if you keep doing drugs, you seek out harder and harder drugs.
That's the problem.
And it's a political problem.
I won't get into it.
It's really, I mean, read it.
It's good journalism, and you really feel for all these guys who don't get married because of this, who don't have kids because of this, who have trouble holding down jobs.
Some of these guys start looking at porn at work because they're addicted.
You know, it's like a guy who's, I don't know, he's doing a drug.
He's blowing a line of coke in the bathroom at work or something.
They start doing all of this, and it's taken over their lives, and they're miserable because of it, and they're speaking to this woman.
That's not just a personal problem.
It's a political problem.
When you have people living double lives, obviously that's a public issue, because at least one of those lives is the public one.
And there's no such thing really as a totally personal sin, but when it's affecting marriages, when it's affecting birth rates, when it's affecting work, those are political problems.
This needs to be treated as a public health crisis and a political issue.
The problem is in our country, we're no longer even treating drugs as a public health crisis.
We regulate cigars, and then we deregulate fentanyl and cocaine and heroin.
We regulate businesses, you know, operating their business, but we deregulate bizarre sex stuff.
I mean, there's one story out of San Francisco that actually ties in with my guest who's about to come on the Memorum Segmentum.
The San Francisco Pride Parade has just turned into the most depraved Sodom and Gomorrah-style display in front of little children.
Whatever you're imagining, it's worse.
They sent me a video of this earlier.
Sorry to say, I watched a minute or two of it.
So, my guest is Taylor Hanson.
If you want to tune in, you've got to become a member at dailywire.com.
Use code NOLS, you get all sorts of extra goodies.
That's a political problem.
You can't say, love is love, just leave me alone, stop interfering in my bedroom.
