Ep. 1759 - Doomers Dismayed, Plan Trusters Vindicated…Again
President Trump makes a big announcement on Iran, the European Space Agency predicts we'll be living on Mars in 15 years, and the Call Her Daddy podcast gives women the worst advice ever.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1759
- - -
DailyWire+:
Join millions of people who still believe in truth, courage, and common sense at https://DailyWirePlus.com
Ben Shapiro’s new book, “Lions and Scavengers,” drops September 2nd—pre-order today at https://dailywire.com/benshapiro
GET THE ALL-NEW YES OR NO EXPANSION PACK TODAY: https://bit.ly/41gsZ8Q
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
ARMRA - Receive 15% off your first order when you go to https://tryarmra.com/KNOWLES or enter code KNOWLES at checkout.
Old Glory Bank - Go to https://OldGloryBank.com/Knowles to open an account and make the switch today!
Pique Life - Go to https://Piquelife.com/KNOWLES to get get 20% off—for life.
- - -
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
Several days after panicans screeched about President Trump's betraying MAGA by going to war with Iran, President Trump still has not gone to war with Iran.
And now that he's made a major announcement about Iran, the doomers and the panicans once again look ridiculous, and the rest of us, who remained calm, are once again vindicated.
How much I hate to say I told you so.
I'm Michael Knowles.
It's the Michael Knowles Show.
*BEEP*
Welcome back to the show.
The European Space Agency says that humans will be living on Mars in space oases in 15 years.
I have very strong feelings about this prediction.
I have many more opinions, deep, closely felt opinions, which I'll tell you in one moment.
First, I want you to go to tryarmra.com slash Knowles.
Ever wonder what gives elite athletes, business moguls, and high performers their edge?
Many are turning to Armra Colostrum.
This remarkable superfood is nature's original whole food supplement containing over 400 bioactive nutrients that work at the cellular level.
Armra helps build lean muscle, speeds up recovery time, and enhances overall performance without relying on artificial stimulants or synthetic ingredients.
Whether you're running a company, pushing your limits in training, or simply looking for a natural advantage in your daily life, Armra Colostrum optimizes your body's systems for peak performance and sustained energy.
Research has demonstrated that colostrum does more than just strength and performance.
It enhances your body's ability to absorb essential nutrients, support the development of lean muscle mass, and improve endurance.
At the same time, It works at the cellular level to accelerate repair and regeneration, helping you bounce back faster after intense physical exertion.
Now, you know, I'm not the most athletic guy in the world, but Mr. Davies is kind of a beefcake, you know, and swears by this stuff.
We have worked out a special offer for our audience.
Receive 15% off your first order.
Go to tryarmra.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, or enter K-N-O-W-L-E-S to get 15% off your first order.
That is T-R-Y-A-R-M-R-A dot com slash Knowles.
President Trump still has not gone to war with Iran.
He was asked directly by a reporter, are you going to strike Iran?
And he laughed.
He said, yeah, yeah, I'm going to tell you that.
Yeah, yeah.
Hey, guys.
He's talking to guys behind him in hard hats.
Hey, guys, get a load of this one.
Hey, yeah.
Oh, I'm definitely going to tell you.
He goes, here's my answer.
Maybe I will, and maybe I won't.
And so now we're getting a more formal official answer from the White House, from Press Secretary Caroline Levitt, who had this to say.
Now, regarding the ongoing situation in Iran, I know there has been a lot of speculation amongst all of you in the media regarding the President's decision-making and whether or not the United States will be directly involved.
In light of that news, I have a message directly from the President, and I quote, based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.
I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.
That's a quote directly from the president for all of you today.
Okay, I have my formal announcement of what's going to happen.
I'll tell you maybe in like two weeks, maybe.
Again, I love it.
I love the uncertainty here.
So what he's saying is not that Iran is going to get a two-week reprieve.
That's how some people on social media were interpreting this.
That's clearly not what she's saying.
What she's saying is, The Iranians have two weeks at most to give up their nuclear program.
That's what Trump is saying.
When Trump says total surrender, I don't think he's talking about regime change.
I don't think he's talking about the Ayatollah, you know, turning himself in and getting handcuffed.
I think he's saying, give up your entire nuclear program and we'll let you live and we'll move on.
And you have at most two weeks.
You had 60 days.
You didn't make a deal in 60 days, so we killed all of your, sorry, the Israelis.
With maybe a little help from the United States, killed all of your top guys and your nuclear negotiators.
Okay, so now we're going to get some new people in there.
I'm giving you a little reprieve one more time, but it's two weeks at most.
So the way that Caroline Levitt has phrased this, Trump could strike at any time, but he's still giving the opportunity for negotiation.
So the question then is, why is Trump urging caution?
And there's an article from The Guardian out.
That I think gets to it a little bit.
Now again, you never know.
Obviously, there are leaks coming out of the White House.
You never know to trust the leakers.
But the headline is, Trump caution on Iran strike linked to doubts over bunker buster bomb, officials say.
So the United States involvement, beyond just shooting down some missiles that are aimed at Israel, beyond just providing broader support, the Americans getting really actively involved would have to do with bunker buster bombs.
Big nuclear facility that the Israelis don't have the capacity to destroy.
So they want the United States to fly B-2s or something right over there and just drop bunker busters on the targets.
So the problem is, according to this reporting, the bunker buster wouldn't get it done.
If the so-called bunker buster bomb were guaranteed to destroy the critical uranium enrichment facility at Fordow, then Trump would die.
However, this is according to the reporting from The Guardian, the effectiveness of GBU-57s has been a topic of deep contention at the Pentagon since the start of President Trump's term, according to two defense officials who were briefed that perhaps only a tactical nuclear weapon could be capable of destroying Fordow because of how deeply it is located.
So now we're talking about escalation.
This would be the third time ever that a nuclear weapon has been used on the battlefield.
Even though conventional weapons can cause more damage than nuclear weapons in certain cases, we just haven't done that.
And there's a major risk to using a tactical nuclear weapon.
Even if it would get the job done, it would eliminate Iran's nuclear program.
Unintended consequences of that could be massive.
It could lead to a nuclear arms race around the region, all around the world.
It would just radically change the rules of war.
Everyone has thus far, including all of the nuclear states, including all of the nasty nuclear states, like Pakistan and North Korea, we've all agreed we're just not going to go there since World War II.
This would totally change war.
So I think Trump is smart.
According to this reporting, Trump is not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow.
And the possibility was not presented by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in meetings in the White House Situation Room.
But the defense officials who received the briefing were told that using conventional bombs, even as part of a wider strike package of several GBU-57s, would not penetrate deep enough underground, and that it would only do enough damage to collapse the tunnels and bury it under rubble.
So it would cause a big problem for Iran's nuclear program, but it wouldn't end it.
And so I think what we're seeing here...
What we're seeing here is the U.S. interest and the Israeli interest diverge.
The Israeli interest from the beginning has been regime change.
And there are plenty of people in America who want regime change in Iran too.
But that's what Israel is after.
The reason this war is happening now is not because Iran is five seconds away from a nuclear bomb.
We've been hearing that since the 80s, and sometimes they've gotten closer than others, and the Israelis and the Americans have done a good job setting that back.
But that's not why.
The reason why is that the attack on Iran is the apotheosis of the war in Gaza, which began when Hamas invaded Israel on October 7, 2023.
So at that point, Israel says, okay, you've got all of these little tentacles.
You've got Hamas, you've got Hezbollah, you've got the Houthis, and they're all just the tentacles from Iran.
So we're going to go in, we're going to cut off the head.
I think that is the strategic objective for Israel.
And so, okay, the Gaza war is finally wrapping up.
There's not very much more to do there, even though Hamas still has hostages.
So, you know what?
We're going all the way.
We want regime change in Iran.
That, I think, is not the American objective.
I don't think America's chief aim here is regime change.
Sure, we've helped the Shah over the years, or the Crown Prince, Riza Pahlavi.
Sure, we don't like the Ayatollah.
Sure, the Ayatollah chance death to America.
But we're a little skeptical of regime change.
So I think if the US could get Iran to denuclearize and keep the Mullahs in charge, Trump would take it, I think.
I'm not speaking for him, but that would be my guess.
Whereas, I don't think Israel would like to take that deal.
I think Israel needs to go all the way.
In fact, I think Israel cares more about regime change even than the nuclear program.
So, what's going to happen?
Well, we've got some updates here.
From Israel that I think backs up my thesis, which is that the Ayatollah has bombed an Israeli hospital.
The Ayatollah bombed a hospital yesterday, the day before.
And Israel has responded and said, okay, guys got to die.
Khamenei has to die.
According to the Israeli defense minister, Israel Katz, Ali Khamenei can no longer be permitted to exist.
What a phrase.
I'm going to start using that for my enemies.
Oh, yes.
Johnny, he can no longer be permitted to exist, I'm afraid.
Khamenei openly declares that he wants Israel destroyed.
He personally gives the order to fire on hospitals.
He considers the destruction of the state of Israel to be a goal.
Such a man can no longer be allowed to exist.
Now, I get it from the Israeli perspective.
I totally get it.
I just think the order of events is backwards here.
I don't think that the reason Israel is now saying we've got to kill the Ayatollah is because the Ayatollah fired on a hospital, hideous as that is.
Israel had already decided it wanted to kill the Ayatollah.
I don't think it needed any convincing.
I don't think it was an attack on a hospital.
That's a fine excuse for it.
It's a fine justification or causes belly.
But the reason Israel wants to kill the Ayatollah is because the Ayatollah poses an existential threat to Israel.
That's what it's about.
And so, if Israel wants to fight that war, they go fight that war.
But that's a different goal.
From the strategic objectives of the United States.
And we're going to have two weeks now to see just how far apart those interests diverge.
Hold on one second.
There's much more to get to.
But first, you need to go to oldglorybank.com slash Knowles.
Some companies are just now rediscovering patriotism and treating love of country like it's a hot new trend.
But not Old Glory Bank.
They've been pro-America from the very beginning.
Back when standing for faith, family, and freedom actually cost something.
I love Old Glory Bank.
In fact, I was so upset with my other bank that when I heard that Old Glory Bank was open for business and was very pro-American and everything, I sped right on over to make an account.
Because it's the bank for people who remember that the Constitution is not just a suggestion.
It's a bank that won't cancel you for believing that Easter is about more than a bunny or that the ladies' room is not for men.
Especially now, people really worry about political debanking.
It's really important.
Your money is your money.
No DEI or ESG nonsense.
Only PSL, and I'm not talking about pumpkin spice lattes.
I'm talking about privacy, security, and liberty.
Because of their great mobile banking, Old Glory Bank has become the premier bank for the freedom economy with customers in all 50 states.
So ask yourself, why are you still banking with banks that hate what you believe?
At Old Glory, they don't apologize for loving the American tradition.
Join me and go to oldglorybank.com slash Knowles.
Make the switch today.
Also, folks, a buddy of mine, Mr. Gregory Woodman, has collected a magnificent book of President Trump's tweets, and he has arrayed them.
in the style of the modernist poet E.E. Cummings.
And it's just this really a delightful book, really, really high quality.
It's over at the Daily Wire shop right now, up.
It is the collected poems of Donald J. Trump.
I have said since 2016, since 2015, probably, that Trump has poetic diction in the way he uses language.
I'm not even joking about it.
Make America great again, good short evocative Saxon words.
He's got a knack for language.
So anyway, you can get this beautiful Ilhan Omar has nasty comments about the country.
She has said on Democracy Now, some fringe show, she has said that America is becoming one of the worst countries in the world.
I mean, I grew up in a dictatorship.
And I don't even remember ever witnessing anything like that.
To have a democracy, a pecan of hope for the world to now be turned into one of the worst countries where the military are in our streets without any regard for people's constitutional rights, while our president is spending millions of dollars prompting himself up like a failed dictator with a military parade.
It is really shocking.
It's really, really shocking.
One of the worst countries in the world.
She obviously doesn't believe that because her family came over here and they were so jubilant when they came to America, the whole family, that she actually married one of her family members, her brother, allegedly.
So, I don't know, they seemed very, very excited when they came here.
And she's had a career not only in America but in the American government.
She, however, is expressing one of the big problems for the Democrats heading into next year, which is that we're heading into the bicesquicentennial, one of my favorite words.
The bicesquicentennial, the 250th anniversary birthday of America.
And it's going to be very hard for Democrats because...
We're patriotic.
I mean, you know, we criticize America all the time, but we wrap it in the American flag.
You know, dissent is patriotic.
They've gone from that, which is hiding their contempt for the country behind the American flag, to a kind of naked contempt for America and for the American flag, such that when they're having riots in the streets, they won't even wave the American flag.
They'll wave the Mexican flag like they did in L.A. So that's going to be a big problem, because politics 101 is wrap yourself in the flag.
Okay, people love their countries.
Patriotism is part of human nature, really.
It's an extension of the love that you have for your own family, is the love for your country.
And the Democrats don't love their country.
And so you've got a sitting member of Congress, a pretty prominent sitting member of Congress, saying America's becoming one of the worst countries in the world.
That's a shocking statement.
And it's even more modest than her true belief, I think, which is that America always has been one of the worst countries in the world.
And I think this is what Democrats will say openly if you get a drink into them or you prod them long enough.
They'll say, yeah, the country was founded on slavery and it's evil and they genocided the Native Americans and they're horrible to women and they oppressed the long hidden LGBTQ.
It's just a horrible, oppressive, terrible place.
Now, what's funny is they say that out of one side of their mouth, then out of the other side they say, and that's why you need to open up all the borders and let all the foreign people come here.
It's such a terrible, awful, horrific, oppressive place, that's why you've got to let all the foreigners come here.
You should close all the borders so that you're not subject to this horrible place, one of the worst countries on earth.
They never quite resolved that.
But they are consistent in their stated contempt for the country.
It's going to make a big problem for Democrats next year.
And so there were some people saying, well, why is Trump making such a big deal about the 250th?
Why does he like the military parades?
Why is he making such a big deal about America's birthday?
I think for him, why does he just put a gigantic, he put this huge flagpole up on the south lawn of the White House, this gigantic flagpole.
I don't even know how big it is.
I think it scrapes against the moon.
As the moon circles the earth.
Why does he do that?
I think in part because he has a legitimate, instinctive love for the country.
When he hugs the flag and kisses the flag on the campaign trail, I think it's sincere.
But also there is a political payoff here that Republicans can exploit, especially right now in a way we couldn't a quarter century ago, which is that the people love the flag.
We love the flag.
Democrats openly hate the flag.
Wave the flag.
Wave the flag.
That is like the easiest way you can pry votes away from the Democrats and will be very helpful, especially in a midterm election year like we're going to have next year.
Okay.
Now, speaking of aliens, we turn from all the illegal aliens who are coming to the worst country in the world, supposedly, to the aliens in outer space.
The European Space Agency says that humans will be living in space oases.
On Mars in 15 years.
This according to the Daily Mail.
But it's not just the Daily Mail.
If we're just some British tabloid, it's ridiculous.
No, no.
It's the ESA.
The European NASA has come out and said we will be living on Mars in space oases in 15 years.
And I have a prediction.
No, we won't.
That won't happen.
Bookmark this show.
Save this show in your calendar.
Just a link to it in 2040.
And I want you to come back to this and look up.
And if we are not living on Mars, then you can tell your boy a thing that I hate to hear, which is that I was right.
It's not going to happen.
Furthermore, we should not want to.
Why do you want to live on Mars?
Mars isn't pleasant.
Earth is very pleasant.
Almost like it was a world created for us.
It's really nice.
And all of the other planets that we've ever observed anywhere suck.
They're terrible.
You wouldn't want to live there.
They're not for you, man.
It's like that meme.
It's like men will do anything to avoid going to therapy.
It's like human beings will do anything but avoid Thanking God for creating the stars and the firmament, the beautiful earth, you know, Psalm 8. We'll do anything to avoid just like being normal and accepting reality.
We will even go to an uninhabitable, dusty, red planet without any water.
And we'll live in a test tube, maybe, in our fantasies, best case scenario.
So stupid.
Why do you want to go to Mars?
I don't want to go to Mars.
It's not that I don't like exploring.
I've traveled all around the world.
One of my main men is Christopher Columbus, exploring new lands to spread the gospel for a purpose, not just for a fun vacation, but to spread the gospel, which was one of Columbus's goals, to get rich, which was one of Columbus's goals, but to get rich even for a purpose, according to the historian Carol Delaney, to get rich to fund another crusade, another religious purpose.
Okay, I get all that.
That's awesome.
I'm all for that, man.
But to just go to Mars?
And live in a much less pleasant place?
Just because?
That's stupid.
That's modern exploration.
I'm not into it.
I know this is a really unpopular view.
What about the spirit of exploration?
Exploration is supposed to be for a purpose.
And the purpose has to correspond to your human nature.
We just want to go play in the red dust.
Why?
Why?
Exploration is for something.
Everything you do should be for something.
And Earth is for us, and that's good.
That's good, man.
Good grief.
We're so unpatriotic now that not only do we not have any special love of our country, we no longer even have a special love of our planet.
Well, anyway, it's a moot point, because we're not living there in 15 years.
How much money does the European Space Agency want to bet me?
I'm kind of frugal, but I'll bet a lot of money on it.
Not seeing it happen.
Okay, speaking of the difference between fiction and reality.
President Trump has turned on Fox News again.
You know, they have a little bit of a love-hate, a little Sam and Diane kind of relationship, and they're in a negative part right now.
They're in a valley of their relationship.
Why?
Because Fox News reported polls that President Trump doesn't like.
Hold on one second.
Go to peaklife.com.
That's P-I-Q-U-E life dot com slash Knowles.
I want you to think about something that we all often overlook.
Gut health.
We live in a world filled with processed junk, rushed meals, energy drinks disguised as productivity.
No wonder digestion, metabolism, overall vitality suffer.
But there is a better way, and it starts with puerh tea.
This is not your average grocery store tea.
Puerh is a fermented tea.
That's right, fermented.
That means it's naturally packed with probiotics, prebiotics, and antioxidants that help your gut do what it's supposed to do.
Digest food, observe nutrients, and keep you running like a well-boiled machine.
I love black puerh tea in the morning, in the afternoon for that matter.
It's clean, focused energy.
You don't have to worry about all those jitters.
After the meals, the green puerh option is smooth, rich, and really helps with that heavy, sluggish feeling.
This wonderful peak puerh tea is wild harvested from 250-year-old trees.
No pesticides, no additives, none of that gross modern stuff.
It is clean, it's organic, it dissolves instantly in hot or cold water.
No bags, no brewing, no naans.
Peak is offering my listeners 20% off for life.
Not just one order, for life.
You will get a free rechargeable frother and glass beaker with the Puerh bundle.
They even back it with a 90-day money-back guarantee, so there's no risk in trying it.
Head on over to peaklife.com slash Knowles.
That is peaklife.com slash Knowles.
Can it be well?
You ask to get 20% off for life.
Your gut will thank you, and so will your brain.
The crooked Fox News polls got the election wrong.
I won by much more than they said I would and have been biased against me for years.
They were always wrong and negative.
It's why MAGA hates Fox News.
Whoa!
Big escalation now.
Big escalation in the war against Fox.
MAGA hates Fox News.
And I love this parenthetical.
It's why MAGA hates Fox News.
Even though their anchors are great.
You'd have to say, hold on, MAGA hates Fox News.
You've staffed like half your administration with Fox TV hosts.
What do you mean MAGA hates Fox News?
No, no, no.
He's drawing a distinction between the news corporation and the anchors whom he likes and is friends with.
It's why MAGA hates Fox News even though their anchors are great.
This has gone on for years, but they never changed.
The incompetent polling company that does their work, now a new Fox News poll comes out this morning, giving me a little more than 50% of the border, and yet the border is miraculously perfect.
Nobody was able to come in last month.
This is true.
Nobody came in.
The border crisis was completely fictional.
Joe Biden just let them in.
When Joe Biden said, I need a new law to fix the border, that was not true.
You don't need a new law.
Trump didn't need a new law.
Trump stopped the illegal crossings completely.
Completely.
So, Trump's saying, I have this amazing border policy.
I proved everyone wrong.
It could not be more perfect.
And Fox's poll is saying that I've only got a little more than 50% approval at the border.
He said, 60,000 people came in with Sleepy Joe in the same month last year.
I hate fake pollsters.
One of the worst, but Fox will never change their discredited pollster.
That was one Trump post.
And then, right afterward, Trump posts this from Greg Kelly's show, which is on Newsmax, on What are you kidding me?
56% approval in a brand new Rasmussen poll for President Trump.
56% of the American people think he's doing a great job.
That is a landslide.
Clip goes on.
And that's overall approval.
It's not even just approval on the border.
So why does Trump post this?
I'll tell you.
Trump's critics on the left and his sneering, condescending critics on the right.
We'll say it's because he's so vain.
Oh, this man.
He just wants to look at himself in a mirror.
He's so vain and egotistical.
He just cares about the poll numbers more than about actual policy.
No.
I'm not saying Trump doesn't have an ego or vanity or anything.
But that is not vanity.
The reason Trump obsesses over the polls is because Trump is a media guy.
Top of network TV for 15 years, tabloid fixture for 40 years or more at this point.
Trump obsesses about the polls because as a media mogul, President Trump understands the relation between perception and reality.
President Trump recognizes that not even primarily does reality influence perception, but perception can create reality.
If you have polls coming out saying Trump is doing a great job and everyone's happy, all of a sudden people are going to speak openly about that.
I'll give you an example of this that's really concrete.
Trump wins the popular vote this year.
Trump wins the, or last year, Trump wins the popular vote, everything changes.
All of a sudden, you're going to win.
You are encouraged in some ways to talk about how you support Trump.
The corporations start dropping all the DEI stuff.
They drop Pride Month.
Pride Month is deader than disco.
Everything changes.
And I think it wasn't just the electoral college, it was the popular vote.
Two weeks prior, two weeks before the election, you were not really allowed to talk about how much you liked Trump.
You really couldn't wear that MAGA hat.
To a bar down the street.
You certainly couldn't talk about your Trump support at the water cooler.
You had to kind of hide it, because you felt, yikes, I'm totally under siege, I could be punished by the HR department and DEI, and we've got to get ready for Pride Month and all that.
But the minute that people said, hold on, wait, most people are like me?
Oh, wait, hold on, my view, which I thought was the minority view that I thought was going to be punished for, that's what most people think?
Oh.
Forget about that, man.
Let's go.
Party on.
Where's my MAGA hat?
Let me put that on my head.
Perception can help to create political realities.
So he obsesses over the polls, not in a vain way, but in a very practical way.
Because he realizes that if the perception is that Trump is mainstream, Trump is popular, people like what he's doing, he can get more of his agenda done.
It's not, say what you will about the guy.
That is not vain.
Okay, so then, how's he looking?
How's he looking with the electorate?
Well, Greg Kelly mentioned that Rasmussen poll there.
Rasmussen says that Trump now has, this is according to Breitbart reporting, that Trump has majority support from blacks and Hispanics.
Now, I don't know if that, I'm a little skeptical of majority black support.
It might just mean that combined he has majority support.
But according to the Breitbart reporting for June 8th to 12th, Rasmussen surveying 1,772 likely voters.
I found that Trump has 53% job approval rating, which is very good, which includes 54% approval from black voters.
I don't really believe that number.
I think that has to be an error in the analysis.
It's because black voters are just so overwhelmingly Democrat.
But 53% from Hispanic voters, that checks out.
White voters, about the same.
Total of 59% of men approve of the job Trump is doing compared to 49% of women.
Even 49% of women is pretty good.
How about on immigration?
According to Economist and YouGov, so not just Rasmussen, which is a right-leaning poll firm, but Rasmussen has a good record.
Economist, YouGov shows that Trump has a 4% positive approval on immigration, 49% approved, 45% disapproved.
That's quite good.
That also coincides with a morning consult survey, shows majority of voters, 51%, approve Trump's handling of immigration.
Political gut, which is something that I've said for a long time.
He's obviously reshaped the conservative movement to bring in more Hispanics, to bring in more black people, to bring in more women, to bring in more labor, pro-labor, blue-collar crowd.
He's just reshaped the thing.
And so when thorny issues come up, When issues come up like trade, where he's got to reconcile irreconcilable factions like the protectionists and the free traders, it's why I've given him a little grace on it.
And it's why I think J.D. Vance was so smart when he tweeted out his take on the Iran war, which is, look, we don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon.
We're also really skeptical of getting bogged down in wars in the Middle East.
And I think Trump has earned...
That's all I've said.
I'm not saying put all your trust in princes or anything like that.
I'm just saying the guy, numbers don't lie, man.
The numbers don't lie.
And the guy is putting big numbers up on the board.
So maybe he's got a good political gut.
Maybe, you know, the 10 millionth time people say the walls are closing in, he's totally done.
Now there's no way he can get out of this one.
Maybe he's going to get out of this one again, would be my guess.
Okay, speaking of numbers, speaking of big numbers.
The Call Her Daddy podcast gal is weighing in on a girl's body counts.
weighing in on promiscuity and how that affects relationships and marriages.
My boyfriend has a very big issue with my past.
He found my list of people I have been with and he was passed.
He actually broke up with me initially, but after a while, we got back together.
The issue now is, I feel like he is constantly making judgmental comments about me being easy or having a high body count.
He always says he's just kidding, but how can I get him to stop caring that I was with guys before him?
I feel like every single girl has a list of the guys she's ever been with.
Like, how fun.
I remember the men that have been inside of me, and I have a husband, and that's okay.
This sounds like a really insecure Or possessive man.
We've all lived.
We've all had a good time.
And if anything, everyone we've been with prior to has helped us become the person we are today.
I think your answer next time he says that, if you were just being catty, is like, what's your point?
I was so easy.
What's your point?
Do you not want to be with me anymore?
He's like, well, no, I'm just saying like, I'm really shocked.
Like how easy you were.
What's your point?
What's your point?
Are you trying to put me down right now?
Or do you want me to get upset?
Do you want me to defend myself?
Like, you let me know what's your point.
What do you want me to do?
You want me to leave?
You want me to call them?
Do you want me to detail everyone for you?
Do you want me to pretend you're the first person I've ever had sex with?
Like, what do you want?
What will make you feel better?
You little boy.
What do you want?
If I were that guy, what I would want is for her to admit that she did something wrong that hurt.
Me, that hurt him, you know, the guy, the boyfriend or the husband in this situation.
And just acknowledge that.
That's what I would want if I were that guy.
She says, what is he?
He sounds like a really possessive guy.
If you don't want a possessive guy, why are you married?
What was the point?
If you don't want your husband to feel a bit possessive of you, why are you getting married?
Marriage involves possession.
It involves belonging one to another.
Why would you even be in a relationship?
Why would you even date someone in an exclusive way if you don't want to be possessive?
Being exclusive means and entails being a little possessive.
She did something wrong.
Why is the guy making the snide comments?
He shouldn't do that either, but the reason he's doing that is because he's hurt.
He's hurt because she did something wrong to him, maybe before she even met him.
But when a woman is promiscuous, she is harming, she is injuring her future husband.
Just a fact.
And it's going to cause him pain.
Even if she hasn't met him yet.
Because it's painful to think of the woman you love having done things with other guys.
It's painful.
Any guy in the world will tell you that.
And so, whatever, you know, we all do bad things.
And you can move on.
And it's whatever.
It's this culture that we're in and we accept that there are fallen aspects of the world and we try to do better.
But you need to acknowledge it.
That's the issue.
The reason the insecure boyfriend keeps making the snide remarks is because you won't acknowledge that you did something wrong.
It was wrong for you to sleep around.
And you should acknowledge it that it was wrong.
And you should, I don't know, maybe say you're sorry.
At least acknowledge it.
Man, I shouldn't have done that.
That was bad, huh?
I'm glad I'm better now.
I'm glad I've turned my life around.
Because part of the insecurity for that guy is, well, hold on.
If she didn't think there was anything wrong with that, who knows?
Maybe she should do it again.
I'm investing my life into this woman, but she didn't treat herself with the value and the dignity that I treat her.
There seems to be a mismatch in price here.
Who's right?
Who's wrong?
Yeah, I've really changed, honey.
I did bad things when I was young, but I've changed, and I've become a more dignified, serious person now, and I'm actually worthy of the love that you've given to me, and maybe I wasn't then.
Anyway, I'm sorry.
But the woman can't face it, because she's drunk on feminism, which is only going to make the problem worse.
And then the guy's going to behave in a feminist way, too.
Not acting like a man, acting like a little snide girl.
Make these little snide comments, these little jokes.
But, you know, jokes always have a little element of truth to them.
That's it.
That's it.
And she can help them get over it, but you've got to acknowledge reality.
You just have to acknowledge reality, at the very least.
I'm not sure that they can do this.
Okay, there's so much more.
So much more to get.
There's actually one more thing I want to get to before the mailbag today.
He briefly ran for president, as you'll recall.
He's best known for having allegedly dated a Chinese spy and for his alleged flatulence on television.
Here is the commercial that he just posted that the Democrats are going to run on through the midterms.
I had a really good time today.
Yeah, me too.
She's coming with us.
What are you talking about?
Who are you?
I'm your Republican congressman.
Now that we're in charge, we're rounding up illegals.
She was born here!
She's a citizen!
I don't care.
She looks like one of them.
But don't worry.
When she's in prison in El Salvador, she'll have lots of company.
Give me a break.
So, for those of you who are only listening, not watching, it's this really hot chick, you know, with her boyfriend, whatever, and then the girl gets taken away.
First of all, the people who are being deported don't look like her.
They look more like face-tattooed Satan-worshipping men who are in gangs.
So they don't look like this really hot, basically white.
You wouldn't even think she was Hispanic or anything.
But regardless, then, you know...
No, that's not really what happens.
That's not really what it looks like.
No one really believes that.
And the killer for this kind of commercial is that won the popular vote.
Whatever the real version of the thing being depicted in the commercial is, that thing won the popular vote.
Deporting that liberal guy's girlfriend Pretty much most people voted for that.
Okay?
And that's the part that the Democrats haven't adjusted to.
Mass deportations are a mainstream majority political issue.
And so they're going to keep making these silly commercials.
And the Eric Swalwells of the world can keep posting them.
And that's great.
And his colleague in the House, Ilhan Omar, can talk about how America's the worst country in the world as we head into the bicesquicentennial.
And that's great.
Democrats can wave Mexican flags and whine and complain and call America evil.
And we'll see you at the ballot box in the midterms.
There's a lot happening in the world right now, a lot you need to be aware of.
More than ever, you need the truth, the real story behind the headlines.
And there's only one place you're going to get it, Daily Wire+.
Become a member, get ad-free shows and unfiltered opinions from the most trusted voices in conservative media.
Investigative journalism that cuts through the narrative.
Don't miss a moment.
Go to dailywireplus.com and join today.
My favorite comment yesterday is from ITGFP.
It says, Michael, you're pretty good at extracting positives from a completely negative situation.
I try to do that.
I'm a glass half full kind of guy.
I'm not an optimist, but I do have hope.
I'm not despairing.
I think hope is a theological virtue.
It's kind of funny because people, I've never done any such thing.
Go look for one instance of me encouraging war in Iran.
That has not been my approach to this issue.
It's not really my approach to a lot of issues.
What I've tried to do...
Say, okay, here are the arguments on one side.
Here's what Trump could be thinking on one side.
Here's what he could be thinking on the other.
Here's what part of the conservative movement is saying.
Here's what the other part of the conservative movement is saying.
Here's why neither side is completely insane.
Here are the best arguments for each side.
89% no, 11% yes.
Should we go to war in Iran?
89% no, 11% yes.
Those two things are in conflict.
Here are the issues.
I don't know.
I think Rush Limbaugh usually carried out that kind of strategy here.
I'm not going to just scream until I'm red in the face over this policy or that policy.
I'm going to tell you what's going on, what the issues are at stake.
Maybe gently nudge you one way or the other, but in this case, looks like Trump has arrived at a very good position.
Okay.
Our mailbag is sponsored by Pure Talk.
Go to puretalk.com slash KnowlesKnowles to switch hassle-free in as little as 10 minutes.
Take it away.
This may be petty, but since you have a book called Speechless, That is all about words.
I have to ask you, why do you keep saying gif when it's graphical interface format?
That's like saying I give my kids gifs or that I am for jiving.
It's gif for graphical interface format.
Please let me know what you think about this.
It's like giving your kids Christmas gifs.
Is it?
Is it?
There's never a hard G?
No?
When you go to the zoo, do you go look at the giraffes?
The giraffes, rather?
I messed that one up myself.
Do you go, the G can be hard or it can be soft.
But furthermore, your argument is that GIF, which is an acronym, Graphic Interface Format, because there's a hard G on graphic, because the G is pronounced G on graphic.
And it has to be pronounced G in the acronym.
Did a bunch of homosexuals in the 1980s contract AIDS?
Did they contract AIDS?
Or was it AIDS?
Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.
Acquired.
Immuno.
AIDS?
Was it, did we say, does the pronunciation of these individual letters in an acronym, which is a word unto itself, Do we have some respect, although language changes, for authority in language?
Well, what does the Coiner of the term say.
He says it's jif, like the peanut butter.
Do you jet it now?
Next question.
Hi, Michael.
I'm a big fan of your show, and I appreciate you taking time to answer my question.
Both mine and my husband's parents are divorced, and three of the four of them have quote-unquote remarried.
I say quote-unquote because this includes parents that were married in the Catholic Church and have not received an annulment, but are divorced and remarried.
We just had our first baby a couple months ago, and some of our parents have started referring to their spouse as a grandparent.
My husband and I aren't sure how to respond to this.
We don't call any of our step-parents mom or dad.
We just use their first names.
We believe in the Catholic teaching of marriage and want to be clear on what message we give to our children, but we aren't looking to unnecessarily offend any family members either.
Do you think that we should let the step-parents call themselves Grandma or Grandpa, or should we find an alternative such as calling them by their first name?
Thank you again.
Pax Domini, Sitz Emper, Vubiscum.
Et cum spiritu tuo.
That's a tough issue that many, many people are facing right now, so you're certainly not alone, because you're torn between The good of family, and respecting your family, and the fourth commandment, and all the rest, and the wanting to avoid the sin of scandal,
scandalizing your kids, who see everything, who observe everything, and who you don't want to have them forming their idea of marriage based on this really degenerate, kind of modern, everyone remarries a hundred thousand times version of things.
So, I get it.
Great.
I think there is a middle ground.
And I like nice, moderate, I think the middle ground is come up with a cute little nickname that doesn't quite have the dignity and the formality of Grandma and Grandpa.
Is still not so cold and clinical, like Bill or Sue or something.
Maybe just come up with a fun one in the middle.
You know, like Nini, Nana, Meemaw, you know, like something like that.
Something that's kind of fun and familiar and recognizes that you do care for this person and this person is part of your family, but also doesn't give up the meaning of mom and dad and grandma and grandpa.
That's what I would do.
I would find that kind of a middle ground.
In that way, minimize the scandal.
Some scandal inevitably will come to your kids because of these actions, but also will preserve the good of the family.
That's what I would do.
Okay, next question.
Hey, Michael.
I'm a huge fan of you guys and everything that y 'all do.
I've been a long-time listener.
My question is kind of a rebuttal to one of the questions from last week where a guy had brought up the concept of faith alone.
I'm a Baptist, and I believe faith alone, but you had said the only time that faith alone was referenced in the Bible was in James, and that it was actually refuting the concept of faith alone.
I feel like it's an intellectually dishonest argument to make when there are numerous other times that it's discussed in the Bible, but it is not using those exact words.
For instance, John 3.16.
For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son, that whosoever shall believe in him will not perish but have eternal life.
To me, that sounds a lot like faith alone.
So I kind of wanted to get your opinion on this and see if this changes your thoughts in any way on the subject.
Thank you.
It does not, but that's a very good point to raise.
And I think a lot of people would raise it and say, well, hold on, I read John 3.16.
It says, all I have to do is believe in Jesus.
Notice the phrasing is not, will have everlasting life, but can have everlasting life.
Or may have everlasting life.
But regardless, it's actually secondary to the point here.
Because the real question, I'm going to do my best Jordan Peterson impression.
Well, you know, bucko, it depends on what you mean by believe.
And really, it does.
What is meant by belief here?
Because you're talking about John chapter 3. What happens when you fast forward to John chapter 6?
So the very same gospel, Christ says, whoever does not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood has no life in him.
The flesh of the Son of Man is true food, the blood of the Son of Man is true drink, and you have to eat my flesh and drink my blood to have life in you.
And the Jews argue among themselves because they're shocked by this, and a lot of the disciples go away.
So this is clearly a shocking statement, as shocking as it sounds, as I'm saying it to you now.
And Peter does not go away, and the apostles do not go away.
And then you see the sacrament formalized in the Last Supper.
This bread is my body.
It's given up for you.
This wine is my blood, given up for you.
Eat the bread.
Drink the wine.
Drink, which is my body, and do this in memory of me.
So, is that a work?
You know, is that our Lord giving us a work?
Well, it's our Lord giving us a sacrament.
He's saying to do certain things.
He's saying belief looks like certain things.
When people go and touch the hem of his garment, they're doing something.
They're touching something.
It's not just all in their head.
When our Lord gives the Great Commission to the apostles and says, go make disciples of all nations, he's giving them a work to do.
Yes.
Not to earn your salvation like the Pelagians, but also not to just close your eyes and think beautiful thoughts, and then you'll be saved in that way either.
Neither of those things are exactly right.
When our Lord says to the apostles, go and forgive sins, you have the power to forgive sins, to forgive and retain sins, he's giving them, is it a work?
Is it just closing your eyes and having some kind of totally abstracted faith?
No, it's a sacrament.
It's a sacramental religion.
So this is why it's important to say, yeah, yeah, we're saved by our faith in Christ.
God's grace comes down the mountain, but we cooperate with God's grace.
As St. Thomas Aquinas quotes St. Augustine in the Summa, says, you know, God made you without your participation, but he won't save you without your participation.
He saved you.
He's the one doing it.
It's not you're saving yourself or anything like that.
But belief looks like something.
It entails doing things, which is how you reconcile.
You know, what you would seem to be, this notion of faith alone in John 3.16, with James.
James 2.24, right?
It says that you are justified by works and not by faith alone, which is the only time that the phrase faith alone appears in the Bible.
So that's how you reconcile.
When you look at it and you say, well, hold on, I don't know how to...
this seems to me like it means this thing, but this phrase seems like it means some other thing.
Well, the only way then to understand the entirety of this, So you can't just pick and choose.
When you try to pick and choose, that's what creates schism.
Even the word heresy, which we use as kind of a scare word right now, but the word heresy, heresis, just means to choose.
So you don't want to just choose.
Even among Catholics, you don't want to just be a cafeteria Catholic.
You know, you pick this.
Oh, I like this.
Yeah, I like the jello salad.
I don't really like the chickpeas.
It's got to all make sense together, including what is meant by faith and what we do that expresses faith.
Because, as James also points out, faith without works is dead.
