Ep. 1787 - Democrat Congresslady: I’m Loyal to Guatemala Before America
An Illinois Democrat claims loyalty to Guatemala before America, a bombshell report reveals Jeffrey Epstein was an FBI Informant, and Benjamin Netanyahu is set to fully occupy Gaza.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1787
- - -
DailyWire+:
My new series, The Vatican Files, premieres Wednesday, August 13th, exclusively on DailyWire+. 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:
Balance of Nature - Go to https://balanceofnature.com and use promo code KNOWLES for 35% off your first order PLUS get a free bottle of Fiber and Spice.
ExpressVPN - Secure your online data TODAY by visiting https://ExpressVPN.com/knowles and you can get an extra four months FREE.
Good Ranchers - Visit https://goodranchers.com and subscribe to any box using code KNOWLES to claim $25 off and your choice of free ground beef, chicken, or salmon in every order for an entire year.
- - -
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
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
These are questions that take cultures thousands of years to answer.
During Answer the Call, I take questions from people just like you about their problems, opportunities, challenges, or when they simply need advice.
How do I balance all of this grief, responsibility?
How do you repair this kind of damage?
My daughter, Mikaela, guides the conversations as we hopefully help people navigate their lives.
Everyone has their own destiny.
everyone.
Thank you.
Thank you.
A Democrat Congress lady just traveled to a foreign country to give a speech in a foreign language to proclaim that she is more loyal to yet another foreign country than she is to America.
Her husband is an illegal alien.
She boasts about this.
She has apparently nothing but contempt for the country that took her, that took her also illegal alien parents in.
And the craziest part is she will most likely not have to face a single.
negative consequence for it.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Nullet Show.
So Welcome back to the show.
Radar Online reporting breaking exclusive news about Jeffrey Epstein.
We are finally getting info on which intelligence agencies he was connected to.
We will get to that in just a moment.
But first, I want to tell you about balance of nature.
We all know we should be eating more fruits and veggies, but let's be frank with each other.
Most of us are not getting nearly enough variety.
That is where balance of nature comes in.
Because what you put in your body matters.
Their whole health system gives you 47 different whole food ingredients, 16 fruits, 15 vegetables, plus 12 aromatic spices and four fibers.
We're talking real ingredients like wild blueberries, kale, turmeric, and psyllium husk.
No artificial additives, no sugar added, just nature doing its job.
One thing I love about Balance of Nature, the convenience.
You can take the fruits and veggie capsules with water, chew them.
or open them up and mix the powder into smoothies, yogurt.
You can even sprinkle it on oatmeal and have the fiber and spice blend that mixes great into drinks too.
These supplements are vegan, kosher certified, and gluten-free.
If you check the label, you will actually recognize every ingredient that's rare these days.
Balance of Nature is not trying to replace fresh produce.
It's a smart way to fill the gaps in your diet with real whole food nutrition.
I love it.
Everyone around here loves it.
Around DW, these hyenas who want to grab it.
Go to balanceofnature.com.
Use promo code Knowles for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer.
Plus, get a free bottle of fiber and spice that is balanceofnature.com promo code K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
This woman, Delia.
Delia Ramirez.
Delia Ramirez is a Democrat member of Congress.
She just traveled to Mexico City for the Pan American Congress, whatever that is.
And here is what she had to say.
I am spelled I'll translate that for you.
My Spanish is pretty weak, but she said, I am speaking Spanish because I am a Guatemalan before I am an American.
What does she mean by before?
I really wanted to give this woman the benefit of the doubt, seriously.
So I said, well, maybe she meant I was a Guatemalan before I became an American.
It's not exactly what she said, but sometimes the tenses get messed up when you're translating languages.?
No.
No, she was born in America.
So she could not possibly have meant I was a Guatemalan before I became an American.
She has to mean I am a Guatemalan.
I consider myself to be Guatemalan before I consider myself to be American.
In some ways, it's funny, a lot of people are going to attack her and say, This woman is a foreign element and she isn't really an American.
In some ways, this is the proof that she has assimilated to be an American.
This is what it means to assimilate as a leftist in America is to hate America, is to not consider yourself American, is to try to.
to consider yourself as being any nationality, having part in any identity group before being an American.
That's one of the most American things about her.
Her parents were immigrants.
Actually, more precisely, her parents were illegal aliens.
America took them in.
She herself, I guess, is a citizen because of the loophole of birthright citizenship, but she doesn't consider herself American.
She clearly doesn't like speaking English.
She married an illegal alien.
Her husband, this Democrat Congress lady's husband, is currently an illegal alien.
be deported at any moment if we were to seriously enforce our immigration laws.
She goes down to this ridiculous event, the Pan American Conference, She's not one of the squad Congress ladies.
I don't know who that is.
Jesus Gilberto Garcia, also of Illinois.
On her website, she observes that her husband's in America illegally and she's in a, quote, mixed status marriage.
And she fights for the rights of dreamers.
Dreamers is a euphemism for foreign nationals who are in our country illegally.
Dreamers like her husband and needs to be deported immediately.
Full stop, end of discussion.
I hope, I'm sure the White House has considered this.
I'm sure Tom Homan has considered this, but just to bring it to your attention, if you've not considered it already, that lady's husband needs to be deported immediately.
Not out of cruelty, not because I think that we should break up marriages.
Oh, contrary, quite the opposite.
I don't want to break up her marriage.
I want her to go too.
She's awful.
She adds nothing to our country.
We can't technically deport her because she got birthright citizenship because her parents snuck into the country and we have a kind of a silly jurisprudence on this.
So we can't just deport her, but she needs to leave.
She does not add anything to this country.
She is openly, explicitly hostile to the country.
She, in her own words, wants no part of the country.
So get her out.
What's the point of having her here?
The liberals will say, well, it's her right.
She's got birthright citizenship.
And the libertarians will say much the same thing.
It's her right, her constitutional rights.
But my question is just like a normal guy in politics is, what good does she bring to the country?
How is it good for the country for her to be here?
It's not.
How is it good for Congress for her to be there?
It's not.
How is it good for her to be here?
She says it's not good.
That's what she's implying when she says I'm a Guatemalan before I'm an American.
Then go to Guatemala, honey.
I don't need you here.
I guess if I must, I will tolerate your being here.
I don't have to tolerate your husband being here.
But I don't know.
You want to go to Guatemala.
I want you to go to Guatemala.
Hey, we agree.
Look at that.
That's a bipartisan agreement.
That's wonderful.
And before, I already hear the liberal objection.
They will say, Michael, you're misconstruing her words.
We are a pluralistic society and people have multiple identities at the same time.
Michael, don't you have multiple identities?
You are an American.
You're of Italian extraction.
You're a Catholic.
You're a Republican.
You're a conservative.
You're a traditionalist.
You're a this, you're a that.
You're a Yankee fan.
You have all of these identities.
She has multiple identities too.
Yeah, that's true.
And I could even say I've certain identities are more important than others.
For instance, my Christianity is more important than my even my national identity or my racial identity or my sexual identity or whatever.
That's true.
I would say I'm a Catholic first.
That's the deepest part of my identity, for sure.
But that's not in conflict with my other identity groups.
Being a Yankee fan does not conflict with being a Catholic.
Does not conflict with being American.
Does not conflict with being a Tennesseean.
Does not conflict with being a man.
Does not conflict with being a prep who wears collared shirts.
and gold-button blazers does not conflict with anything else.
Being a Guatemalan conflicts with being an American.
We all have many simultaneous loyalties, but we cannot simultaneously be loyal to multiple things of the same kind.
This is why being a dual citizen or a triple citizen or a quadruple citizen doesn't really make any sense because you cannot simultaneously actually be loyal to multiple countries at once.
Because if those two countries go to war, you have to pick one.
I can be loyal to the Yankees and my local barbecue joint.
and America and the Catholic Church.
I can be loyal to all of those things because those are different kinds of things.
You cannot simultaneously be loyal to two countries.
And in this case, this woman isn't even saying I'm equally loyal to Guatemala as I am to America.
She says, I am Guatemalan.
I'm first, I'm Guatemalan.
Once I'm done being Guatemalan, whatever is left over of my loyalty and my affection, that I give to America.
Not enough for me.
Get her out.
The way to get her out is to deport her husband.
And you should deport her husband not only as a matter of convenience to speed her out of our country.
Do it as a matter of justice.
He has no right to be here.
And the longer we tolerate this kind of injustice, the worse off we are.
Just a minor point on this.
There was a story yesterday, Nashville executed, not Nashville, the state of Tennessee in Nashville executed a death row inmate.
And some people were whining about this, some people who are intrinsically opposed to the death penalty, who think that the death penalty is intrinsically evil, which simply is not.
And there's really no good way to argue that.
Death penalty, which is perfectly just in principle.
This guy was executed.
He murdered many years ago.
He murdered his girlfriend and her two young daughters, a six-year-old and a nine-year-old.
Horrific crimes.
And he was executed.
He committed those crimes in 1988.
As far as I'm concerned, the only part of this episode, of this punishment that really raises eyebrows is the fact that it took almost 40 years for justice to be served.
That is wrong.
There's something really wrong about that.
And the longer you allow injustice to fester like that, the longer you wait to deliver justice, the more questions are raised about the justice of any given action.
The longer you let this Congress lady's husband hang out in the country, the longer you let 11 to 16 million foreigners stay in our country.
the more difficult it's going to be to deport them, the more dubious the ethics of deporting them really look like.
So you got to hurry up.
Get her out of the country.
I don't want her here.
Okay.
Now, speaking of absolutely insufferable Democrat women, Kamala Harris has made a big announcement about her political future.
We'll get to that in a moment.
First, I want to tell you about ExpressVPN.
Go to ExpressVPN.com slash Knowles.
Did you know multiple companies maintain living profiles based on your internet activity?
Everything you do online is recorded and sold to big tech companies, advertisers, and government agencies.
These organizations that are behind this activity.
They're called data brokers.
They're companies that generate billions of dollars by selling your private information.
When an entity purchases your data, they can use it to target you with ads, curate your content, and potentially.
influence your decisions.
However, if you want to take back control of your online privacy, I suggest you do what I do and use ExpressVPN.
ExpressVPN is a virtual private network that reroutes 100% of my internet activity through secure encrypted servers.
No one can see what I do online.
No one can use my information against me.
ExpressVPN also masks my IP address, which is a number that identifies you on the internet.
This prevents data brokers from building a profile on you.
It's really, really important, especially when you consider all the stuff you do online politically these days.
You got to watch it.
Even if you're reading right-wing content, it's not so great.
Think of all your financial information.
Think of everything you do online.
Right now, you can get an extra four months for free when you use my link, expressvpn.com slash Knowles Canada WLIS.
Get four extra months of ExpressVPN.
That is expressvpn.com slash KNOW LES.
Kamala Harris, long rumored to be considering running for governor of California.
You know, she was attorney general of California, senator from California.
Then she jumped to the national stage.
She was vice president.
Then I guess she was technically running for president.
107 days didn't work out very well.
So she was exploring California governor.
Here's what she had to say on the Colbert show.
Yesterday you made an announcement that you're not running for the governor of California.
Correct.
Even though in early polling you beat every other candidate by double digits, you said you're going to sit this one out.
Why are you sitting this one out?
Are you saving yourself for a different office that might be No, no, no.
That's what everybody obviously.
But obviously people project onto the scene.
And honestly, that it's more perhaps basic than that.
I am, listen, I am a devout public servant.
I have spent my entire career in service of the people.
But to be very candid with you?
You know, when I was young in my career, I had to defend my decision to become a prosecutor with my family.
And one of the points that I made is why is it then when we think we want to improve a system or change it that we're always on the outside on bended knee or trying to break down the door?
Shouldn't we also be inside the system?
And that has been my career.
Recently I made the decision that I just for now I don't want to go back in the system.
I think it's broken.
Hold on.
Wait.
Lady, eight months ago, you were begging all of us to let you be president, to be as far in the system as possible.
Your entire professional life has involved you trying to get further and further into the system, including doing some rather dubious things to further get yourself into the system.
Let's just leave it at that.
Let's be polite.
Now, all of a sudden, you are humiliated at the national stage.
You lose this race.
All of a sudden, it dawns on you, you know, maybe there's a problem with the system.
I don't want to be in the system.
All I know how to do in my entire professional life is be in the system.
I don't want to be in that, though.
But hold on, I thought you were a devout public servant.
If you're devout, if you're really devoted, you would continue to be in public service.
Could you imagine someone saying that with a straight face?
I'm a devout public servant.
Could you imagine with a straight face saying, oh, I'm a devout Christian.
I'm devout.
I'm very pious.
Oh, I'm a holy, I'm a living saint.
I'm a living martyr as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, none is holier than I. So devout I am.
Really?
Take me seriously.
I'm a serious person, but I'm much better than you.
I'm so devout, but I'm not going to run for office.
In this case, you say I'm a devout public servant.
Saying I'm so devoted to running for office and serving in office, but I'm going to quit now.
Because it's broken.
Because what?
Was it broken eight months ago?
No, what changed?
I'll tell you what changed.
We have polling out from California.
So this is a Capital Weekly poll from, is from February, but not a lot has changed in the California governor's race.
Showed that for California governor, 23% of respondents wanted Kamala Harris.
Kamala Harris had just run a national campaign.
She had run for president.
She had the highest name ID she's ever going to get, basically perfect name ID.
She had as much goodwill as she was going to get after dumping $2 billion into a campaign to make people like her.
23% of Californians wanted her to be governor.
The Republican, John Cox, who no one has ever heard of and who has not said that he's running, had 21%.
Kamala Harris, $2 billion, Democrat, California served as senator, served as attorney general, spent all that money to make people like her 23 a republican no one's ever heard of two points lower 21 in california followed by former us rep katie porter a democrat who resigned in disgrace because of a super creepy sex scandal she had 16 16 she wasn't even that far off from harris disgraced
sex freak ousted from the house of representatives within striking distance of kamala harris pathetic she just the reason she's not running for governor of california is she can't win and not only would she lose, she would be completely humiliated, completely humiliated.
It would be, if this is not already the end of her political career, it would be the end of her political career.
Okay, well then Colbert says, are you thinking about another office?
Let's look at the presidential polling.
The latest data, the latest poll on the 2028 Democrat race, Harris has 21.1% support.
That is a 14-point drop since March, April, May, June, July.
In the beginning of August, five months, she's dropped 14 points down to 21.1%.
Just one in five Democrat voters would support her.
Now, when the polling began January 1st, she had 34.8%.
So she was already weak as the Democrat nominee, as a person who should be the front runner in a weak field.
Who's it going to be?
Buttigieg, give me a break.
Newsom, Newsom burned his main city to the ground.
Newsom is a total joke.
Whitmer, who?
Shapiro, Democrats don't like Jews anymore.
Ain't going to be Shapiro.
Who's...
I guess there were two presidential candidates from the Democrats who are popular right now, but that's Tulsi Gabbard and Bobby Kennedy.
They're working foring for Trump who you have you got you got nothing you got nothing her the book is going to be terrible I seriously doubt Kamala Harris wrote any of it I kind of doubt that she even read it it's called 107 days 107 days to end Kamala Harris's political career this strikes me all of this strikes me is Sarah Palin stuff.
This is Sarah Palin 2.0 except that Sarah Palin was politically talented and Sarah Palin was relative to Kamala Harris a much much more serious politician but but Sarah Palin got really bruised up in the 2008 race when she was the running mate to John McCain and And afterward, she went on TV and she was selling stuff and she was keeping herself in the public eye.
But it was always teasing, maybe I'll run in 2012.
Who knows?
Maybe I'll run in 2016.
Maybe, maybe I'm going to keep running.
The support just wasn't there.
It's just a way to try to stay relevant on this prompt.
Maybe I'll run.
Maybe I'll run.
There's no path for Kamala Harris.
She was like the first person out.
of the 2016 Democrat primary field.
She only got picked to be VP because she's a black woman who isn't a communist like Karen Bass was the other prominent black woman who could have been picked.
Biden put himself in a corner so I'm going to pick a black woman.
Kamala was the only choice.
She got the nomination because with the Democrats' racial caste system and sexual caste system, you couldn't overlook the black lady VP, even if Newsom might have been a better choice or some other Whitmer might have been a better choice.
So look, good honor that she got this far.
It's impressive that a woman who can't speak and has no actual opinions made it this far in politics, but.
She's done.
She's done stick a fork in her.
She is done with the federal government.
Now, you know who else was working for the federal government and is no longer working for the federal government?
According to a breaking exclusive report from Radar Online.
Jeffrey Epstein.
Now hold on.
Hold on.
Remember I said, you're going to say, Michael, you got something wrong.
You predicted something wrong.
Because I said when all the Epstein stuff was coming up again, I said, hey, I just want to let you know, you will never learn anything more that is in any way significant about Jeffrey Epstein.
It's just not going to come out.
There's not going to be the big smoking gun.
You're not going to learn new stuff.
You'll think you're learning new stuff, but you're not going to learn new stuff.
Remember I said that?
And it was a very unpopular view.
And I explained why, because governments are not totally transparent.
And there are reasons that states sometimes need to protect information.
Either Jeffrey Epstein is who the government says he is, in which case you've already heard everything you're going to hear, or he's a little bit more than that, in which case you've definitely heard everything you're going to hear.
Anyway, I got in some hot water for saying that.
And it looks like I'm wrong now, right?
Because Radar Online, big headline, do I have the piece?
No, I didn't even print.
I just took quotes from it.
Breaking exclusive.
Jeffrey Epstein was secretly working with the U.S. government.
according to bombshell documents obtained by radar online.
Well, that's new information, right?
An FBI report.
This bombshell explosive exclusive.
document from Radar Online was already reported in 2018.
It was already reported seven years ago.
This article was main page a drudge report yesterday.
Oh, wow, breaking exclusive.
No.
So there's probably new information to some people because some people didn't read it back when it came out seven years ago.
What was the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and the FBI?
Because less you missed it all those years ago, Epstein was, in fact, an informant for the FBI.
What does that mean?
Does it mean he was working with other intelligence agencies in America?
Was he working with foreign intelligence agencies?
What was the Epstein operation?
We'll get to that in one moment.
First, I want to tell you about Good Ranchers.
Go to goodranchers.com.
Use code Knowles.
As a parent, as a father, I thought I was making smart choices at the grocery store until I discovered that over 4 billion pounds of meat were imported into the U.S. last year.
Meat that can still be labeled as though it's from here.
Meat from countries that even if it says product of the USA, maybe they don't quite have the same health standards that we have in America.
Maybe they're shooting it full of antibiotics and hormones and all sorts of crazy stuff.
It's one of the reasons that you need good ranchers.
The main reason you need good ranchers.
is that it is delicious.
It is the best meat you're going to get at the best price you're going to get for any meat, even the bad meat.
The Good Ranchers meat is just top shelf, which is what I care about.
Their meat is 100% American sourced from local farms and ranches, delivered straight to your door.
Quality is phenomenal, especially the New York Strip Steak and the Wagyu burgers.
It's all magnificent, but especially the Strip Steak and the Wagyu burgers are insane.
Right now, you can get $25 off every box, free shipping, and a free gift for life.
Everything from bacon to their Cedar All-Free Chicken Nuggets.
The Cedar All-Free Chicken Nuggets are also completely off the chain.
It's crazy that they make those.
They're very hard to find.
They're very expensive to make and they're very inexpensive for you to buy somehow.
Go to goodranchers.com, use code Knowles, KNWLAS to get 40 bucks off plus free meat for life when you start a subscription.
That is code Knowles, KNWLAS, 40 bucks off, free meat for life, goodranchers.com.
Welcome to the table.
I'll just read the report, even though it's not actually new information, is being presented as new information.
The late tycoon and pedophile who died in jail in 2019, aged 66, was quote, more than just protected.
He was a puppet, informant, and spy for the FBI.
That, according to an Intel agency source, he is a 2008 internal file obtained through a successful Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show Epstein was operating as an FBI informant prior to his now infamous 2007 sweetheart plea deal.
So in 2007, he gets this plea deal where he said, yeah, I was doing a bunch of creepy stuff with young girls and he goes to the Palm Beach court and he's allowed out on nights and weekends.
And it's like he basically had to just go to a hotel for a little bit, but he got this unbelievable sweetheart deal, no federal prosecution.
How'd that happen?
Well, apparently this file was obtained through a FOIA lawsuit.
Now, again, I think the file was already out there.
The information was already out there.
So why is this being reported on as new information?
I don't know.
Epstein has also provided information to the FBI as agreed upon.
A special agent whose name was redacted wrote on an internal cable dated September 9, 2008 marked routine.
Case agent advised that no federal prosecution will occur in this matter as long as Epstein continues to uphold his agreement with the state of Florida.
So this deal.
between the FBI and Epstein allowed him to plead guilty to the much reduced state level charges in Florida and get a slap on the wrist and then go free.
According to a source close to the case, these are the smoking gun documents.
They show Epstein was an active source for the FBI way before his plea deal in 2007.
The real reason the FBI has been stonewalling for years is because these files blow up the official story.
Epstein wasn't just evading justice.
He was helping them.
You don't give this kind of deal to a man like Epstein unless you're getting something big in return.
Okay, so Epstein was a fed.
That's the takeaway.
Epstein was a fed.
We already kind of knew it.
We already had the reporting from Alex Acosta.
who was the U.S. attorney on the Epstein case.
Then he was up for Labor Secretary Andrew Trump.
He reportedly, according to the Daily Beast, so take it with a grain of salt, but he reportedly said in an interview with the Trump transition that the reason that Epstein got the sweetheart deal is because he belonged to intelligence and Acosta was told to let Epstein be.
So Epstein was a fed.
Gee, you don't say.
You know, a lot of people are feds.
this accusation gets thrown about.
It's bandied about a lot.
It's often true.
It's often true, okay?
People who are mob figures.
people who are in organized crime, a lot of them are feds, a lot of them, what do we mean by fed?
We'll get to that in a second.
A lot of people who are political activists, who are prominent extremists, you know, political extremists and dissidents, a lot of them, not just now, but for many, many decades, up to and including the present time, have been feds.
And what I mean by fed is not that they're super secret agent double spies who are raised in a laboratory at Quantico or Langley.
What I mean is they provide information on their associates and their associates' activities and their campaigns to the federal government.
And I'm not saying they do it necessarily willingly.
Usually what happens is, the government will get them on some kind of a crime.
Did they participate in a riot?
Did they participate in some violent action?
Did they cheat on their taxes?
Did they not report some income?
Did it whatever?
They're going to get them on some minor crime.
They'll say, look, we can either put you away.
We can either prosecute you.
We can either do this, that, or the other thing.
We can either take your money.
We can, or you can give us some information when we ask.
And we're not, that's it.
We're just going to meet with you every so often.
And you give us some information.
Maybe, who knows, we'll go meet at a restaurant.
It's no big deal.
Every, every month or two.
And you're going to tell us about.
whatever.
If you go back many decades about the Black Panthers or you're going to tell us about the civil rights movement or you're going to tell us about, but all the way up to the present day, there are many ways to get you.
And so in this.
In this case, with Epstein, he was a fed.
Yeah.
Most people who you think might be feds, in my humble rule of thumb opinion, yeah, yeah, it's probably a safe assumption.
It's probably a decent assumption.
Let's put it that way.
With Epstein, duh, you think a guy was operating a secret peto sex island with the richest, most powerful people in the world.
And then he was prosecuted, but he got totally off the hook.
And he wasn't working with the government.
Give me a break.
Of course he was.
The question now is not, was he an informant for the FBI after his prosecution?
The question I have is, was he working for or with anyone before the prosecution?
The way it works, the way people turn cooperators and government informants is they're doing something a little dodgy and the government gets you and they say, well, we won't punish you if you inform for us.
And a lot of the time people inform, even if they deny it publicly.
Now, with Epstein, That's what happened.
Okay, now he's informing for the FBI.
But who was he working with before?
Was he, as is being alleged, working for the Mossad?
Was he working for, I don't know, MI6?
Was he working for the CIA?
Was he working for organized crime?
Or it is entirely possible that he was just running his own kind of thing, running his own little criminal enterprise.
I'm saying it's possible.
I'm not saying it's likely.
I'm not saying it's plausible.
I'm just saying it's possible.
He was running his own thing.
He gets pinched by the feds.
Either way.
The fact that we know that he was a federal informant eventually means that the government knows what he was up to.
The government knows a lot more about his operation than the government's let on.
And the fact that it has already been reported many years ago that he was a federal informant, the fact that this actually isn't any new information is just a reminder.
You know how much I hate to say I told you so.
You're not going to get juicy new info on the Epstein case.
You're just not.
There can be perfectly, there can be bad reasons for that.
There could be good reasons.
There can be virtuous reasons.
The governments are not even supposed to be totally transparent.
But I'm just looking at the timelines here.
You're not getting any new info.
Full stop.
Now, I mentioned a lot of People think he was mobbed up with Mossad because he was working with Ghislaine Maxwell and Ghislaine Maxwell's father, Robert Maxwell, was reputedly associated with Mossad and MI6 and maybe the KGB and whatever.
So turning to Mossad, turning to Israel rather, not just the spy agency of Israel, but to the nation itself, BB Netanyahu is reportedly going to occupy Gaza.
And look, these are reports coming out of the Israeli press, out of the international press.
He is planning to propose fully reoccupying the Gaza Strip when he meets with his security cabinet.
The die has been cast according to local journalists or according to a senior official quoted by local journalists, the die has been cast.
We are going for the full conquest of the Gaza Strip and defeating Hamas.
According to reports, the unnamed official said, if that doesn't work for the chief of staff of the army, of the Israeli army, then he should resign because we're doing it.
It's going in.
We're not asking for advice anymore.
We're going to go take Gaza.
Now, also being reported, the families of hostages are worried that these plans could endanger their loved ones because it's believed that 20 of the 50 supposed hostages in Gaza are still alive.
20 hostages who are alive.
Polls suggest that three in four Israelis favor a ceasefire deal to return them.
So three in four Israelis, a vast majority of Israelis, according to polls, would rather Israel not conquer the Gaza Strip, would rather Israel leave Hamas in power, but get a ceasefire deal to bring the hostages home.
The government, according to all these reports, including from Israeli media, says no, even if the hostages are going to die.
Even if the moment we conquer Gaza, they're going to kill all the hostages.
We have to do that.
That's the better course.
My question, for the, you know, I've been, I've had the least, in some ways it's the least popular view on the Israel-Gaza conflict, but in many ways I think it's the view of most Americans.
It's the least popular view among the media and among activists and politicians.
I think it is the actual popular view among most Americans, which is I broadly have supported Israel.
I get Netanyahu's reaction to October 7, 2023.
I do think that the Palestinian Arabs have certain rights.
I do think that wars that begin in a just way can turn unjust.
I'm a little skeptical of the Israeli actions in the war.
I'm deeply troubled by, for instance that attack accidental or otherwise on the one catholic church in gaza and some of the reports coming out of the west bank and maybe even the mission drift the fact that this war was supposed to be to get the hostages home punish hamas and yet it moved into bombing iran and maybe regime changing iran and occupying southern syria and all i'm and i'm just a little skeptical i want to know when the war is going to end especially because we're funding it as americans that's my view It's a complicated view.
It's a nuanced view.
It doesn't make Bibi Netanyahu out to be the devil himself.
It doesn't pretend that Hamas and the Islamists are in any way on our team or in any way admirable or to be tolerated.
It doesn't.
It recognizes that there is a distinction between combatants and civilians.
I know that's not popular in the world of punditry or political prognostication.
I think that's where most Americans are.
And so my reaction to this news, having that view, is I don't know what's the alternative.
What's the alternative to conquest of the Gaza Strip?
What Netanyahu is now saying is the objective of the war is the neutralization of Gaza as a political threat, as a security threat.
That's it.
And that's what I've been wondering.
In order to have a just war, you have to, one, have clear military objectives.
And then you need to have proportionality, which means not using excess military force to achieve those military objectives.
And you need discrimination to discriminate between combatants and civilians.
And you need all sorts of a just cause and a legitimate authority and all the rest.
But you need proportionality, especially.
And that means you need clear objectives.
Netanyahu is saying, Gaza proved itself to be an unacceptable security threat right on the border of Israel.
We played this game.
We used to control Gaza.
A lot of people don't even know the history of Gaza, but we allowed Gaza to kind of run its own show and it's proved itself to be an unacceptable security threat.
So we're not going to let them continue to be run in the way that they're run.
Okay.
Okay.
Fine.
That means it's not really about the hostages.
It's not, it's just, it's about neutralizing Gaza.
Well, in that case, what are they going to do other than occupy Gaza?
They're going to just let Hamas keep running the show?
No.
They're going to have elections be held.
Do you think some other group is going to get elected that's going to be so much better?
I don't think so.
I mean, before 1967, Gaza was controlled by Egypt.
Okay.
After the 1967 war, until 2005, Gaza was controlled by Israel.
2005, Israel decides, all right, we're going to give Gaza to the Palestinians.
They give it to the Palestinian Authority.
That lasts until 2007.
2007, they hold elections.
Hamas gets elected.
2023, Hamas rules through 2023.
2023, they attack Israeli civilians.
Now Israel's going to go in and take it.
Okay.
I'm not saying that's wonderful.
Oh, that's great that Israel's going to conquer Gaza.
Certainly seems quite unfortunate that Gaza's also already basically been obliterated.
But I guess for the people who really hate Israel on Netanyahu, what's your solution?
If you accept that Israel is a nation, is an actual nation, the Israeli government is a legitimate authority established by the United Nations and a War of Conquest and the Belfur Declaration, and it's just, if you believe that any modern nation state is a legitimate nation state, it's hard to argue how Israel is not a legitimate nation state.
If you grant all of that and you grant that Hamas is an unacceptable security risk in an independent Gaza, What's the alternative?
Give me the alternative.
I'm open.
I think I'm like most Americans.
I'm pretty open-minded on the issue.
What's the alternative?
At least now there's a little bit of clarity on the war.
And it's not a moment too soon because as even another pretty right-wing former Israeli Prime Minister points out, Israel doesn't have any friends anymore.
People are sick of this war and Israel is becoming, in his words, a leper state.
There's a lot of great stuff going to Daily Wire Plus, especially August 13th, the Pope and the Führer, my documentary series on one of the most slandered, maligned, lied about guys of the 20th century, who also happens to be one of the greatest men of the 20th century.
That is Pope Pius XII.
We will get into his role in World War II and why the accusations against him are bunk.
Then this fall, Isabel Brown's new show joins the lineup alongside the most trusted and handsome voices in conservative media, all ad-free, uncensored, with live chat.
So you're not just watching, you're part of the conversation.
We built this because no one else would.
Now it's yours too.
Go to dailywire.com, become a member today.
My favorite comment, hold it now, listen, I didn't pick a comment.
So I want you to be clear.
The producers picked this comment and we'll see if it actually is my favorite comment.
It's from the drummer's workshop, Norm's Music.
Don't forget, FEMA skipped homes with Trump signs.
That's true.
That's true.
FEMA did skip homes with Trump signs.
I guess you're making that point.
This was in North Carolina, right?
The Trump supporters, when the federal disaster relief went in there, FEMA said, don't go to the homes.
There's memos about this.
Don't go to the homes that have Trump signs.
But in this case, the FEMA news was that FEMA would not send disaster relief to states that didn't do business with the state of Israel.
Another Israel story, actually.
But I think that would have been at the direction of higher-ups political appointees, right, at DHS.
I don't know.
I actually, I don't know that you blame FEMA for that one.
Now, according to former Prime Minister of Israel, Naftali Bennett, Israel's status in the United States, which is the State of Israel's chief political patron, Israel's status in the United States has never been so bad.
It's being seen as a leper state.
He says, the Democratic Party hasn't been with us for some time.
We're also losing the Republican Party, whose support for Israel once could be counted on.
Even those who have been our friends are having a hard time defending the State of Israel.
Israel is being seen more and more as a liability and burden on the USA and Americans.
The government is doing terrible damage and still does not understand the magnitude of the disaster.
There you go.
And obviously, Bennettett opposes BB Netanyahu and wants his job, but there you have it.
I don't see anything false in what he said.
Because I hold the view, I think, of most Americans on the Israel-Gaza conflict, it means that I am simultaneously called a chill, PR-flack, Shabbat-goy, bought and paid for Israeli propagandist on the one hand, and an anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas reincarnation of Hitler on the other hand.
Whenever I say anything about the Israel-Gaza conflict, I'm somehow both of those things.
I don't know.
I think most Americans are called both of those things by propagandists on both sides.
But you don't need to take our word for it.
How about you listen to the former prime minister of Israel, who's a pretty right-wing guy, Naftali Bennett.
Never been so bad.
Leper state.
Terrible damage.
Israel being seen as a liability and a burden on the USA and Americans.
The war has to end.
I made this point a few weeks ago.
A just war cannot go on indefinitely.
There are just wars.
There's justice in going to war.
There's justice in conducting war.
Wars can begin for just causes and be conducted in an unjust way.
But a war cannot go on indefinitely and still be just.
And that's why it's not that the state of Israel is losing support among Americans, including among Republicans who used to be very supportive of Israel, simply because of propaganda.
There's some of that.
But it's because of the facts on the ground in the war and our relation to that war.
So it's got to end quickly.
I think Netanyahu is sensing that.
I think that's why he's saying, all right, we need a conclusion here.
What's the conclusion?
What are we doing?
Okay.
Okay, speaking of generally unpleasant events, there's a story.
I teased this yesterday.
I have to get to it.
This is in Wired.
Highly recommend you read this article, Wired magazine, Confessions of a Recovering AI Porn Addict.
AI Porn.
I'm going to read their first.
This is the subheadline.
Their words, not mine.
Confessions of a Recovering AI Porn Addict.
A gooner tells Wired he became hooked on the cartoonish nature of AI porn.
Several addiction experts say the genre could pose a problem for people prone to compulsive sexual behavior.
And if you read it, this guy, he's not just, this guy has a girlfriend.
He's not just a total, you know, freak leper who can't speak, speaking of lepers, who, you know, a social leper who can't speak to anyone, who's just so contorted by perversions that he just is completely locked up in a prison of his own mind.
This guy has a girlfriend.
I think he's got a job.
Yeah, he's got a job working for a sports betting company, but he had this addiction, not merely to pornography, but to this AI pornography, to cartoons with totally grotesque features that can't possibly exist in real life.
And he said it was affecting his his relationship.
He was affecting his intimacy.
It was poisoning his mind.
He said he was just on the brink of total despair.
And the article interviews a lot of people who've fallen down this rabbit hole.
This is not different in kind from regular porn, regular porn addiction, where how many guys have written into the show over the years to say a porn addiction has ruined my life?
How many surveys do we need to see that men are exposed to porn at the age of eight?
or nine or ten as a median age of exposure and it really screws them up how many stories do we need to hear about some guy married guy maybe with a kid or two wasn't that the Mr. Beast sidekick.
It's like married to a beautiful woman, had a beautiful kid, and then he got into some really weird stuff, and all of a sudden he thinks he's a woman.
The Wachowski brothers, the guys who made the Matrix, they said they became transgender because of pornography.
Okay, crazy stuff that you hear about regular pornography.
This is just the logical conclusion of that.
It's not totally different in kind.
It's the logical conclusion of that.
One problem with regular pornography is that it sets unrealistic expectations and cultivates unrealistic desires about sex, such that you read these reports that come out about younger and younger people engaging in all this kind of abusive sexual activity, you know, hitting people and choking people and all this kind of stuff.
And Why?
Because they're obviously learning it from pornography.
I don't think they're just imagining it out of nowhere.
Why is there, why are you seeing this spike in this activity?
Because they're seeing it in pornography and we're mimetic creatures, so we just imitate what we see.
And not only do we imitate behaviors, we imitate desires.
So it cultivates unrealistic desires such that if you become a degenerate porn addict, you will not be satisfied with your girlfriend or your wife.
You will.
You will desire other women, other things, other stranger and stranger ways to titillate you.
That's what you see happen with regular pornography.
What is a big problem here is that the artificial intelligence pornography sets expectations and cultivates desires that are totally divorced from reality.
So it's not even just like you're setting the expectations that you're going to do some wacky, crazy thing with some, you know, blonde with.
gigantic whatever you know okay i need to we don't need to get too graphic here but it's not just that it sets the unrealistic expectations and thereby because we're creatures of habit cultivates these these bizarre desires and unrealistic desires of regular pornography It's going to be like a cartoon with like three breasts and two heads and tentacles.
You know, it's going to be something that's like so completely out there that it cannot exist in the real world.
And that is really, really bad because it's much, much harder to come back from that.
You can.
There are plenty of people who've recovered from this addiction, just like any other addiction, addiction to drugs or alcohol or anything else.
But it's really bad.
It's really, really bad.
And this is, not to broaden it out too much, this is.
This is kind of the logical conclusion of liberalism.
To me, the greatest statement of what liberalism is as a political philosophy, progressive liberalism, all the way back to classical liberalism, is Paradise Lost.
It's John Milton writing the character of Satan, Satan who is the archetypal classical liberal, who is cast down into hell, and he says, that's fine.
I don't care.
I am so.
going to ignore reality.
I'm so concerned with my autonomy that I'm going to celebrate being in hell.
The mind is its own place, and it can make a hell of heaven or a heaven of hell.
And it's better to reign in hell.
It's better to be autonomous in hell amid torture than it is to serve even a good God in heaven.
That's liberalism.
That's the apotheosis.
That's the logical conclusion of liberalism, okay?
And that's what you have here.
I remember I was having a conversation.
I was with Drew years ago.
One of these stories came out, you know, a report that men would raise rather look at pornography than sleep with a real girl and we were joking about everything could you imagine could you imagine someone saying that and then we thought oh yes i, I can.
Of course.
Because a real girl has wrinkles.
A real girl might have a little bit of fat in that one area.
A real girl has opinions and desires.
A real girl has a say.
A real girl can judge you.
A real girl can reject you.
A real girl is a human being.
Porn is just whatever you want.
We always say, oh, there's always any kind of, any desire you might even possibly think up.
There's some porn for it.
That was true before AI.
Now you just get caught in this seemingly solipsistic prison of your own constantly perverting and degrading desires.
