Ep. 1737 - CONFIRMED: Biden Stage 4 Cancer Cover-Up EXPOSED
Joe Biden has stage-four cancer, President Trump declares Taylor Swift "not hot," and a woman goes viral for proudly sterilizing herself.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1737
- - -
DailyWire+:
Join us at https://dailywire.com/subscribe and become a part of the rebellion against the ridiculous. Normal is back. And this time, we’re keeping it.
“Parenting” with Dr. Jordan B. Peterson premieres May 25th. https://bit.ly/3RXTL07
Live Free & Smell Fancy with The Candle Club: https://thecandleclub.com/michael
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
Shopify - Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial and start selling today at https://shopify.com/knowles
PureTalk - Switch to PureTalk and start saving today! Visit https://PureTalk.com/KNOWLES
Daily Wire Shop - Save up to 47% with Jeremy's Razors Father's Day Sale: https://jeremysrazors.com/fathersday
- - -
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
- - -
Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy
Former President Joe Biden has cancer, which should not come as a surprise to anyone because he told us all in 2022.
But that was before his staff and his doctor and the media apparently lied to cover it up.
Then a pro-lifeline Georgia is supposedly forcing a brain-dead woman to be kept alive to support her pre-born baby.
Is that true?
What does that all mean?
And speaking of babies and bioethics, an IVF clinic was just firebombed by...
A radical leftist.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Thank you.
Welcome back to the show.
President Trump has officially declared Taylor Swift is no longer hot.
And Bruce Springsteen is a dried-up prune.
This is now official national policy.
This is a declaration from the White House.
So be it, Nihil Obstad.
Hold on.
Pause.
Hold on.
We'll get back to that point in a second.
First, I want you to go to Shopify.com slash Knowles.
You know, I have started a few businesses in my years in actually different fields.
And one thing that I wish that I knew about when I was starting my businesses was Shopify.
Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. We even use it for our own Daily Wire shop to make sure that things are running smoothly and efficiently so you can get all the goods.
Now, you might be asking yourself, what if I can't design a website?
What if I'm worried people haven't heard about my brand?
Not a problem.
Shopify's got you covered from the start with beautiful ready-to-go templates that match your brand's style and helps you find your customers through easy-to-run email and social media campaigns.
If you need a hand with everyday tasks, their AI tools created specifically for commerce can help enhance product images, write descriptions, and more.
Plus, their award-winning customer support is available 24-7 to share advice.
Turn your business idea into...
With Shopify on your side.
Sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at Shopify.com slash Knowles.
Go to Shopify.com slash Knowles.
Shopify.com slash Knowles.
Joe Biden has cancer.
Biden's press team has released this statement.
Quote, last week...
President Joe Biden was seen for a new finding of a prostate nodule after experiencing increasing urinary symptoms.
On Friday, he was diagnosed with prostate cancer, characterized by a Gleason score of 9, grade group 5, with metastasis to the bone.
So the cancer is metastasized.
This is apparently a stage 4 cancer.
Really, really bad stuff.
We all pray for people when they're sick and suffering, so it's good to pray for Joe Biden.
It's also good to have a critical eye to see that we have been lied to politically.
Why is this information coming out now?
Is it just a coincidence that as Jake Tapper's book is coming out, completing the Democrat throw of Joe Biden under the bus, Jay Tapper's book that says that the media lied about Biden's health decline, and the White House staff lied about Biden's health decline, and everybody lied about it to try to keep him on the ticket.
And now they've all realized mea culpa, mea culpa.
Now you have this story about Joe Biden's different health decline, not a cognitive health decline, but a cancer.
And this just apparently was discovered.
You don't really just discover stage four prostate cancer.
A lot of guys have prostate cancer.
It's a relatively common cancer.
But you don't just discover it, generally.
Especially if you are the President of the United States.
You have access to the best doctors in the world.
You are constantly under medical scrutiny.
That doesn't just happen.
So, when did they discover it?
I have here a news article about how Joe Biden was totally, quote, fit for duty.
Last year, after his annual physical, Joe Biden's doctor, Kevin O 'Connor, said that Biden has peripheral neuropathy in his both feet, gastroesophageal reflux, he's got heartburn, allergies, and a little spinal arthritis.
They're all being treated.
But otherwise...
The president feels well, and this year's physical identified no new concerns.
He continues to be fit for duty.
That was last year.
This year he's got stage 4 prostate cancer that's metastasized to the bone.
Were there any signs?
There were signs.
Two years before Joe Biden's doctor said that he's totally fine and fit for duty, no worries, no cancer, no nothing, Joe Biden told us that he had cancer.
And because it was a four-lane highway that was accessible, my mother drove us, and rather than us be able to walk.
And guess what?
The first frost, you know what was happening.
You had to put on your windshield wipers to get literally the oil slick off the window.
That's why I and so damn many other people I grew up have cancer.
And why can't for the longest time, Delaware had the highest cancer rate in the nation.
So at the time...
Some of us heard this and said, wait, Joe Biden has cancer?
He just said he has cancer.
And of course, the liberal media wanted to overdrive.
They said, no, no, no, no.
I know he just told you he has cancer, but he doesn't really have cancer.
You didn't hear that.
He didn't really say that.
Pay no attention.
These are not the droids you're looking for.
So, Associated Press right here.
No, I'm sorry.
Is this Reuters or the Associated Press?
No, this is the Associated Press.
Fact focus.
Biden cancer remark causes...
Confusion.
I'll just read you a little bit of it.
Here are the facts.
Claim Biden announced that he has cancer.
Right-wing accounts quickly began sharing a clip of this remark with the claim that Biden was revealing that he had cancer.
Where'd you get that crazy idea?
Just because he said he had cancer?
But Andrew Bates, a White House spokesperson, confirmed on Twitter that Biden was referring to the publicly disclosed fact that he had skin cancer removed before he became president.
Well, hold on.
He said, that's why I have cancer.
If you're saying he had cancer in the past, but the cancer was removed, why would he say I have cancer?
No, no, no.
Listen here.
Listen here.
You don't understand.
Biden doesn't know what he's talking about.
You didn't hear what you thought you heard.
The AP concludes, in a November 2021 memo summarizing Biden's health, Dr. Kevin O 'Connor, Biden's physician for more than a decade, acknowledged that Biden had several localized Yeah, or he just had cancer, like he told us, and like the right-wing kind of crazy conspiracy accounts heard and reported, and now Biden's family is admitting.
What's more likely?
It's always good to pray for Biden.
That said, the guy's 82 years old.
The male life expectancy in the United States is 75. So he's kind of playing with the House's money at this point.
Everyone's going to die at some point.
The political takeaway here, it would appear overwhelmingly likely that his doctors lied.
And that his press team lied.
I guess that his family lied.
And they all just lied.
And then the media, the Associated Press, which were they actual reporters and investigative journalists, would hear the president admitting he has cancer and look into that.
But instead, what does the Associated Press do?
They just repeat...
The propagandists for the White House blanket denial, like Pravda, and they don't look into it any further.
No, no, no.
I know Joe Biden just said he had cancer, but don't worry.
His cleanup artist, propagandist, just said that isn't true.
So anyway, we're the Associated Press, and democracy dies in darkness, and we're the fourth estate, and we're the intrepid journalists, so we'll just print that.
What a joke.
What a joke.
The big takeaway from all of this...
In some ways, perhaps this release is trying to do damage control over Jake Tapper's book, which Jake Tapper's book, admitting that Biden was in decline, was trying to do damage control over the media's complete failure to their own audience, mostly liberal audience, to report on Joe Biden's failing health.
It's damage control all the way down.
And the irony of it is, the thing that they were after, holding on to power, most likely, Could have best been accomplished by just keeping Joe Biden on the ticket.
Had Joe Biden remained on the ticket, if he has metastatic cancer, that is, you know, he's an elderly man, he's well past the life expectancy, Kamala Harris could have probably been president.
It's very, very possible, even likely, that Kamala Harris could have ended up president had the Democrats not thrown Joe Biden under the bus.
And they continue to throw Joe Biden under the bus again and again and again.
And this doesn't even look that bad for Joe Biden.
Joe Biden was at least honest with us, it appears.
He said, yeah, I got cancer.
It's just that the experts, the media, the established powers, they lied.
I have an episode of Michael And right now with one of the chief vaccine dissidents, the guy behind the 1998 Lancet study that caused a lot of questioning about the MMR vaccine.
I told him in the interview, I said, I'm not an anti-vaxxer.
I'm not anti-institutional.
I'm not anti-expertise.
I'm really not.
But today, I have to be skeptical of expertise.
I have to be skeptical of the public health authorities because they lied to me.
Because I know at least during COVID, they lied.
They said one thing privately and they said another thing publicly.
And then the things they said publicly, they contradicted six months later and then they told us they didn't contradict themselves six months later.
So the...
Me, not an anti-institutional guy, not an anti-vaxxer, not anti-expertise.
The only rational reaction that I can have to their squandering their credibility is doubt and skepticism.
This denial of Biden's health, which now is undeniable, didn't just come from the media.
It came from the White House physician.
And these people ask us why we don't trust them.
We've got to talk about these things.
We also have to talk about the brain-dead woman who is supposedly being forced to be kept alive to save her baby.
The pro-abortion people are up in arms.
They said this is an abuse.
Stop what you're doing.
Hold there.
We'll get back to my very important story.
First, though, I want you to go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
Pure Talk, my wireless company, a veteran-led company, believes that every man and woman who has faithfully served his country Deserves to proudly fly an American flag that was made in America.
That is why Pure Talk is on a mission to give an allegiance flag, the highest quality American flag period, to 1,000 U.S. veterans in time for all the patriotic holidays.
That is why you should just switch your cell phone service to Pure Talk this month, and a portion of every sale will go to provide these high quality flags to deserving veterans.
With plans from just $25 a month for unlimited talk text and plenty of data, you can enjoy America's most dependable 5G network while cutting your cell phone bill in half.
The average family saves over $1,000 a year.
Could you use $1,000 a year?
I think most people could.
Go to puretalk.com slash Knowles to switch hassle-free in as little as 10 minutes.
That's puretalk.com slash Knowles to support veterans and to switch to America's wireless company, Pure Talk.
April Newkirk.
Is the mother of Adriana Smith.
Adriana Smith is a 30-year-old woman who is being described as brain dead.
But April Newkirk, who would like to pull the plug, is not allowed to pull the plug in the state of Georgia, supposedly because of a pro-life law, because Adriana Smith is pregnant with a 21-week-old baby.
And the baby's grandma...
Newkirk wants to be able to pull the plug on the daughter and kill the baby, but the doctors, supposedly following the pro-life law, say that the grandma's not allowed to kill the daughter and the baby, even though the daughter is supposedly already dead, even though she's not really dead, because if she were really dead, the baby would be dead too.
Are you confused?
Scientifically, ethically, a lot of people are.
Newkirk, the grandmother, says that she's not allowed to take the daughter off the ventilators.
In order to protect her grandson, and she says it should have been left up to the family, according to NBC.
I'm not saying that we would have chose to terminate her pregnancy, that is, kill the baby.
But what I'm saying is we should have had a choice.
I'm not saying I would have killed my grandson.
I'm saying I should have had the choice to kill my grandson.
I don't want to sound callous.
This woman presumably is grieving the very likely death of her daughter.
But the reaction...
To any tragedy should never be the desire to kill an innocent baby.
Should have been left up to the family.
I'm not saying I would have killed my grandson, but I'd like to have been able to do it.
Now, even the media are reporting, it is not really clear that the reason this woman can't kill her daughter and her grandkid is because of a pro-life law.
That's not really clear.
These are very nuanced discussions when we're talking about brain death.
And this is the deeper issue here.
Because the part that most people are just accepting unquestioningly is the notion of brain death.
The woman is dead.
She's just sort of still alive.
But she's dead.
Because she's brain dead.
Even though her heart's still pumping blood and her lungs are still taking in oxygen and she has machines that are helping her do that.
But she's obviously alive because the baby's still alive.
But she's dead.
She's alive and dead.
Schrodinger is patient.
The deeper issue here is that brain death is kind of fake.
What is death?
Death, in the traditional understanding, is the moment that the soul and the body separate.
Because in the traditional understanding, human beings are both soul and body.
Now, in modernity, we like to deny the soul.
What's weird is we also sometimes like to deny the body.
Sometimes we like to say we're only a body and we're not a soul.
That's materialism.
And sometimes we like to say we're only a soul and not a body.
So that's what the transgender ideology is largely about.
They say, I know my body might be entirely one way, but my true self, that is to say my immaterial self, that is to say my soul, is a different way.
And I'm really my soul.
I have nothing to do with my body.
So we go back and forth.
We're a little bit schizophrenic in modernity.
But death...
Understood, traditionally, is the moment the soul and the body separate.
Death is not the moment of the obliteration of the body, because there's still a body after death.
It's a cadaver.
But it's understood that at death, something changes, and you are no longer quite the same you.
After death.
I don't mean to be pedantic or tedious here, but it's a little confusing.
And clearly today we don't exactly know what death is because we have this nebulous, dubious concept of brain death.
So, in the 1960s, this notion of brain death is developed primarily at Harvard.
Because we traditionally understood the soul as leaving the body at the moment that your heart stops beating and your lungs stop breathing and that's the end of it.
But as technology advanced and you could keep people's blood pumping for a little while longer and air going through their lungs, then they said, okay, well, when all brain activity ceases, then you're dead, even if you kind of seem like you're alive.
But that's a little bit unclear because your hormones might react in a different way.
You might have other bodily functions that are not just your heart beating and your lungs pumping air after supposed brain death.
And this is a really important ethical question because people check that little box on the back of their driver's licenses that say, I'm an organ donor.
But when you're an organ donor, you are generally still kind of alive when you're donating the organs.
In fact, it is the removal of the organs that kills you.
If you're there and you've had a car accident or something, God forbid, and you're on a machine and your heart's still pumping...
And your lungs still have air coming in and out of them, but you're supposedly brain dead.
Then the thing that actually kills you is when they go in and take your organs.
Is that ethically acceptable?
All sorts of groups have weighed in on this.
The institution that I look to for these kinds of matters, the Catholic Church, has weighed in and said that the notion of brain death can be acceptable when it is known with certainty that the person is dead.
But it's all kind of dubious.
If you go back to the original question, okay, what is death?
It's when the soul and the body separate.
Well, can we be so certain that the people who are supposedly brain dead are really dead?
Seems to me the expansion of the notion of brain death is another utilitarian perversion of the law.
A utilitarian perversion to say, look, it would be really helpful if we can harvest...
Organs that are healthy.
But the moment a person actually dies, their organs start to decay, and the organs aren't really useful anymore.
So, what if we can redefine death?
I mean, we can redefine marriage, we can redefine man and woman.
What if we can redefine death?
And if we redefine death and move it just a little bit into the alive territory, then we can get these organs.
And it will be a good thing, because it will help people who need a kidney, or who need a lung, or who need a liver, or something like that.
So that would be really helpful.
And all we got to do is maybe technically kill a lot of people.
That creeping utilitarianism, that bioethical, dubious kind of Faustian bargain, that explains, I think, a lot of our, not only our scientific confusion, but our moral confusion.
So much so to the point that in this case, a grandmother can be complaining to the press because she's not allowed to kill her grandson.
Because her daughter, who's supposedly dead, isn't really dead.
As technology advances, you have to ask yourself, are we going to be able to use this in a better way for human flourishing?
Or with the amount of moral corruption that's already set in and moral confusion, are we going to have many more of these questions?
Speaking of babies and medical technology, there's been a car bombing at an IVF facility.
This is a California fertility clinic.
Someone drove up and blew up a car.
Only one person died, the guy who blew up the car.
Four people were injured inside.
But when I heard this story, I said, oh no, was this a radical kind of pro-lifer?
Because pro-life people, myself included, have a lot of problems with IVF and the fertility clinics because virtually everything that they engage in is...
Morally suspect, if not outright clearly immoral.
And there's a good end, which is babies, but all the steps along the way are really bad, like turning human beings into commodities and promoting actions that are gravely disordered and humiliating and people shouldn't do, and purchasing eggs and renting wombs and creating children intentionally to deprive them of their natural mothers to fulfill the fantasies of single people and homosexuals.
And, you know, it's just not...
Sometimes implanting the wrong embryos, and then having people sue over which baby to have, ripping babies away from their surrogate mothers, the only mothers they've ever known.
Sometimes just creating people with the wrong egg and the wrong sperm, and now you've intentionally created a person, or rather, you've intentionally created a person accidentally made of component parts from people who have never met each other, so you're setting them up for a life of suffering.
Yikes!
All sorts of problems.
Was it a pro-lifer?
No.
It was actually a leftist.
It was an anti-lifer.
It was an anti-natalist.
That is to say, someone who holds the radical ideology that we shouldn't have more kids.
Usually the anti-natalists are motivated by some kind of left-wing eschatology like climate change.
In order to save the rocks and the delta smelt, we have to get rid of all the people.
Sometimes antinatalism is just driven by selfishness, by kind of radical individualism, autonomy.
But in any case, if pro-life is an idea and a campaign on the right, the thing that blew up this IVF clinic comes from the left.
And now people are reacting to the story, and they're saying, well, thank goodness no one in the clinic was killed.
I mean, it's a fertility clinic.
Imagine all those babies, all these people, they've invested their time, their hopes, their money.
Into creating their babies, and this monster might have blown up those babies, might have killed those babies a little bit before the clinic and the parents will kill them themselves.
Because do you know what happens at a fertility clinic?
The vast majority of the babies who are created are killed because they're not used, because in the fertility...
Industry process.
Many, many more babies are created than will actually be implanted and will actually be born.
And then the rest of the babies, I just say the vast majority of the babies, are put into a freezer until the parents or the clinic want to just destroy them.
And then they kill them.
So what is the reaction?
The reaction doesn't make any sense.
Thank goodness he didn't kill all of those embryos before the clinic workers could do it themselves.
Thank goodness.
Those embryos might not have lived for another two days.
Very strange.
Also curious that on the IVF issue, you are now seeing criticism from the left and the right.
And the left-wing criticism is wrong and the right-wing criticism is right.
But it is interesting that an issue that even, I think, about a year ago, most everyone, maybe two years ago, most everyone would have said, oh, this is unambiguously a good thing.
What's wrong with more babies?
Of course, there are all sorts of immoral ways to create a baby, including rape, for instance.
It doesn't mean the baby is bad, but it means that good ends do not justify immoral means.
But now you're seeing all sorts, as people begin to understand what IVF is, you are seeing a real movement against it.
You're seeing a right-wing movement against it, which is justified and peaceful and civil.
But you're even seeing a left-wing movement against it from people who hate From the people who hate people who are willing to blow up cars to stop them.
More pearls of wisdom are incoming.
First, though, go to jeremysrazors.com slash Father's Day.
You did not get here by accident.
Well, maybe you did, but there was at least an intentional act behind that.
You got here because a man, a real one, raised you right.
Honor him this Father's Day.
With Jeremy's Razors, with five stainless steel blades, a precision trimmer for clean lines and tight corners, and a lubricating strip made with argan oil and aloe, Jeremy's Razors are built to erase the stubble, not the masculinity.
With up to 47% off for Father's Day, now is the time to find the perfect gift made for men who raised winners, not whiners.
Go to jeremysrazors.com right now.
That is jeremysrazors.com right now.
I mentioned earlier in the show...
My latest episode of Michael and the Vaccine Dissident, which might be being suppressed by certain social media algorithms, it would seem.
I don't know.
I'm just looking at the analytics, and it seems as though certain powers that be don't want this one to get out.
This is, to my mind, one of the most important episodes I've done of Michael and.
Definitely in the top five.
I sat down with Dr. Andrew Wakefield for Michael and the Vaccine Dissident.
We dive deep into the science, the scandals, and the questions of the CDC.
Doesn't want you asking, covering everything from vaccine risks to public health cover-ups.
Check out this teaser.
I started getting calls from parents saying my child was perfectly normal.
They stopped sleeping at night.
They were screaming.
They were in pain.
The lights went out in their eyes.
It was a very common description.
Doctors say, this is just part of autism.
Get over it.
Put your child in a home.
Have another child and forget about it.
What were they thinking?
This is their quote.
We are not going to be left with an orphan drug.
And so it was decided to avoid that.
they would put it into one day old infants Go watch the full episode right now.
Subscribe for the ad-free version on Daily Wire+.
Speaking of young people, Taylor Swift is no longer hot, so declareth President Trump.
Quote, this is from Truth Social.
Has anyone noticed that since I said I hate Taylor Swift, she's no longer hot?
Now, I guess here he means hot, as in she's no longer popular.
But...
It's ambiguous, and he might be insinuating that she's ugly now.
Trump has engaged in these kinds of fights before, most notably with Rosie O'Donnell.
I don't remember Trump saying he hates Taylor Swift, but he put it in quotes in all caps, and then he also put HOT in quotes in all caps.
And there are going to be squishy Republicans.
I hear them now.
They're going to be boring people.
In the policy wonk beltway community on both sides of the aisle who say, oh, this again.
Trump was doing so well.
Or the ones on the left will say, Trump wasn't doing well, but this is even worse.
So, oh, this again.
But even the people on the right who think that Trump's policy is generally good, they'll say, oh, he was doing so well.
Why does he have to engage in these kinds of tweets again?
Why does he have to engage in fights?
With pop stars.
He did it with Bruce Springsteen, too.
Bruce Springsteen just came out and engaged in this rant before a concert.
In my country, they're taking sadistic pleasure in the pain that they inflict on loyal American workers.
They're rolling back historic civil rights legislation that led to a more just and plural society.
We're abandoning our great allies and siding with dictators against those struggling for their freedom.
This guy, he's abandoning our greatest ally, Ukraine, man.
He, this guy, this Trump, he is turning away from democracy for dictators.
His green door slams.
So Trump responds.
He goes, I see that highly overrated Bruce Springsteen goes to a foreign country to speak badly about the president of the United States.
Never liked him.
Never liked his music or his radical left politics.
And importantly, he's not a talented guy.
Just a pushy, obnoxious jerk who fervently supported crooked Joe Biden, a mentally incompetent fool, and our worst ever president who came close to destroying our country.
If I wasn't elected, it would have been gone by now.
Sleepy Joe didn't have a clue as to what he was doing, but Springsteen is, quote, dumb as a rock.
Just a point.
He used quotation marks here, and some people don't understand that.
New Yorkers of a certain age do that.
They use quotation marks as if to boldface something.
I don't know.
I know it's a quirk.
People don't do it.
But my grandmother wrote like this.
Anyway, that's what he's doing here.
Dumb as a rock and couldn't.
See what was going on.
Or could he?
Which is even worse.
This dried out prune of a rocker, his skin is all atrophied.
Ought to keep his mouth shut until he gets back into the country.
That's just standard fare.
Then we'll see how it goes for him.
And you know, all of the really smart people who wear...
Tweed jackets, and they go on all of the television shows, and they work at the think tanks, and they read all of the policy papers, and they just say, Trump, what are you doing?
This again?
Why?
Oh, he's so...
If only you took his Twitter away!
That's what people say.
This is smart politics.
Saying that Taylor Swift isn't hot anymore when you're the 70-something-year-old president of the United States?
It's not just not dumb politics, it's smart politics.
Going after Bruce Springsteen this way is smart politics for a different generation.
When you go after Taylor Swift, you're attracting the attention of millennials and Zoomers.
When you go after Bruce Springsteen, you're attracting the attention of boomers and Gen X. This is not just not bad politics, it's smart politics.
Because it is accessible to everyone.
The dorks.
Who just talk about their white papers on TV and at think tank lunches.
They don't speak to everyone.
Most people, even the people who are politically sympathetic to them, have no idea what they're talking about.
Trump speaks to everyone.
Because not only does he talk about, he does talk about policy.
And he does talk about trade.
And he does talk about tariffs.
And he does talk about immigration.
He does talk about foreign policy.
He also talks about Taylor Swift.
Many, many more people.
Can speak about and be interested by a discussion about Taylor Swift than they are discussing immigration.
In a democracy, you need to talk to as many people as possible and persuade as many people as possible.
There's an irony here.
Bruce Springsteen is insinuating that Trump is a threat to democracy.
Democrats have said this forever.
Joe Biden's whole presidential campaign was predicated on calling Trump a threat to democracy.
Trump is the most democratic president maybe that we have ever had.
Andrew Jackson gives him a run for his money.
Some of the progressives in the early 20th century give him a run for his money.
But he might, I think he probably is.
Because he is totally fluent in the pop culture.
He is a pop culture icon and has been for decades, like 40 years at this point.
And he knows that in a democracy, this is not true in an aristocracy, this is not true in a monarchy, this is not true in a dictatorship necessarily, but in a democracy, you need to talk to people in ways that they understand that are accessible.
You need to titillate people, you need to push their buttons.
I'm not even saying this to be condescending or to suggest this is a bad thing and these unwashed hoi polloi.
I'm interested in the Taylor Swift stuff.
I'm interested in the Bruce Springsteen stuff.
It's good to talk to those people.
Donald Trump is, alright, I'm willing to go all the way.
I've considered the Andrew Jackson thing.
I've considered the Teddy Roosevelt and the progressives thing.
Trump is the most Democratic president we've ever had.
So if you don't like that he's talking about the subjects of popular culture, don't blame him.
Blame democracy.
Speaking of the public discourse, a George Washington University student, the class spokesman, At her commencement ceremony, dedicated her speech at an important moment of her life.
This is a lovely honor at one of the more important moments of her life to explaining how she is ashamed to graduate because of the state of Israel or something.
For over a year, we have watched a genocide be committed against Palestinians.
I cannot celebrate my own graduation without a heavy heart, knowing how many students in Palestine have been forced to stop their studies, expelled from their homes, and killed for simply remaining in the country of their ancestors.
For the rest of us, these atrocities cause us to take stock in our own complacency in the imperialist system.
I am ashamed to know my tuition is being used to fund genocide.
Despite repeated calls from students and faculty to disclose all endowments and investments by the university and divest from the apartheid state of Israel, the administration has refused to negotiate in good faith.
Instead, they have repressed anyone with the courage to point out the blood on their hands.
None of us are free until Palestine is free.
Thank you.
*crowd cheers*
None of us are free until Palestine is free?
I don't know what that means, and I certainly don't think it's true.
I think I can be perfectly free no matter what is going on in the Levant.
I would be much more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause if its loudest proponents were not these people.
Okay, this is it.
I have a pretty open mind on the Israel-Palestine issue.
I don't care that much about the state of Israel.
I am broadly sympathetic to the state of Israel.
I care about the holy sites a lot.
I have a lot of friends who are very pro-Israel.
It's not my top issue.
I don't really care that much.
I can understand some of the gripes that come from the pro-Palestine side.
But when these are the people leading the pro-Palestine movement, how am I supposed to get on board with this?
These kinds of people are wrong about everything.
That girl, I promise you, that girl giving that speech is wrong about literally everything.
So why would she be right about this issue?
Furthermore, I think about the Israel-Palestine issue.
She wants us to think about it.
Let's think about it.
I have yet to hear anyone make a persuasive argument.
That the state of Israel is not justified in going to war against Gaza.
And even in continuing the war against Gaza.
I sort of wish they wouldn't because I care about this more from the American national interest.
And the longer this war goes on, the more volatility is created and the greater the risk of the United States being dragged into a war.
So from the American perspective, I would kind of like the war to wrap up.
But from the Israeli perspective, can someone please explain to me how the war is not justified?
That Gaza invaded on October 7th and killed a bunch of people and took hostages.
The state of Israel responded and still has not gotten all of the hostages back.
Furthermore, the state of Israel now is looking at Gaza and saying, okay, well, Hamas in power is an unacceptable security risk.
We cannot tolerate that, so we have to do something to change it.
Furthermore, the people in Gaza...
When they had a modicum of self-government, chose to elect Hamas, which carried out the attack.
So if you're the state of Israel, it seems to me that pretty much all of the criteria of just war that we have understood from classical antiquity up through the Middle Ages up to the present are fulfilled here in going to war and in continuing the war.
Can someone explain to me?
I have an open mind.
I am easily persuadable.
If someone can make a good argument.
I haven't heard anyone making the argument.
The only arguments I've heard are the arguments that this lady is making and the arguments that people just don't like the state of Israel and they want them to lose a war or something.
But what is the argument?
Usually what the argument comes down to is, well, the Palestinians, it's understandable.
It's understandable that they would go in there and fly the hang gliders in and kill and rape and take a lot of hostages.
Because, because why?
Because the Israelis shouldn't be there in the first place.
That's what it comes down to.
And you heard this woman, this young girl, say that during her commencement speech.
She said, I'm complicit in imperialism.
It's not just this supposed genocide.
It's not any of this.
It's imperialism is the problem.
In other words, the Israelis shouldn't be there in the first place.
Okay, and I kind of get that.
Except, how are you going to make that?
Can someone make that argument for me?
You had a declaration from the British Empire, which controlled the area, saying that you can have a homeland for Jews.
Then you had a UN establishment of the State of Israel, and then the Israelis fought a war over it in 1948.
So you...
You might not like that.
I don't know.
You might have wished the war went a different way.
You might have wished the UN didn't do that.
You might have wished the Balfour Declaration didn't take place.
You might not agree with the religious or historical premises of Zionism or anything.
Sure, that's totally fine.
But if you actually trace all of these things back, I fail to see how you could say the Israelis are not justified in going to war.
And I fail to see...
How if you accept the premise of modern nation states generally, you could say that the state of Israel is not justified in existing.
And you might say, well, I don't believe in modern nation states.
And okay, now we're all the way back at the Westphalian system.
Now I guess we have to have another conversation.
But what is it?
This is to me why I just can't get on board with the pro-Palestine activism.
Some of which crops up on the right a little bit too.
You have to rely on the arguments that these people are making.
Which are ultimately radical left arguments that undermine a lot of the other premises that you have.
You think this woman's ready for another crusade?
Bring back King Baldwin to the Holy Land.
I don't think so.
It just doesn't hold up.
So then you have to make common cause with these people, and then what are you doing?
I don't know.
If that's the right, who needs the left?
If you are not a Daily Wire Plus member, here's what you're missing.
Ad-free full-length shows from the most trusted and handsome and swarthy voices in conservative media, access to our award-winning investigative journalism, breaking news, top headlines, unlimited access to our entire entertainment library, including the number one documentary of the decade, Am I Racist?
and Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's new series, Parenting, premiering this Sunday exclusively on Daily Wire Plus.
Live chats with the show and fans and listeners across the country.
Much, much more than that, too.
Join now at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
My favorite comment yesterday, or no, what was this?
This would have been on Thursday, because I went down and took my family to the beach.
I was on the beach for four hours, and I came back looking like I'm from the Levant, didn't I?
I come back a little bit Levant or Guadalajara or something.
I don't know.
Got a little toasty.
It's that Sicilian blood.
My favorite comment in any case from Thursday is from Maria Sanchez, SF60J, who says, Coincidentally, providentially, we need to bring back the Crusades.
A lot of people are saying that.
Well, we didn't get Pope Urban this time around.
We got a Pope Leo.
We didn't get a Pope Urban this time around.
Who knows?
Maybe.
Maybe.
Speaking of death, a lot of death in today's show.
FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino have made a shocking, explosive claim that Jeffrey Epstein did kill himself.
You said Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide.
People don't believe it.
Well, I mean, listen, they have a right to their opinion, but as someone who has worked as a public defender, as a prosecutor, who's been in that prison system, who's been in the Metropolitan Detention Center, who's been in segregated housing, you know a suicide when you see one, and that's what that was.
He killed himself.
Again, you want me to...
I've seen the whole file.
He killed himself.
This is shocking, actually.
Because Kash Patel, everyone was so excited for Kash Patel to go in, clean up all the corruption at the FBI.
Is there any greater symptom?
Is there any greater expression of corruption at the FBI than how the FPC case was handled?
And Dan Bongino.
We love Dan.
Now these guys are contradicting what everyone believes?
What am I supposed to say to this?
A lot of people are saying, well, Kash, he got sucked into the system.
Dan, he sold out.
Let me tell you something.
I trust Dan Bongino.
I don't know Kash Patel.
That's no knock on Kash Patel.
I just don't know the guy.
But I do know Dan Bongino.
And I trust Dan Bongino.
So now, this is making me rethink my priors.
Because two weeks ago, if you said, hey, Michael, Jeffrey Epstein killed himself, I'd say, ah.
Now I remember, I interviewed Bill Barr around this time.
Bill Barr was the Attorney General.
And I heard stories from people around Bill Barr that he seemed surprised when it happened.
So it didn't seem like a setup from him, at least.
So hold on.
What does that mean?
Did Epstein kill?
No.
On the one hand, there's no way Epstein killed himself.
On the other hand, I trust Dan Bongino.
So what is it?
Did Cash and Dan get duped?
Are they lying?
I don't think they're lying.
Or what did they not say?
Is it possible that Jeffrey Epstein did kill himself, but that he was allowed to kill himself?
Is it possible that when the cameras went out, it might just be that the cameras went out, I guess, but when the cameras went out and the guards didn't do their checks and he was on suicide watch, is it possible that he just had an opportunity to kill himself?
Is it possible that Jeffrey Epstein was even craftier than we realized?
Even more of a political operator than we realized.
Don't forget, when Alex Acosta...
The U.S. attorney who was involved in the Epstein case was up for Labor Secretary under Trump the first time.
He was asked about Epstein, and he said, I was told not to go hard on Epstein because Epstein belongs to intelligence.
The whole Epstein operation seems like an intelligence operation, probably an international intelligence operation.
Is it possible that Jeffrey Epstein did, in fact, kill himself, but that there was nevertheless still a conspiracy to kill Jeffrey Epstein?
I don't know.
That is legitimately shocking news that makes you rethink your priors.
Because unless you're just inclined to throw Patel and Dan under the bus, which I am not, then it's making me think, okay.
But even if he killed himself, it doesn't mean that he killed himself, right?
It can be the case that Jeffrey Epstein technically killed himself, but also Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself, okay?
Could be.
Could be.
That kind of a statement is only going to raise more questions.
That is more questions than answers.
Now, turning from intelligence-related things to unintelligent things, a woman has sterilized herself and is celebrating that.
This TikTok has gone a little bit viral, and it was sent to us by Natalia Turiansky.
It was sent to the show.
I said, Michael, take a look at what's going on in this TikTok.
A woman having a party, or at least a party for one, to celebrate...
Sterilization.
Tomorrow, I'm getting permanently sterilized by having my fallopian tubes removed, so I decided to throw a little celebration for that and to celebrate the fact I've made the choice to not have kids.
Women tend to only be celebrated when they get engaged, get married, or have a baby, and it's rare to see them celebrated as individuals for their accomplishments outside of the family.
So it was really important to me to make sure that I dedicated time and space to celebrate myself and this life-changing decision that I'm making, and I'm so excited about it.
So at first I thought this must be satire.
But I don't think it is.
I was looking at the comments.
I don't think it is.
Notice she says, I'm having a celebration.
And this is really sad.
She's the only person there.
Which is a symbol of the thing she's celebrating.
Which is cutting herself off from other people.
Cutting herself off from the most basic ties.
Her choice.
It's not that it just didn't work out for her.
She never got married.
Her family and friends died or moved away.
It's not just, oh man, this is tough.
Suffering, gotta kiss it up.
She's choosing to isolate herself.
Choosing to cut herself off from the closest bonds that one can imagine in this life.
And then she puzzles at it.
She says, you know, we celebrate pregnancy, but we never celebrate intentional sterilization.
Yeah.
Why do you think that is?
So much of liberalism comes down to, hey.
For all of history, we've done this thing, but why don't we do the opposite of this thing?
Maybe there's a reason.
You ever think that?
You ever think that maybe there's a reason why everyone everywhere has done a thing and a thing in a certain way?
But liberalism begins from the assumption that everyone for all of history must have been Wrong and deeply stupid.
And that you and you alone have figured it out.
You know?
Why is it?
Why do you think?
Why is it that everyone's always done this thing, but I'm going to do the opposite?
Why don't we do the opposite?
Furthermore, who do you think she's trying to convince?
These people don't post.
Relative to the people who have children versus those who have their fallopian tubes removed.
Relatively few people post on TikTok about their pregnancies.
Relatively few.
I know there are a lot of pregnancy TikToks.
But I'm saying, compared to the people who have children, which is most people, compared to the people who don't have children, and not just don't have children, but actually intentionally sterilize themselves, who's this lady trying to convince?
Why is she making this big celebration?
This gets down to, I put this in my commencement speech at Ave Maria, which is available at the Ave Maria YouTube channel right now.
It does come down to that vision of George Bernard Shaw.
Some people see things that are and say, well, I dream things that never were and say, why not?
Which is the serpent in the Garden of Eden talking to Eve.
The liberals think that's really good advice.
It's actually very bad advice.
And it comes back to Karl Marx in the 11th thesis on Feuerbach, who says, philosophy up till now has tried to understand the world.
The point is to change it.
You're not going to change the world.
It would not be good if you changed the world, even if you thought you could.
It's good to be tethered to reality.
So, while you're watching the Michael Ann, while you're watching this episode of the show, while you're watching all the extra content, you can also go over and watch my commencement speech at Ave Maria University.
Don't change the world.
And you can also watch Music Monday, which is coming up in the member room segmentum.
Get two months off.
Daily Wire subscription with code Knowles at checkout.
