Ep. 1542 - Venezuela RIGGED The Election Like Joe Biden
Apparently Venezuela is one of those "s-hole countries" Trump told us about, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh is killed in Iran by an alleged Israeli strike, and an MSNBC guest claims JD Vance only wants more “white children."
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1542
- - -
DailyWire+:
Join the fight. Become a member! https://dailywire.com/subscribe
Get tickets to Backstage LIVE at the Ryman, August 14! https://bit.ly/46igytS
Get your Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Make a qualifying purchase by July 31st and get a GOLDEN Truth Bomb! Text "KNOWLES" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/knowles
Responsible Man - Get 30% off, plus additional savings, at http://www.Responsibleman.com
- - -
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
Venezuela held a presidential election on Sunday, and while polls conducted before the election showed that centrist opposition leader Edmundo González Urrutia was likely to win by a large margin, the Venezuelan regime and its establishment media have declared socialist incumbent Nicolás Maduro the winner, leading to protests in the streets by ordinary citizens convinced that the election was stolen.
Now, Jorge Rodriguez, the socialist leader of the Venezuelan National Assembly, is calling his opponents fascists and demanding that the opposition leaders be thrown in prison.
With fascism there can be no contemplation, he says.
With fascism, there is no dialogue.
Fascism is not given procedural benefits.
Fascism is not forgiven.
Fascism, when it was forgiven, almost ended with the planet, almost ended humanity.
When they were pardoned, when the English talked to Hitler, they generated a war of more than 30 million Europeans killed or died in the war.
Our opponents are like Hitler, aren't they?
With fascism, you don't compromise.
You apply the laws to it.
With this I mean that the Public Prosecutor's Office must act as it is acting.
Maria Corina Machado, she has to go to jail!
One of the opposition members.
Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia!
He's the head of the conspiracy!
Fascist conspiracy that they're trying to impose in Venezuela!
This is a command of violent action.
They're trying to sow a civil war in Venezuela.
This is what they tried to do yesterday.
I was just waiting for him to call it an insurrection.
Absolutely outrageous behavior from this socialist Denying the people's legitimate concerns about a rigged election?
Baselessly smearing a huge number, perhaps the majority of citizens, as fascists?
Attempting to throw the opposition leaders in prison?
Who does this man think he is?
Joe Biden?
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
The media are continuing the Harris campaign talking point, which is not about any issue in particular.
They're just the Harris campaign like a mean girl on a schoolyard is saying that J.D.
Vance, the vice presidential nominee for the Republicans, is weird.
And to advance that line of argument, they've trotted out what appears to be a woman wearing a man's business suit, but actually turns out to be a man who identifies as a woman wearing men's clothing.
To prove that J.D.
Vance is the weird one.
Huh.
That's kind of weird, I guess you would say.
I got something that's really big.
Forget about the presidential election.
Who cares?
Forget about, oh, we're on the brink of World War III.
Forget about that.
This is a big announcement.
If you're driving, pull over.
If you're standing, sit down.
We have the Mayflower Cigar Travel Humidor.
I have waited for this for many months.
We designed this a long time ago.
It was in production, then it was on container ships, and now we've got it.
I actually haven't seen it.
This is my first time unboxing the Mayflower Cigars Travel Humidor.
Let's see it.
This is...
This is a thing of beauty.
Look at this.
Look at this.
It's got a nice nifty little handle.
That's kind of cool.
You usually don't see that on this.
You can carry this.
Throw this in your briefcase.
Throw this in your suitcase.
You're going on a weekend.
You're going to the cigar bar.
You're going to a barbecue.
It's got a lovely Mayflower cigar logo from dawn to dusk.
Very subtle design here to blend with the black.
The key, of course, is that You've got nice little padding here so you throw it in your suitcase, your cigars aren't going to get destroyed.
It's got a great seal on it, which is really all you need in a humidor.
These things are basically indestructible, really strong.
I know for a fact that these are going to sell out very, very quickly.
If you want one, you should order one right now.
They're an extremely reasonable price.
I try to do that with all my Mayflower stuff.
We could charge a lot more money for the Mayflower cigars and for the cutters and for the now-travel humidor, but I try not to because it's like the Mayflower, you know?
I want it to be accessible.
These are ordinary, hard-scrabble Americans who are able to enjoy some wonderful things like the crop that built our country.
But it's going to be accessible luxury.
So it's accessible at a price point.
It won't be accessible when it sells out.
If you want one, get it today.
Mayflowercigars.com.
You have to be 21 years old or older to order some exclusions.
Apply.
Mayflowercigars.com.
Back to Venezuela, which I'm very happy to say does not grow tobacco.
So I don't need to worry if there's a civil war in Venezuela.
It'd be very sad for many reasons, but there should not be any disruptions to my cigars, which is great.
Reuters is reporting that the Venezuelan opposition says its victory is irreversible.
73% of votes have been tallied.
The opposition leaders have won.
The socialist incumbent regime has lost.
That's it.
It's irreversible.
Right?
Uh, no.
No, it's very much reversible, actually.
I remember, I'm just, I'll give you a hypothetical.
Let's say it's election night in a developed country and it looks like one candidate is winning by a lot and then they just stop all the counting, you know, and then they wait like days and weeks even to finish the counting and then all of a sudden everything gets reversed.
That happens sometimes.
And this is some political insight that you get not just from a tinpot dictator, well a kind of tinpot dictator I guess, not just from some third world banana republic.
This is the kind of advice and insight you get from one of the most powerful presidents in the history of the United States to another one of the most powerful presidents in the history of the United States, albeit before he was elected.
Franklin Roosevelt wrote a letter to his protege, Lyndon Johnson.
Uh, this was in, I believe it was 1941 after Johnson had lost a Senate race.
And this is reported in the great biography of Lyndon Johnson by Robert Caro, uh, This is Path to Power, the years of Lyndon Johnson.
FDR writes, Lyndon, apparently you Texans haven't learned one of the first things we learned up in New York State, and that is when the election is over, you have to sit on the ballot boxes.
Famous line from Franklin Roosevelt.
Oh yeah, Lyndon, you campaigned alright, but you forgot the most important part, which is who's counting the votes.
This is, if you think of that meme of the brain, you know, turning, you got the brain-dead version, then you got the guy starting to think, then you got your brain starting to work, and then you've got really galaxy brain.
The brain-dead understanding of politics is that politics is about winning arguments.
Look, I like to think that logic, rhetoric, oratory has something to do with politics, but that's basic stuff.
The smarter version is when people say, politics, it's not about winning arguments, it's about winning popularity.
Okay, that's true, but popularity and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee if you don't turn out on election day.
So then the smarter people, they say, no, politics, it's not about winning arguments, it's not about winning popularity, it's about winning votes.
You got to get the votes.
Okay, yeah, well, that's closer.
You're getting closer.
The galaxy brain take is that politics is not about winning arguments, not about winning popularity, it's not even totally about winning votes.
It's about counting votes.
Who counts the votes?
Who watches to make sure that the person counting the votes isn't cheating?
Who's sitting on the ballot box?
That's the insight that President Roosevelt gives to future President Johnson.
That is the insight that the socialist regime in Venezuela understands right now, and it seems that Reuters and a number of other people in the media have forgotten that.
It looks like the people voted for the opposition leader, but does Venezuela possess the political structures to oust the socialist dictator from power?
Right now that remains rather dubious.
But the victory is irreversible.
Oh yeah?
Tell that to Maduro.
Tell that to the Venezuelan Army.
Tell that to the guy who's still sitting in power.
Now, speaking of shady government activity, there are explosive new revelations from the investigation into the near assassination of President Trump just a few weeks ago.
We know that there were massive security lapses.
The Secret Service has finally admitted that this was a colossal failure.
We are now learning that the shooter was rather sophisticated, We know that the shooter had a drone over the site to scope out the whole area where President Trump is going to be speaking.
We know that the Secret Service did not use drones.
Kind of a basic technology these days.
The 20-year-old shooter used this technology.
The U.S.
Secret Service didn't.
And what we've now discovered, thanks to a grilling from Senator Josh Hawley, A grilling of one of the deputy directors of the FBI.
We know that the Secret Service was offered the use of drones and turned it down.
That seems like a pretty basic fact.
I'm also told that local law enforcement suppliers offered the Secret Service drones And you declined them.
Is that true?
So, Senator, one, I've been very transparent and forthcoming.
Your agency has not been transparent and forthcoming, so please, let's not go there.
I have been forthcoming, sir.
That remains to be seen.
You've been on the job a few days.
So far, you've fired nobody.
Now, the drones.
Thank you, sir.
Were you offered drones?
No, there was an offer to fly a drone on that day.
And why did you deny it?
Again, I think the ability of local law enforcement to provide an asset, we probably should have taken them up on it if it was offered.
Whoa!
What an admission.
So, we were offered the drone.
We turned it down.
I have no explanation for why we turned it down.
Yeah, oopsie-daisy.
Actually, I guess we probably should have used it.
I love Hawley's Smackdown.
Sir, I've been very forthcoming.
Actually, your agency lied, and you've been on the job for five minutes, so spare me.
There's zero evidence that you guys have been forthcoming.
There's a lot of evidence that you haven't been.
We don't know anything about you, Deputy Director, other than you don't have an answer to a basic question.
Why did you turn down a basic security measure?
Why did you reject it?
Because it would be one thing If the Secret Service came out and said, we just didn't think those were necessary.
We didn't want to use drones on that day.
Local law enforcement offered it to us.
We said, we don't need that.
We don't want that.
But we found out in testimony that the Secret Service actually did want to use drones and something about their drone technology on that particular day in Pennsylvania just didn't work.
Director Rowe, can you explain why the shooter's drone worked?
Because there was no counter UAS present, sir.
Well, you had a drone system, but you had bandwidth problems.
The bandwidth apparently was adequate for the shooter's drone, but not for the Secret Service.
Can you explain that?
I have no explanation for it, sir.
We also know that in the military context, electronic warfare or jamming capabilities are commonly used on the battlefield.
Does the Secret Service have jamming capabilities?
Or drones?
We have drones, sir, and when it comes to... I have to be very careful about how I answer this one in an open forum.
What I can tell you is that we have technical security measures, sir, to address, I think, what you're asking me.
Huh?
Hold on.
Wait.
You're telling me...
That this 20-year-old kid that we know nothing about, we'll get to now, there's even more revelations about how little we know about this guy coming from the government, but this 20-year-old kid that we know nothing about, some apparent total loser, loner, weirdo, that word's become popular lately, just we don't know anything about him.
He was able to get his drone off the ground, but the United States Secret Service wasn't able to do the same.
That the 20-year-old lone gunman that we know nothing about had better technology, more functional technology than the U.S.
Secret Service.
And then on top of that, when your drones didn't work, local law enforcement offered you the use of their drones.
And you said, no, we're good.
We're good, actually, no thanks.
And you testify that you have no explanation as to how that happened, how the drones didn't work, how your drone systems broadly didn't work, and why you would turn it down from local law enforcement.
You got nothing?
But you're so forthcoming?
Something is really, really weird about these explanations.
There's so much more to say first, though.
Text Knowles to 989898.
Saudi Arabia recently ended its 50-year petrodollar deal with the U.S., which has the potential to weaken the U.S.
dollar.
Since 1974, Saudi Arabia has sold oil solely in U.S.
dollars, which was huge for our global economic dominance.
If there is less demand for the U.S.
dollar, what happens to its value?
It is for reasons like this.
I think it's important to diversify some of your savings into gold.
You can do that with the help of Birch Gold.
Right now, qualifying purchases are eligible to get a one-of-a-kind limited edition Golden Truth Bomb.
The only way to claim your eligibility is by texting KNOLLS, K-N-N-W-L-L-E-S, to 989898.
Protect your savings by diversifying away from the U.S.
dollar with gold.
Text Knolls K-N-O-W-L-E-S to 98-98-98.
Birchgold will help you convert an old IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold for no money out of pocket.
Right now qualifying purchases will get a limited edition Truth Bomb.
Text Knolls K-N-O-W-L-E-S to 98-98-98.
That is Knolls to 98-98-98.
Remember last week the FBI Director Christopher Wray came out and he said that he didn't know if Trump was even shot by a bullet.
Remember that?
Ray comes out and says, corrects legislators and says, well, you know, actually, we don't know.
There's some question.
Was Trump hit by shrapnel?
Was it a shard of something?
Oh, we don't even know if he was really shot.
And the American public said, hold on, we saw him get shot.
We heard the gunshot go off.
We saw him get shot.
You can even, if you look at the photo, you can see the bullet going out of his ear.
You're telling me, FBI Director, that now we shouldn't believe our lying eyes that Trump wasn't really shot?
So, the FBI Deputy Director is asked about this, and he comes clean.
Deputy Director of the FBI, is that correct?
Yes, Senator.
Is there any doubt in your mind, or in the collective mind of the FBI, that President Trump We shot in the ear by a bullet fired by the assassin Crooks.
Senator, there is absolutely no doubt in the FBI's mind whether former President Trump was hit with a bullet and wounded in the ear.
No doubt, there never has been.
I've been part of this investigation since the very beginning and that has never been raised.
You're sure?
Yes.
It wasn't a space laser?
No.
It wasn't a murder hornet.
Absolutely not.
It wasn't Sasquatch.
No, Senator.
It was a bullet.
It was a bullet, Senator.
100%.
Fired by crooks.
Yes, sir.
That hit President Trump in the ear and almost killed him.
100%, Senator.
Okay.
Glad we cleared that up.
Okay.
Love it.
Love Senator Kennedy here.
And love the clarity from this Deputy Director of the FBI.
There's no question that Trump was shot with a bullet and there never was.
So does that mean the director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, was lying?
It means one of two things.
It means this man is so ignorant, so totally incompetent, that he doesn't know the most basic facts of the most important matter that's come before the FBI in decades.
Or he lied.
That's all it can mean.
Or this deputy director is lying, and all of our eyes are lying because we didn't really see Trump get shot.
Stinks to high heaven.
But then on top of that, here is the cherry on top that really makes this whole thing look weird.
The FBI.
is now claiming, reportedly, that the shooter had one social media account.
Remember we were told he's got no social media trace.
A lot of people reacted to that.
They said, hold on, you're telling me a 20-year-old in the year of our Lord 2024 doesn't have any social media?
Doesn't make any sense.
No one believes that.
Everybody has a social media trace.
Well, okay, now they're saying he had this one social media account and it shows that he was anti-immigrant and anti-semitic.
So, Andrew Torba Who is the head of Gab, one of these right-wing social media platforms.
He came out and he said, look, I don't usually disclose law enforcement requests that we get, but in this case, it's a matter of such public opinion, I will, though I'll redact it somewhat.
But yeah, they're talking about us.
Apparently, it's our platform that this shooter had the social media account on, and they're not telling you the truth about it.
This description that the shooter was anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic, this is not consistent with Gab's understanding of the shooter's motives based on an emergency disclosure request we received from the FBI last week for the Gab account, Epic Microwave, which based on the content of the emergency disclosure request, the FBI appeared to think belonged to Thomas Crooks, the shooter.
The account for which data was requested was unequivocally Pro-Biden, and in particular, pro-Biden's immigration policy.
To the best of Gab's knowledge, as of 2021, Crooks was a pro-lockdown, pro-immigration, left-wing Joe Biden supporter.
That would be consistent with the shooter making his only political donation ever to a left-wing Democrat group.
Though it's still inconsistent with the fact that the shooter was apparently registered as a Republican.
But that's what we're hearing from social media.
Now, I don't know.
I don't know who's telling the truth.
But I know something's real fishy.
And what is fishy is not that someone tried to shoot Trump.
That's not fishy at all.
The leading Democrats in America established the premise that justifies an assassination of Trump years ago, and they've been repeating it for years.
For years, the leading Democrats, up to and including Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, have said that Trump is Hitler, he models his career after Hitler, he wants to do things that Hitler did, and he poses an existential threat to our country.
That premise, which is false, but that premise, if it were true, would justify assassinating Trump.
Unless you think we should go soft on Hitler.
Unless you think, no, actually Hitler is a nice guy, we should just talk to him.
Unless you think that a country shouldn't defend itself against an existential threat.
Existential.
So it's not fishy that someone tried to shoot Trump.
That's what the Democrats' language has been leading toward for many years.
What's fishy Is that the US Secret Service and the FBI have been caught lying about it.
In the case of the FBI, perhaps multiple times, the Secret Service came out and said Trump did not ask for more security.
That was a lie.
We found out that Trump did request more security and those security requests were denied.
So the Secret Service was lying.
That looks like a cover-up.
The FBI has been caught lying.
The director of the FBI said maybe Trump wasn't even shot.
The deputy director comes out and says, we have always known that Trump was shot.
It has never even been a possibility that crossed our minds that Trump was not shot.
So that's a lie.
The FBI is claiming that the shooter had the social media profile that said one thing.
The man who runs the social media network says that's not actually what his profile said.
That looks like another lie.
What's so fishy is not that a controversial politician was assassinated, or was nearly assassinated.
What's fishy is these major US government institutions, the Secret Service and the FBI, have lied about it.
At least once each, maybe twice in the case of the FBI.
Why are they lying?
What are they covering up?
Could be that they're covering up their own incompetence.
Or it could be more nefarious.
All I know is, every time they lie, every time they try to cover something up, it looks a lot worse for them.
There's so much more to say.
First, though, go to ResponsibleMan.com.
Gentlemen, In these challenging times, our nation needs strong, responsible men.
That is why Responsible Man created the Emerson Multivitamin.
With 33 key ingredients, this American-made powerhouse supports your immune system, sharpens your mind, and keeps your heart and muscles strong.
Right now, you can get your first order of Emerson Multivitamins for just $27.99.
That is over 30% off.
That is over 30% off.
Go to ResponsibleMan.com and fuel your commitment to your faith, to your family, to your country.
That is ResponsibleMan.com right now.
We live in a time when people don't even really know what a man is.
However, this crisis of masculinity is going to be a real problem for America.
You know, what's that meme?
It says, easy times make weak men and weak men make bad times and strong men.
Anyway, the point is you need strong men.
I feel like I'm George W. Bush.
Go to ResponsibleMan.com.
Be the man America needs.
As a Daily Wire Plus member, you get uncensored, ad-free shows, the latest breaking news, and more.
Join the fight now at DailyWire.com slash subscribe.
When the libs are not attacking Trump, they are attacking J.D.
Vance.
And the latest line, it's a word I've now used ironically many times in this show, weird, that's the new attack.
They can't really hit Vance too much on policy.
He has very standard, in some ways moderate, conservative policies, very popular policy views.
Vance is obviously intelligent, he's very accomplished, he came from nothing and he really made something of himself.
The guy's totally unimpeachable.
An ordinary person, a sensible person, would say he's actually quite normal and has done really great things in his life from a normal perspective, the perspective of norms and standards and living in a way that is conducive to flourishing.
The libs are calling him weird and so CNN just ran another J.D.
Vance's weird segment by inviting on screen one of J.D.
Vance's former classmates.
This is someone from Yale Law School.
There's really no lower level, well actually Dante says this overtly and explicitly, there's no lower level of sin than those who betray their benefactors and their friends, the treacherous.
And you see this especially at some of the prestigious universities where, I don't know, some people's careers do better than others and that green-eyed monster comes out and, I don't know, some Yale Law School person wants to get 15 minutes of fame on TV by having known a notable person 15 years ago or something.
So that's what happens here.
But the irony of the whole thing is...
In order to make the case that J.D.
Vance is weird, CNN has trotted out what appears to be a woman named Sophia Nelson wearing a man's business suit.
Sophia, thank you very much for sharing all of this with us.
I know you did it after great consideration, and I appreciate it.
I know everyone watching does too, so thanks.
Thank you for your time, Aaron, and yeah, absolutely.
This was a difficult decision for me because, again, I do care about JD, and I'm a private person.
I've never been on national TV before.
This is not comfortable for me, but I thought the American people had a right to know, and I thought trans kids needed to know that these MAGA people, they're not actually scared of you.
They don't think there's anything wrong with you.
They're engaged in political opportunism, and you're going to be all right.
All right, Sophia, thank you.
So hold on, gotta correct the record here.
To prove that J.D.
Vance is weird, not only did CNN trot out a lady dressed up like a man, but they trotted out a lady dressed up like a man who advocates the castration of little kids.
But J.D.
Vance is weird.
And I think I have to make a further correction, maybe.
When I posted about this on social media, I was informed that this woman is actually a man who identifies as a woman with a woman's name, but who dresses like a man still.
But now, it's just totally unclear from the articles and the mentions in the media.
And so I don't know.
It could just be that she's a woman who kept a woman's name but dresses like a man and kind of has a woman's voice or who is a man who has taken the hormones to do the voice or whatever.
So you know what I'm going to do?
I'm going to use, I'm going to go back to the Oxford English Dictionary.
I'm going to use the pronoun he because he is the gender-neutral singular pronoun but I am not necessarily calling this person a man I just don't I I just don't know at the very end Aaron Burnett ends that segment says okay well thanks for coming on and and trashing your your former friend and then this person Mr. Nelson says Yeah, but before we go, we need to trans all the kids.
We gotta castrate those kids.
I'm motivated to come on and tell my story because of how important it is to mutilate little kids' genitals and to stop them from going through puberty and to confuse them and to dress them up like the opposite sex.
I think that's really important.
In different words, but that was the gist.
And what tells you the whole story is when CNN broke that clip out, when they clipped it to put on social media, they didn't include that last minute.
That guy went off script a little bit at the end.
No, didn't you get the story?
We're here to talk about how weird JD is.
So can you maybe ixnay on the anzing the kids tray?
Can you cool it with all the weird sex stuff?
We're trying to prove that JD, Normal, hard-working, successful family man, beautiful wife, beautiful kids, turning from private enterprise to service country and public service that, no, we gotta make him look like the weird one!
Maybe just, for now, cool it with transing the kids.
They can't do it.
They cannot do it.
Molly Jong Fast, who is a left-wing journalist of sorts, left-wing character at least, went on MSNBC to make the usual left-wing claim that anyone they don't like is racist and sexist and this and that, but she really stepped in it.
She did even less research than most liberal journalists do, and they're already quite lazy and ignorant.
She said that JD Vance, He only wants there to be more white children in America.
The stats are there.
More and more Americans choosing not to have kids, which again emphasizes why J.D.
Vance's comments about childless Americans, childless cat ladies, could be so politically damaging.
Well, so what's interesting is this is this natalism that comes from an authoritarian playbook, right?
That there need to be more white children.
J.D.
Vance doesn't want there to be more children.
When he says it's good to have families and have kids, he doesn't want there to be more kids generally.
for him wanting more children.
He wants a certain kind of racist thing.
J.D. Vance doesn't want there to be more children.
When he says it's good to have families and have kids, he doesn't want there to be more kids generally.
He only wants there to be more white kids, which is why he married an Indian woman and has biracial children.
Wait, what?
Whoops, huh?
What?
This woman.
This woman.
If Molly Jungfast did not exist, the conservatives would have to invent her.
She doesn't even Google the man.
She doesn't even look at a picture of his family.
She's doing a segment.
She's pontificating on J.D.
Vance's understanding of family.
She doesn't even Google J.D.
Vance's family to realize he's married to an Indian.
And he has biracial children.
No, he's probably a racist.
He's a conservative.
He's probably a racist.
This reminds me, some years ago, a woman, a black liberal activist, went on David Webb's show, and she accused David Webb, a conservative radio host, of white privilege.
That's a radio show.
So you call into the radio show.
You're not on TV.
You don't see people.
And David Webb just starts laughing.
Why are you laughing at me?
And he says, lady, if you knew who I am, I don't think you would be accusing me of white privilege because I'm a black guy.
And it was a beautiful interview, I hope we can find the clip somewhere in the annals of the internet.
Because it showed you how disingenuous all these accusations are.
It's just the knee-jerk reaction, so-and-so is racist, so-and-so is white privilege, so they don't care, they don't even Google it!
And even if they did Google it, Google rigs the search results anyway, so they probably wouldn't see anything even resembling the truth.
But it's hilarious when it turns up.
Now, before we move on from Molly Jongvest, I want to point out her first remarks.
She says this natalism.
Natalism is a fancy left-wing scare word for thinking it's good to have kids.
That's what it means.
You know the thing that statistically everyone forever has thought?
Yeah, now that's a terrible, scary, evil, far-right ideology.
She says that wanting to have kids is an ideology that is authoritarian, far-right, racist.
If you want to have kids, you're probably a fascist.
You're basically Hitler if you think it's good to have children.
Her saying this He totally vindicates J.D.
Vance's joke that he made on a TV show years ago that the libs are trying to make a big deal out of.
On the TV show, he said, you know, we're being governed by all these childless cat ladies.
That's a problem.
He's obviously not making fun of people who have suffered infertility.
He's obviously not making fun of people who, for whatever reason, haven't had children.
He's not making fun of nuns.
He's not making fun of people in consecrated celibacy.
He's making fun of a political type.
He's making fun of a political ideology.
And Mollie Jongfast is proving it.
The rejoinder from the Libs to J.D.
Vance is, how dare you mock people who don't have children?
How dare you mock people who, through personal circumstance, haven't had children or haven't been able to have children?
But obviously, J.D.
is making a political point, and Mollie Jongfast admits it.
She says, yeah, yeah.
I view having kids as a political action.
This is about a political ideology.
We're going to call it natalism.
And it's evil.
And I condemn it.
And we should discourage people from having children.
Because having children is far right and fascist and evil and extreme and... Oh, you're proving J.D.
Vance's point.
You are... Thank you, Molly Jongfest.
That's so beautiful.
And you're also proving J.D.
Vance's point that you guys have no idea what you're talking about.
You call him a racist white supremacist who only wants white kids, and his kids are half Indian.
Speaking of Indians, Kamala Harris.
This was a doozy.
It made the rounds last night.
Kamala Harris is hitting the campaign trail, and people are noticing a change in Kamala Harris.
Not a change in how she looks, not a change in how she dresses, but a little bit of a change in how she talks.
And you all helped us win in 2020, and we're going to do it again in 2024.
Yes, we will.
So let's get right- And we gonna do it again, man.
You know that across 110th Street.
Pimp's trying to find a woman that's weak.
You know what I mean, man?
Jive Turkey?
That's right.
Well, we're moving on up.
That's not how- That's not how I remember Kamala Harris speaking.
I'd listen to Kamala Harris a fair bit, more than I'd like to.
And she always- She seems to speak differently than that.
That sounded a little bit more, I don't know, a little bit more jive to me, didn't it?
It kind of reminded me of when Hillary Clinton hit the campaign trail in 2008, and she started to sound a little bit different than she used to.
I don't feel no ways tired.
I've come too far.
In Kamala's defense, Hillary's black voice was way worse and sillier than Kamala's.
I'm not saying Kamala's was subtle, it's not.
I'm not saying Kamala's was natural.
In Kamala's defense, Hillary's black voice was way worse and sillier than Kamala's.
I'm not saying Kamala's was subtle.
It's not.
I'm not saying Kamala's was natural.
Kamala Harris, though she is now presenting herself as, I don't know, Malcolm X, the lady Malcolm SX or something, she's half Indian and then half Afro-Caribbean.
So she really doesn't have any link to the African-American culture whatsoever.
And she just speaks like an ordinary American.
If she came out and started to put on a little bit of an Indian accent, that would be crazy, but at least, okay, I guess maybe she heard that in the house as a child.
Or if she came out like, well, you know, we're gonna come to Jamaica and feel all right, man, you know.
One love, then you'd say, well, again, kind of strange, Kamala, but maybe there's some heritage thing there.
But for her to put on the accent, the caricature and stereotypical accent of American black vernacular is completely disingenuous.
She has no connection to that whatsoever.
She's doing it for the same reason Hillary Clinton did it, for the same reason a lot of politicians do it, which is that all people are mimetic.
We imitate others.
This is the theory of Rene Girard.
It's how we cultivate even our desires.
It's how we cultivate our behaviors and our tics and our speech patterns and all the rest.
And politicians are even more in tune with this than other people because their job is to appeal to people and to find common ground with people.
So I give politicians a little bit of grace on it.
Even Hillary.
I don't feel no ways tired.
I've come too far.
She's probably doing that unwittingly, unconsciously.
I think Kamala Harris does most things unconsciously.
I don't think she's necessarily the most self-aware human being that there is.
But it is an amazing identity transformation.
She once posited herself as the, you know, one of the first Indian Americans, Indian American women to do this, to do that.
And that's changed now, the dynamics of a presidential campaign.
It serves her purposes much better to be the first black woman.
And so now, get ready.
We live in an age of identity transitions.
She's about to undergo a big one.
While new challenges emerge daily, one thing remains constant.
The Daily Wire.
We are on the front lines, cutting through the nonsense to deliver you the facts.
From our uncensored, ad-free daily shows to our breaking news coverage and investigative journalism, the most trusted names in media live right here.
And the most handsome.
Join us as we fight the left and build the future.
Become a Daily Wire Plus member now at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Gage Lawrence 8443.
Dudes for Kamala.
Wait, how do they know what a dude is?
Great point!
Even the group that Kamala spun up was white dudes for Kamala, but I've been told by the left that there's really no such thing as a white identity.
Whiteness is invented and that's why we need to abolish it.
It's not real, it's ephemeral.
And then dudes, of course, there's no such thing as a man or a woman, but we can be whatever we want, man.
But it's kind of funny how at election time they know what a white dude is.
When it comes time to shore up one of their most vulnerable demographics, all of a sudden they figured it out.
That's good.
Maybe they can remember after the election.
Speaking of political displays, President Trump has weighed in on that sacrilegious and generally disgusting Olympics opening ceremony that mocked Christ and that exposed a man's genitals next to a child on international television.
We know that Jill Biden said it was spectacular.
It was just so wonderful, wasn't it?
Here's what Trump has to say about it.
Have you watched any of the Olympics?
I thought that the opening ceremony was a disgrace, actually.
I thought it was a disgrace.
The mocking of the Last Supper.
I thought it was... Catholics and Christians across the globe are outraged.
I mean, they can do certain things.
I thought it was terrible.
Can you say at the next Olympics, if you're present, there won't be... you'll have enough influence on the organizers that we won't be, you know, insulting Christians?
We won't be having a Last Supper as portrayed The way they portrayed it the other night, I just think, look, I'm for everybody.
I'm very open minded.
You understand, you know me better than most people know me.
I'm very open minded.
But I thought what they did was a disgrace.
I love this take from Trump here because it's so measured.
The Libs always want to portray him as some extreme radical, but his take is actually very moderate.
What does he say?
He says, yeah, that mockery of Christ and disrespect shown to Christians and that just generally, that was really, that was bad.
You know, and look, I'm for everybody.
I'm open-minded.
What is he advocating here?
He's advocating for Religious toleration and respect of other people.
That's what he's advocating for.
He is advocating for a moderate position.
The position that was universally held by everyone, or at least people, everyone said that they held this position until very recently when the left decided that they were just going to wage an overt war on Christianity.
They were just going to regularly, openly mock Christianity.
This began in earnest with Barack Obama condemning those people who cling to their guns and religion.
You know, they cling to their Bibles when they get a little nervous.
That was the beginning of the mockery of Christianity at that national level.
You didn't really see that from Bill Clinton.
You certainly didn't see it from guys like Jimmy Carter.
Obama did it, then you start to, it becomes a little bit more out in the open, and now you've got the Olympics mocking Christ at the Last Supper, the moment right before his Passion, before he dies to redeem all of mankind.
And the First Lady of the U.S., married to the supposedly devout Catholic President, says it was spectacular.
And Trump's view is not, we need another crusade, deus vult.
That's not his view.
It might be kind of cool if that were his view, but it's not.
His view is just, hey, let's just treat everybody with respect.
And let's not, I'm not saying we're going to pass some law, but just let's not flagrantly, using public money and public spaces, attack religion.
That just seems kind of wrong, doesn't it?
Very moderate, and I think very moderate centrist voters.
We'll like that take.
So, there's a question now, though, that's hit the internet.
The Libs, you know, falsehood flies before the truth can get out of bed.
The Libs are now claiming that Trump said he's not a Christian.
So, amid all this controversy over the hideous parody of The Last Supper, Trump, supposedly, at a Turning Point action conference, said that he's not a Christian.
Now, I pulled the clip.
You tell me what you hear.
And again, Christians, get out and vote!
Just this time!
You won't have to do it anymore.
Four more years.
You know what?
It'll be fixed.
It'll be fine.
You won't have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.
I love you, Christians.
I'm a Christian.
I love you.
Get out.
You gotta get out and vote.
In four years, you don't have to vote again.
We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote.
Okay, so two things that really leap out at people.
One, the headline, Trump says you won't have to vote in four years.
Why?
Because he's going to become a dictator or something.
It's obviously not what he's saying.
But second of all, he says Trump says he's not a Christian.
That's not what I heard.
His voice did get caught a little bit, but what I heard was, I love you Christians!
I love my Christians!
I'm a Christian!
But what they're saying is, he said, I'm not a Christian!
But I didn't hear not, and it doesn't make any sense as to why he would say he's not a Christian.
I don't think he's ever come out and said, I'm not a Christian.
He's regularly talked about how much he loves Christianity and he's held that Bible and he sells a Bible for goodness sake.
So I think that's obviously totally fake news.
If anything, Trump will go out and say, I love autoworkers.
He'll say, I love this guy.
He'll say, I love that guy.
But in this case, he said, I love Christians.
And I think it daunted him.
Wait a second, I am a Christian.
That's why I also love Christians.
I love myself, too.
But then on this other point, he says, you're not going to need to vote again.
And the Libs say, he's going to upend elections.
He's going to become a dictator.
Because they clipped out that last bit.
The last bit he clearly says, because it's going to be so good you're not going to need to vote.
He's not saying you're not going to be able to vote, he's saying you're not going to need to vote because we're going to fix things.
Just put me in, I'm going to fix things up.
So what is he arguing for?
What is he talking about with all of this discussion of Christianity and the relation of politics to the church?
I think the view he's articulating is a view advocated actually by my main man Dante, one of the first guys to advocate this view, which is that You need some distinction between church and state, but not a total separation.
There used to be a really tight unity, and for a while some of the popes, like Boniface VIII, were calling for, you know, the subservience of the state to the pope.
Dante, very courageously, said, no, no, no, that's bad, actually.
The state derives its authority from God, the emperor derives his authority from God, and the pope also derives his authority directly from God.
The state is a natural institution, it actually precedes the church, the church is formed within the empire, so one leads man toward his natural ends, one leads man towards his supernatural ends, but they relate to each other in this crucial aspect.
Dante argues that the distinction between church and state "...should not be taken so literally as to mean that the Roman prince is not in some sense subject to the Roman pontiff, since this earthly happiness is in some sense ordered toward immortal happiness.
Let Caesar, therefore, show that reverence towards Peter, which a firstborn son should show his father, so that, illumined by the light of paternal grace, he may the more effectively light up the world over which he has been placed by him alone, who is ruler over all things spiritual and temporal." A beautiful, a beautiful description.
He's saying we want a distinction between church and state.
We, you know, we want the political power to have its realm, but we want the political power to be enlightened by the spiritual power.
Because if the political power is totally divorced from spiritual reality, well, things could go really, really bad.
Then you could get tyrannies.
Then you could get totalitarian dictatorships that are totally contrary to truth and goodness and beauty.
No, no, no.
But you also don't want the church just dominating, like the hierarchs would want, just dominating the state.
You want there to be a distinction, the state in the temporal realm, the church in the spiritual realm, and the temporal realm to receive some light from the spiritual realm.
Because man's natural ends, all the goods, you know, feeding your family, having a successful household, you know, being fruitful and multiplying, having harmony within your community, That's not the end of the story.
That's not sufficient.
That's all good stuff, but ultimately, we're all going to die.
We're all on a pilgrimage.
This is not our ultimate home.
And so, man's natural happiness is, in some sense, also ordered toward his supernatural happiness.
Really, really good.
Speaking of religious and civil matters, by the way, we've run out of time.
I should point out, though, Israel just zapped the head of Hamas.
This is one of the biggest news stories in foreign policy in years at this point.
Certainly the biggest one since the Israel-Gaza war broke out.
They zapped the guy who was the head of the organization that carried out the attacks on October 7th of last year, which led to this long war.
They got him, and they got him in Iran.
So, this could mean the end of the war, that'd be great, or it could mean that Iran will make good on its promise for revenge and that we're in World War III.
But, either way, we'll see how things play out over the next few hours, and maybe we'll talk about it tomorrow.
Now, however, it's time for the Membrum Segmentum, and I have my friend Mary Morgan coming up.
The rest of the show continues now.
You do not want to miss it.
Become a member.
Use code NOLS at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.
