Ep. 1795 - The Confusing Trump-Putin Meeting Explained In 5 Minutes
Everyone is left confused after President Trump's high stakes meeting with Putin last week, a lib calls to completely upend the order of the Republic, and Orchid is offering designer babies.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1795
- - -
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:
Chevron - Build a brighter future right here at home. Visit https://Chevron.com/America to discover more.
Leaf Home - Get a free estimate, free inspection, and 30% off at https://LeafFilter.com/KNOWLES
PureTalk - Switch to PureTalk and start saving today! Visit https://PureTalk.com/KNOWLES
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek
- - -
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.
you you you President Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.
He's meeting with Zelensky and European leaders at the White House today, the Ukraine war, which has been going on for 11 years, maybe you've forgotten it's been going on forever, it might finally end in a peace deal.
Except that the aforementioned Alaska summit raised more questions than answers.
President Trump warmly embraced Putin on the tarmac, but then the summit did not end in the ceasefire that Trump went in demanding.
And the summit ended abruptly.
Everyone actually left before lunch.
But before they all left, the two leaders held a press conference in which they sounded as upbeat as they could be.
Putin and Trump once again praised each other and Putin claimed that they'd reached an agreement before Trump said that they didn't.
And now everyone is confused.
But the fact that everyone's confused should not be confusing, as it apparently is to the entire media and the political class, because everyone's scratching their heads.
What did the summit mean?
Why?
What happened?
I don't even know what to think about it.
If you've paid any attention at all to the president over the past decade, you will notice that, unlike most politicians, Confusion is precisely the context in which Trump loves to negotiate.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
The designer babies have officially arrived.
I've been hearing about potential designer babies in the future since I was a kid, since biology class in the seventh grade.
They're here.
You can pick everything about your kid.
This has really dark implications for all your other kids, but you can pick everything full genome sequencing.
It'll only cost you $2,500.
You're gonna do it?
What's it mean?
We'll get into that with the founder in a moment.
First, I want to tell you about Chevron.
America is built on hard work and powered by American energy.
Chevron has spent $44 billion with local businesses across all 50 states since 2022, fueling infrastructure and communities, all while strengthening local economies.
Last year, Chevron increased U.S. production nearly 20%, powering communities and businesses from the heartlands to the coasts.
We're helping to fuel America's energy advantage, building a brighter future right here at home.
Visit chevron.com slash America to discover more.
Speaking of dinosaur juice, we turn up to Alaska, the much anticipated Trump-Putin meeting face-to-face on U.S. soil.
Liberals are furious about this and Trump's consistent critics on the right.
They're inconsistent in their support of Trump, but they're consistent in just always trying to take cheap jabs.
They're furious too.
Why?
Here's the reason.
Here's what happened.
Here's the too long didn't-read brief of the Alaska summit.
President Trump went in saying we need a ceasefire if there are going to be further negotiations.
He left without the ceasefire but saying there are future negotiations.
Trump is not threatening any further sanctions on Russia.
There are already sanctions on Russia, but he's not threatening further sanctions on Russia.
And he seemed friendly to Putin.
That's on the one side.
That's what the Libs are furious about.
Then there's something kind of strange, which is that Trump seems to be insisting on security guarantees for Ukraine.
So that any deal to end the war in Ukraine will involve security guarantees.
like we have with NATO, with NATO.
If a NATO member is attacked, Article 5 of NATO says that all the other NATO countries are going to go in and defend that country as if it were attack on their own countries.
So.
So we're going to have security guarantees in Ukraine, but Ukraine's not going to be in NATO, but we're going to act as though it is in NATO.
And Putin's kind of happy because he didn't insist on a cis fire, but what?
What is happening here?
Okay.
First, I want to take on the critics.
People saying that this is a terrible strategy.
Trump shouldn't have invited Putin to America.
to Alaska, which is right next to Russia.
Trump shouldn't have warmly embraced him.
He shouldn't have literally rolled out the red carpet.
He shouldn't have spoken in a diplomatic way.
He shouldn't, he shouldn't, he shouldn't.
Okay, I said earlier, the war has been going on for 11 years.
We've been adversaries with Russia for 80 years at this point.
My first question to all of Trump's critics and whiners and complainers, what is the evidence that the opposite strategy has worked?
What is the evidence?
Trump rolled out the red carpet.
Obama would never have done that.
McCain, not McCain, Biden never would have done that.
McCain also talked tough on Russia.
So-and-so would never have done that.
Okay.
Okay.
did the obama strategy work we'll get to the obama strategy in a second i don't think it worked did the biden strategy work?
I don't think so.
The definition of madness is pursuing the same thing again and again and again and expecting different results.
Even get down to the clarity versus confusion point.
There were clear goals for this meeting.
We need a ceasefire.
We need this.
We need that.
And we didn't get them.
And yet we are, Trump is kind of doubling back and we are getting more negotiations and Zelensky's coming to the White House and what?
Well, sure.
You got really clear red lines under Barack Obama.
Obama was the president of the red line.
Remember, he drew the red line and then his enemies crossed the red line and then he didn't do anything about it and he looked ridiculous and America looked weak.
But there was a lot of clarity in Obama's negotiations.
With Trump, it is confusing.
I'm a big Trump supporter, but it's very confusing.
People don't know what to make of this.
I think the takeaway is just that.
Trump loves to negotiate from confusion.
I'll give you a clear example of this.
Look at how Trump is negotiating all the trade deals.
Think of all the chaos that's ensued, the volatility to the bond markets, to the stock market generally.
Look at Liberation Day.
He institutes these blanket tariffs on the entire world?
And what does he base the tariffs on?
Does he base the tariffs on really clear economic factors that have a really clear relationship to the health of our trade relationship?
Things like, I don't know, a nation illegally subsidizing its steel industry like China did, or a nation stealing intellectual property like China does, or a nation devaluing its currency like China does, manipulating its currency.
No.
Trump tied the tariffs to trade deficits.
Maybe the most dubious economic indicator because trade deficits can be bad.
Trade deficits can be neutral.
Trade deficits can be good.
It's totally unclear.
And for certain nations that just can't possibly produce things that we're going to buy in large quantities, the trade deficits don't really mean much of anything.
What's our trade deficit with Mauritius?
What's our trade deficit with these some tiny little countries?
Why does that matter?
Some people said Trump's a madman.
He's economically illiterate.
He has no idea what he's doing.
And yet look at the...
The bond market recovered just fine.
The stock market recovered just fine.
We didn't get the massive inflation that all the panicans were predicting.
And we got really good trade deals.
We got a great trade deal with Europe, which was not even primarily about the trade.
It was mostly about the zillions of dollars of investment that they were promising to us, all in exchange for basically nothing.
Good trade deals with the United Kingdom, good trade deals all over the world, China, all over the world.
I think that those two facts are not disconnected.
I think the fact that Trump's negotiations were extremely confusing and he focused in on the most dubious and obscure economic marker, namely trade deficits, I think that was part of the point because it meant that his adherents thought he was a crazy person or he didn't know what he wanted.
where he didn't know what he wanted, and they certainly didn't know what he wanted, and it just gave him the upper hand.
I think that's how he does this.
And you can say, well, I disagree with that strategy.
I don't like that strategy, but it's clearly his strategy.
He loves negotiating from confusion.
And so if he makes a bunch of demands and dangles out a bunch of promises, some of which conflict, and he's talking to Putin in one way, and he's talking to Zelensky in the other way, and he's talking to Europe in another way, and then he just brings them all together, I think Trump's idea is if I win them all over to my side, then.
I'll be able to work it out in the end and not everybody's going to get what they want, but I'll be able to work something out.
I think that's clearly what's going on.
And for all of Trump's critics, the consistent malcontents on the right and especially for his critics on the left.
I would just say, look, he's been pursuing this kind of strategy for 10 years.
It's worked the vast majority of the time.
Almost all the time.
What's your evidence that it's not going to work now?
Is this another walls are closing in?
The sky's falling.
Oh, no, this is it.
They've got him now.
It's Mueller time.
Give me a break.
Now, they did hold this press conference.
It was weird.
I mean, they ended the thing early.
They didn't go to lunch.
They still held this press conference.
There was a very, very telling moment at the press conference as to how things are going to go moving forward.
We'll get to that in one second.
First, I want to tell you about Leaf Filter.
Go to leaffilter.com slash knolls it's summer you've been enjoying the sunshine and then what your gutters are quietly filling with debris this summer you can relax knowing that your home is protected with leaf filter america's number one gutter protection company you will avoid costly damage you'll never have to clean your gutters again do you know how many times i've cleaned my gutters in my house zero times and i realized oh yikes this
is not good and this can lead to foundation problems and this is really really bad i need a better solution now you can have a better solution right now you can get a free inspection free estimates save up to 30% off your entire purchase at leaffilter.com slash knolls.
An investment in leaffilter is an investment engineered to protect your whole home.
You know that in summer you get those heavy rainfalls that overwhelm the clogged gutters, then they lead to flooding and roof damage and the affirmation foundation issues and the DIY fixes aren't going to work and you think they're cheaper up front, they're going to cost you more in the long term.
Do not spend your summer and fall worrying about your gutters.
Schedule your free inspection, get up to 30% off your entire purchase at leaffilter.com slash knolls, Kenneth W.L.E.S.
That is leaffilter.com slash knolls.
Free estimate, free inspection, 30% off at leaffilter.com slash noelscanna wlas see representative for warranty details after the bizarre meeting was an hour and a half meeting everyone looked kind of confused and upset after the meeting but here is the triumphant press conference between putin and trump today when president trump saying that if he was the president back then there will be no war and i'm quite sure that it would indeed be so i can confirm that I
love this line here.
This was kind of a throwaway line, but it was really significant.
Putin says, look, Trump has claimed that had he been president, had Biden not been installed as president, we would never have invaded Ukraine.
He goes, I can confirm that.
The war would not have broken out had Trump remained president.
Now, some people are going to say, well, Putin's just flattering Trump.
He's just buttering him up because he's got him just where he wants him.
And he's getting all these concessions from Trump.
And this is it.
Trump is so gullible to believe all this stuff.
That is not flattery.
What Putin just did to Trump is not flattery.
I once had a very insightful diplomat explain to me the difference between flattery and diplomacy.
Flattery is when you lie to someone to ingratiate yourself to that person and to butter them up.
Diplomacy is when you say true things, but only the good, positive sounding true things.
But there's a big, big difference.
Flattery is lies.
Diplomacy is the truth, even if it's often a partial truth.
What Putin just said is obviously true.
What's the evidence?
Putin invades a country.
on George Bush's watch, invades Georgia.
Then he invades a country on Obama's watch,.
Then Biden becomes president.
He goes further into Ukraine.
That's just what happened.
So when Putin says, yeah, I wouldn't have done it had Trump remained president, there's good cause to believe that that's true.
There's another apparent protocol breach here, which is that Putin spoke first at the press conference.
Usually the American president would speak first on American soil, but Putin spoke first.
Again, Trump's critics are going to say, he gave Putin just what he wanted.
He gave him legitimacy on the national stage.
He gave him deference.
He gave him this.
He gave him that.
I say, what's your evidence that the opposite strategy has worked?
Obama talked a real tough game on Russia and Russia ran roughshot over Obama.
George Bush talked a tough game on Russia eventually.
Initially, he was trying to do the trumpy diplomatic strategy.
Then he talked tougher on Russia.
Russia ran roughshot over Bush.
Russia ran roughshot.
Joe Biden talked the toughest game on Russia.
And Russia flicked their finger under their chin and they invaded a country under Biden.
And Biden was impotent.
So if you got one strategy, which is talk really tough and then look weak, then act in a weak way, and you got another strategy, which is talk nice, speak softly, but carry a big stick, it seems to me me the Trump strategy is at least worth a shot.
The other ones have failed spectacularly.
Obviously the Trump strategy is worth a shot.
It's just called a little bit of diplomacy, okay?
I think Trump's earned some grace on that.
Trump's enemies, they don't know what to make of it.
They can't really criticize any particular aspect of the conference because it's just unclear even what happened.
So what they've honed in on, did you see this headline?
What they've honed in, this is a headline from NVR.
Government papers found in an Alaskan hotel reveal new details of the Trump-Putin summit.
These idiots, these idiot Trump administration people, they left documents from the summit printed in a hotel.
Oh, what a security breach.
What a bunch of nincompoops.
Oh, this is an international incident, a geopolitical disaster.
Okay, what were the documents?
Let's see.
What new details of the Trump-Putin summit were revealed?
Well, we have the documents right here.
I have them.
They're screenshots, but I have them right here.
They are.
First one, it's a a list of Russia participants and U.S. participants.
And who's on the Russian list?
The Minister of Defense., the minister of finance, and the representative for economic cooperation.
Is that like a state secret?
The minister of defense came to the peace summit.
Is that like a big, wow, new details?
What about the U.S. participants?
This is my favorite one.
U.S. participants.
President Donald Trump, Secretary of State Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Besson.
Stop the presses.
Stop.
Hold on.
Two big stories here.
The president of the United States went to the U.S. summit in Alaska and.
And they, now we know that because there is a document.
It doesn't seem like a big state secret to me.
What about the other document?
Michael, Michael, Michael.
Admit that there was another document left in the printer.
That's true.
It was the lunch menu.
This is, I hope I don't get in trouble with the FBI, CIA, NSA for revealing highly classified information.
The first course was going to be a green salad.
with champagne vinaigrette dressing.
Does that, we can blur this out in post production.
If that's going to imperil United States interests around the world, then we can blur out the fact that they were going to have sourdough bread with rosemary lemon butter and then filet mignon with ooh with brandy peppercorn sauce that's spicy or halibut and then for dessert a creme brûlée whoa whoa that's big stuff we need can we redact that menu please they got nothing they have nothing they have nothing really to attack in the summit this i think in part is is is
also trump's strategy You just leave things a little bit up in the air.
It's hard for your enemies, not just your enemies in Russia, to pin you down, but your enemies in the U.S. press.
I don't know who poses a greater threat to U.S. interests.
Before we move on from Russia, though, one last bit.
There's a meme going around and all the libs were posting it.
It's a picture of Obama and Putin.
And Obama's looking real tough.
He's meeting Putin.
He's looking real tough.
And the tweet says, just for those who may be a little confused, this is how an American president should treat Putin.
This, look at Obama.
He looks all tough.
Trump.
He shook Putin's hand and smiled, but Obama's looking all tough.
Allow me to transport you back in time, especially the liberals who have no memory.
Here's a piece from April 2016.
It's called the Obama Doctrine, written by Jeffrey Goldberg, Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic, of the Atlantic, a liberal magazine.
Jeffrey Goldberg was the liberal journalist who was caught up in that signal chat fiasco.
Okay, look how thick.
For those of you who are watching, you can see how thick the Obama.
This is probably the definitive piece on Barack Obama's geopolitical foreign policy doctrine.
Here is Jeffrey Goldberg.
quoting Obama.
Just a few little excerpts.
This piece is very, very long.
Quoting Obama.
Putin acted in Ukraine in response to a client state that was about to slip out of his grasp.
And he improvised in a way to hang on to his control there.
Pause right there.
The liberals are criticizing Trump.
for engaging in realpolitik and recognizing that Russia has a traditional sphere of influence and that Ukraine was not the most independent, free, liberal, democratic state in the history of the world, but was rather a client of two great powers, one being the regional power of Russia, and then after the Maidan in 2014 of the United States.
That's the criticism.
You're not treating Ukraine like an independent country, the beacon of democracy and liberalism and independence.
Well, hold on.
Here's Obama, quoted by an ally of his, Jeffrey Goldberg, in the Atlantic.
Putin acted in Ukraine in response to a client state that was about to slip out of his grasp, meaning Ukraine was a client state of Russia, and it was slipping out of his grasp because of U.S. involvement, because the CIA was on the ground after the Maidan revolution that we funded, because Russia was going to lose Ukraine to the United States.
Russia.
was much more powerful when Ukraine looked like an independent country, but was a kleptocracy that he could pull strings on.
Okay.
Yep.
Russia has this.
major interest in Ukraine.
And then Goldberg goes on, Obama's theory here is simple.
Ukraine is a core Russian interest, but not an American one.
So Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there.
People are attacking Trump because they're saying he's making America look weak.
He's weakening the American empire.
Trump.
is not, you know, just remember World War II when we won everything and the other side didn't concede anything.
We dominated the whole globe and every conflict is supposed to be like that.
We're giving in.
We're recognizing that the Russians might have a say in countries around their own.
That's a betrayal of democracy.
Well, Obama said the same exact thing.
Said the same thing quoted by an ally of his in the Liberal magazine.
The fact that Ukraine, which is a non-NATO country, is going to be vulnerable to military domination by Russia no matter what we do.
That's the fact.
That's what the fact is, according to Barack Obama.
Ukraine, non-NATO country, is going to be vulnerable to military domination by Russia no matter what we do.
That's what Trump is saying.
When Trump is sitting in the Oval Office, he says, you guys don't have the cards.
And the liberals all attack him.
How dare you?
You're betraying the great democracy that we could save Ukraine if we would only give them a little more money.
Obama said you can't.
Obama said the same thing Trump said.
I asked Obama whether his position on Ukraine was realistic or fatalistic.
It's realistic.
But this is an example of where we have to be very clear about what our core interests are and what we're willing to go to war for.
This is exactly the Trump point.
This is exactly the J.D. Vance point.
This is exactly what the conservatives and the Republicans are saying right now that we're being pilloried by the liberal media for.
You forgot Jeffrey Goldberg.
This wasn't even that long ago.
This was nine years ago.
This was the doctrine.
What's the difference?
The liberals all cheered Obama for articulating the exact same views that Trump and Vance are articulating right now.
The only difference is that the Trump administration has actually had success advancing them.
That's the only difference.
They're speaking the same way.
The only difference is Obama couldn't actually put those views into effect.
He failed on foreign policy spectacularly.
And Trump has succeeded.
That's the only difference.
Remember, you guys did, you know, you liked it.
Do you remember when you liked it?
Now, the Libs are getting very confused because you remember the Libs before the election, they were talking about how we need to defend the Constitution, Trump's threat to the Constitution, an existential threat to our democracy.
And now they're changing their tune.
They're actually calling on a New York Times podcast for the abolition of the U.S. Senate and the packing of the U.S. Supreme Court and a complete rewriting of the Constitution.
Look at that.
It's amazing.
Wow.
What changed between October and today?
We'll get to that in a second.
We will talk about it.
First, I want to tell you about PureTalk.
You got to go to puretalk.com slash Knowles.
How many times?
Have you told someone, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
That's great advice for most things.
Not so much for a cell phone.
You see, over time, the battery life fades.
The processor can't keep up.
and it's fallen on the floor one too many times.
Fortunately, thanks to PureTalk, your cell phone is something you can replace without feeling guilty.
When you switch to PureTalk this month, they're going to give you a Samsung Galaxy A36 for free with a $35 qualifying plan.
That's $35 a month for talk, text, and data and a free Samsung smartphone.
with scratch resistant roller glass and a battery that lasts all day, all on America's most dependable 5G network.
I love PureTalk.
I've had my PureTalk for, I don't know what, five years or something now.
People think that you're getting, oh, you're getting a good network, a good 5G network.
You're getting the best 5G network.
You're getting the phone that you want, you get to deal with customer service that's easy to use, very simple switch, and you're supporting company that supports you for less than half the price of the other guys.
Pure Talk's a great thing.
You win by cutting your cell phone bill in half.
They win by hiring more Americans, helping more vets.
Make the switch right now in as little as 10 minutes.
Pure Talk.com slash Knowles, Kana WLS, you get your free phone today.
That's Pure Talk.com slash Knowles to switch to my wireless company, America's wireless company, Pure Talk.
We must defend our sacred institutions, our democracy, our constitution.
That was the liberal line October 2024.
Now we turn to Osita Noanivu, who has a new book, The Right of the People, Democracy and the Case for a New American Founding, explaining what the left is thinking today.
I think it's time for us to consider, you know, to the extent that people are angry about Donald Trump.
what are the elements of the system that allow Donald Trump to rise as a political figure and that have sustained them?
I think they're, to, to, Well, now actually something is being acted upon in states across the country to move to a national popular vote by interstate compact without needing a constitutional amendment.
I mean, the amendment process itself is one of the things that needs amending very, very hard.
I've advocated in the past for adding new states to the Senate.
I think that there is an ideological imbalance now for all kinds of reasons.
Puerto Rico, D.C., the territories.
So, so right.
So an ideal Senate, or would there be a Senate at all?
Well, that's another question.
That's another question.
I mean, I think that's worth exploring, a kind of radical idea, but it's an argument that you have to make on the basis of getting people to understand not only that the system is not democratic, but like what is the value of democracy actually to begin with?
I love it.
Libs, October 2024.
We have to defend our democracy.
Trump is an existential threat to democracy.
Libs after the democracy elects Trump.
I mean, what's the value of democracy anyway?
You know, what's the value of that democracy?
I hate that democracy.
Libs, October 2024.
Our sacred constitution is imperiled and we need to defend that beautiful.
precious piece of parchment.
Libs, Libs today.
Burn the thing to the ground.
Light that vellum on fire.
I hate the constitution.
We need a new one.
Wow.
What changed?
Oh, all the things you said that you were defending actually chose to keep you out of power and to put your enemy into power.
And so now all the things you previously said you wanted to defend, you want to destroy.
Even the Libs have had it out for the Supreme Court for a while.
They previously loved the Supreme Court when the Supreme Court was just inventing new supposed rights.
When the Supreme Court invents the right to kill babies, then the Supreme Court needs to be the ultimate political institution in the country.
They need to dominate the legislature and the executive.
It's all about the court.
The court is the final say.
When the court is redefining marriage based on thin air, then the court is the final word and the president and the legislature can go stuff it.
But when the court starts to overrule Roe v.
Wade, all of a sudden the court needs to be packed.
When the court starts to question transgenderism or whatever, the court needs to be destroyed.
So what about the legislature?
That libs at least love the legislature, right?
It's so democratic.
It's the most democratic part of the government.
We need direct election of senators.
We need to empower the legislature.
We want the House and the Congress, the Senate, rather, to dominate the other two branches.
Except when the Republicans control both houses.
Now we need to abolish the Senate.
We need to seriously think very hard.
That's a radical idea.
We need to think about abolishing the Senate.
You might notice that the way that the left thinks about politics is purely from ends.
The ends are we need power.
We need power to do the things that we want to do.
And they make procedural arguments about means.
and they make procedural arguments about instruments and institutions, but they change on a dime.
The Lib's opinion of the Senate and the Supreme Court and the Electoral College and the Constitution and all of that will change on a dime based on whether or not those institutions give them power.
That's all it's about.
And look, there's something to be said for thinking about substantive goods in politics.
But the arguments that the left is making right now are completely hypocritical, completely outside the scope of morality, tradition, jurisprudence, the law.
It's purely a matter of power.
That's it.
And the most offensive part of it to me, because look, I've had the left's number on this for a long time, and some people are seeing it now too.
The thing that's most offensive to me is guys like, what's his name?
Osita Nwanivu.
Osita Nwanivu.
The most offensive part is that he has the temerity to dress and make his voice sound so reasonable when what he's saying is forget about reason.
Forget about reason.
Forget about logic.
Forget about argumentation.
Forget about any guardrails that exist in any ordered political society.
We're going to burn this to the ground to get power.
But he has a, you know, look, I did my tie.
I did a foreign hand tie today, which looks a little bit casual, but it's kind of prep.
And look, I just think it's very important.
I mean, if you've studied, if you've read all the books, if you are a reasonable person like me, you need to burn our whole government system to the ground because we lost a single election and that's not acceptable.
Pathetic, pathetic.
Very funny.
I mean, what's the value of democracy?
Now, also speaking of Ross Douthit's show, that was a clip from the New York Times columnist, Ross Douthit's show.
And there's another clip going viral.
Gotta tell you, Ross Douthit's great.
He's one of my favorite commentators, pundits, but he works for the New York Times, which is awful.
New York Times, you got to give the devils their due.
They did one smart thing, which is let this guy have a show.
And they actually have adapted to the new media space pretty well.
He's getting the clicks because he's bringing on voices from the left who are articulate.
and representative of broader left-wing thinking and extremely radical.
He's showing them for what they are in their own words.
And nowhere is this clearer than on designer babies.
I've been hearing about someday we're going to have designer babies.
You're going to be able to order your baby and pick all of the attributes.
So he's going to be tall and good looking and really smart, really athletic and really this and really that.
And you're going to be, but then what happens when you can't afford that?
To have the designer baby through this woman's company, Orchid, costs $2,500 per embryo, not per baby that is born, but per embryo.
And that's a big part of this too.
What about the people who can't afford that?
Now you're going to have the lower classes are going to have their ugly, stupid babies, and the elite classes are going to have their beautiful, genius, chemically enhanced babies and you're going to have a horrifying caste system based on based on money to talk about a subverting democracy and human solidarity so doubt that has the founder of this company orchid noor sadiki on the show and
here's her pitch What ORCID can do is it gives parents the power to protect their children before pregnancy begins.
So what happens today in IVF centers is that They're operating essentially almost blind, right?
So this really, really critical decision about which embryo to transfer happens with extremely limited information.
So what happens is that the embryo that looks best under the microscope kind of wins this morphology beauty contest is often the one that's selected.
Other times, there's a very limited genetic test that's offered that looks like a tiny fraction of genetic diseases that could affect a future baby.
So ORCID completely changes that.
We're the first company in the world that allows parents to actually sequence the entire genome of an embryo.
So sequence 99% of embryos.
percent of the bases in an embryo's genome, which allows parents to detect risks for some of the most serious conditions.
So heart defects, birth defects, pediatric cancers, developmental disorders, things that are massively changed the trajectory of a child's life.
the vast majority of these diseases don't have cures.
So what's really exciting about this possibility is that, you know, now parents have this ability to protect their children from an entire category of disease that, you know, previously we had to just hope for the best and wish that, you know, our children wouldn't be affected by them.
Sounds great, right?
You see that phrase, she keeps coming back to protect our children.
It allows parents to protect their children before they're born.
We're offering protection for children.
children how by creating a bunch of people creating a bunch of embryo embryos in a laboratory and then slicing off little parts of them and checking their genome and then if there's any imperfection Orchid will.
Orchid doesn't actually do this directly, but Orchid makes the recommendation that it's then carried out by other companies.
They'll kill them.
if there's any imperfection uh he's gonna be he's gonna have a limp his iq is only going to be 97 he's gonna be he's gonna be a little short he's gonna be a little fat he's gonna be there's something is a little wrong with him kill him you're gonna go kill him we're we're just giving you the information and you're gonna decide to go kill those children so that you can have the perfect baby who doesn't have any problems and who knows i don't what if the baby accidentally comes out and you know he's his hair is brown instead of blonde.
Do they get a refund?
Do they get a partial refund?
Because what does this cost?
This costs $2,500 per embryo to then decide like you're Caesar in the Colosseum, thumbs up, thumbs down up, thumbs down.
Do we kill the baby?
Do we let the baby live?
Costs $2,500 and your kids and maybe your soul.
What does this, what is this?
I'll tell you exactly what this is.
And it's really ironic.
This is the thing that the Libs were just criticizing eight days ago.
This is eugenics.
This is one of the most horrifying forms of eugenics I've ever heard.
Reminder, New Daily Wire Plus annual memberships are 40% off for a limited time.
This is your chance to see what's happening now.
And you can be the first in line for what's coming next.
That includes my brand new series, The Pope and the Fuhrer, the secret Vatican files of World War II.
I take you inside 80 years of hidden Vatican documents to reveal the truth about Pope Pius XII, the Pope that history is called silent, but whose story is a lot more complicated than anyone seems to know.
This fall, Isabel Brown joins Daily Wire Plus with the Isabel Brown Show, telling the truth, asking the biggest questions, and showing people the difference between what's real and what's fake.
Get breaking news live at free daily shows, investigative journalism, and exclusive entertainment with your new Daily Wire Plus membership 40% off for a limited time at dailywireplus.com.
My favorite comment on Friday is from Matthew Hubeley, 7282, who says, you know you've gone off the rails when Joe Rogan corrects your theology of the canon.
Yes, I like, you know, Joe Rogan, very, very intelligent guy, very inquisitive, thoughtful guy.
He's no Bible expert.
I don't think he would call himself a Bible expert.
And yet he had that Republican Congress lady on.
And she starts babbling about aliens and the Bible and how the evil Catholic Church and the Council of Rome in 382 kept the alien books out or whatever.
And he's just looking at her like she's a crazy person.
He says, have you considered speaking to anyone intelligent about this?
That's almost his exact words.
Have you considered like learning anything about the thing that you're talking about?
No, I haven't.
I haven't.
I was just going to talk about how they took the.
aliens out of the Bible.
Okay.
Here is the founder of Orchid, the custom baby company, describing the great moral defenses of her company.
IVF has also met with a vast amount of pitchforks and concern.
12 million people wouldn't exist today if IVF wasn't invented.
So I think people.
discount future people too much, right?
Like those 12 million people that wouldn't exist.
And then at the time, people were so against the idea of IVF.
So I think people, when thinking about this technology, really need to consider future people, right?
Future, we got to consider future people, but notice what's implicit here.
We ignore present people because she says there are 12 million people who wouldn't exist without IVF.
I think that number might be fair, but then I looked up the telegraph.
It says this, official statistics show that almost half of embryos used to help a woman conceive through in vitro fertilization were thrown away during or after the process.
About half.
So she says, look, there are 12 million people who wouldn't exist without IVF, but you could point to that and say, yeah, there are 12 million people who have been conceived and murdered because of IVF.
Basically the same number.
If the telegraph statistic is true, then yeah, for every babyaby where you say he was born because of IVF, see, yeah, someone else was murdered because of IVF.
This is just think about the future people.
But how about you think about the present people, lady?
Because what is the end goal of this?
The end goal is we're going to eliminate suffering.
That's what she's saying.
We're going to eliminate all disease.
We're going to eliminate, we're going to have to kill a bunch of people to do it.
The actual cost is not $2,500 an embryo.
The actual cost is you have to have a system probably sponsored by the state.
She says it requires a kind of state funding to avail this to poorer people.
people, but you're going to have a system that kills most people who are, it kills most people, or at least half of people.
But under this, if you're going to pick the really the perfect embryo, it's going to kill the vast majority of people.
But then, as a consequence, you're going to eliminate suffering.
This is the clearest Faustian bargain I have ever heard offered, at least since the Garden of Eden.
Hey, don't just commit.
an immoral action to get a potential good.
Commit basically the most immoral action you can possibly conceive of, namely killing most babies who are conceived, parents killing most babies of their own babies that are conceived in order to eliminate suffering, but what, go back to the Garden of Eden?
Give me a break.
And in the process, you divorce sex for procreation.
And she talks about this explicitly.
She says, look, sex is for fun.
Orchid is for procreation.
Orchids for babies.
Sex is for fun, but this science is for babies.
So then you eliminate the connection between sex and procreation.
This is the fulfillment of the liberal people referring to their spouses as their partner.
You know how they do that?
Not just the gay ones, but the regular ones too.
Even though it's a very gay thing to do.
You say, oh, this is my partner, Sally.
This is my partner.
Like you have an accounting firm or you're lesbians or something.
This is my partner.
It's so clinical.
It's so cold.
It's so sterile.
Well, yes, now it is.
That is what it is.
Sex, if you have it at all, is going to be purely indulgent just about your own pleasure.
And basically, babies are going to be about becoming gods i guess babies are going to be about eliminating suffering making yourself into god and kill and killing most of them The Libs were criticizing Sydney Sweeney for promoting eugenics through blue jeans eight days ago.
It was like eight days ago.
And now the liberals are openly cheering the most extreme form of actual eugenics practiced that we've seen since the 1930s.
Okay.
Speaking of meeting rituals, a redhead girl has gone viral on the internet because guys did not want to date her.
This clip from some random show has everyone wondering what does a girl have to do to get a date in 2025?
I'm Riley.
I'm 24.
I'm from Houston, Texas.
And honestly, I'm down for any good adventure.
I just got scuba dive certified and I'm planning to go to Australia this summer.
So I'm super excited about that.
And then I just picked up skiing like two years ago.
And I honestly love any themed party.
Like, those are like my favorite things to go to, my favorite things to plan.
And I'm looking for someone that wants to be my adventure buddy and it's someone that I can trust in and is going to be there for me.
Oh.
If any gentleman would like to make some remark, please step forward.
No one steps forward.
It's a poor girl.
No one.
The guys are kind of giggling.
No one wants to.
No one's getting up.
No one.
Come on.
Hey, Riley, we're gonna have you sit down.
Okay, see you, Riley.
Okay.
Now, I played the real clip.
The thing that was going around on the internet that was dishonest, I think, was it was just the picture of Riley and then the picture of the guys, and you couldn't tell there was a curtain in between them.
So it seemed like the guys were not picking her because they didn't find her attractive.
Perfectly cute girl, perfectly good looking girl, but they couldn't see each other.
On top of that, this is not just a regular dating show.
This comes from a TV show called The Altar, and it's a very specific kind of dating show.
It's Mormon Blind Dates.
Hi, I'm Remington, and welcome to The Altar.
We've gathered together 10 single men and 10 single women all across Utah Valley.
They'll be coupling up and going on a journey of love, starting from love at first sight and ending at the altar.
We'll be eliminating couples over three rounds until we have one couple left who will win our date.
Now this is important context because it tells you why poor Riley didn't get a date.
There are structural issues here.
Okay, the first one is, it's called the secretary problem.
It's this problem of optimal stopping, which is like a math problem or probability problem, which is you don't, you have 10.
girls.
Only seven of them are you going to match up with.
You don't, you think there's going to be a better one coming up next.
So that's just built into any kind of selection process like this.
On top of that, she was the first one to go.
So also likely that she would be picked over.
On top of that, there are some lessons.
for men and women and Riley to learn from this.
Why?
Beyond all the structural issues, the Mormon thing, look, these people might get married.
There's all sorts of built-in structural specific issues.
But beyond that, why?
I think part of it is she was the first one up.
And guys, they don't want the girl to be too eager.
If the girl is too eager, it signals to guys that other men aren't pursuing her.
And so you don't have the social proof that she's desirable.
And that's the first red flag.
Why?
She's too, oh, women are to be pursued.
So that was her first mistake.
The second mistake is speaking about what she wants from a relationship.
in really friendly terms.
I actually am in a moment of candor.
I hate the phrase, you know, I married my best friend.
But in a moment of candor, I'll admit, sweet little Elise and I are very, we're buds too.
I'll also chase her around the house.
But there is an actual friendship within a good marriage.
And so that you want the friendship thing, but I have buddies.
I don't need a wife so I can go smoking cigars or out drinking or skiing or scuba diving or whatever.
I need a wife to be a wife.
I want a girlfriend to be a girlfriend.
So the way she's talking about it, you know, you wanted to get up there and say, you know, there's somebody that I'm longing to see.
Do, do, do, do.
Someone to watch over me.
That's what you want to hear from a woman.
I want to, and I want to bring this to the tender.
I want to do this for a guy.
And I want the guy to do this for me.
And I want there to be complementarity there, not indiscernibility.
That's the second thing.
Two, it's all just these adventures, these experiences.
yeah that okay life scuba diving's fun going on vacation so it's kind of like getting up there and she says you know i just really want somebody to go on vacation with well that's not what i care about in a wife or in a girlfriend i want the day-to-day what does tuesday look like that's what matters a lot more what are we building what are we actually doing so i think those were Those were Riley's mistakes.
She's very, seems like a very sweet girl, very cute.
I'm sure she'll find a guy anytime soon.
But for the women watching, trying to draw some gender lessons that's a good lesson to learn okay before we go there's a story i have to get to this is a much much sadder story than the altar show it's gone viral because an illegal alien driving some kind of mac truck made an illegal u-turn and killed three people in florida it's not just any kind of illegal alien we think of an illegal alien being from venezuela or something there's an illegal alien seems like from the subcontinent
hargender sing So already it's calling to mind, oh, the illegal alien problem is not just that we got to plug up the Rio Grande.
It's the entire globe is committing illegal immigration against us.
He entered the country illegally, reportedly, according to officials, in 2018.
So somewhat recently, he obtained a commercial driver's license in California.
He's been charged with three counts of vehicular homicide.
Now, some people would say, well, 2018, Trump was president.
Yeah, Trump was president.
Trump was president.
He tried to close the border.
He very effectively did stop illegal immigration, but there were all those roadblocks.
all those roadblocks being put up by the courts, being put up by the liberal legislators, all the Democrat congressmen going and crying and trying to gum up the works.
So I think it's completely disingenuous to say, well, if an illegal.
entered when a Republican was president, you know, it's on the Republican.
No, the Republicans have been trying to close this border with great determination, doing everything they can.
It's the Democrats who have stopped it, explicitly tried to stop it.
So the Democrats own illegal immigration.
And then when Democrats are officially in power, they welcome them with open arms.
They say, cross the border, come on, come on down.
Not only did he enter the country illegally, he got a commercial driver's license in California.
How's that?
Because the Liberals insist on giving out regular driver's licenses.
And I don't know how he got a commercial driver's license.
The victims are confirmed to be a 37-year-old woman from Pompano Beach, a 30-year-old man from Florida City, and a 54-year-old man from Miami.
The big takeaway on this, the open borders crowd and the Beltway crowd and the policy want crowd, they're going to say, well, you know, look, it's a very sad incident, but just look at the statistics.
Statistically, illegal aliens don't commit much more crime than the native population.
That's a little dubious and weak in debate.
But statistically, they're not more likely to get into car accidents.
I don't know, whatever they're going to say.
Statistically, statistically.
But it's simply a fact.
If the Democrats had not cynically undermined our laws, passed by the representatives of the people that every sensible nation has had for all of history.
If the Democrats had not done that, this guy would not be in the country and three real people would be alive today.
And three real families would not be grieving and have had their lives forever changed and in some cases maybe ruined.
And we don't know the identities other than a few details over the victims.
Did they have kids?
Then a bunch of kids.
would have their parents.
Real kids, real people who are our fellow citizens.
All these people had parents, and those parents would have their sons and daughters.
Had real Democrats who are in office and who have been in office not been so selfish and exploitative and cynical, three real people and countless others downstream, kids and siblings and parents and would be around today and have their family members today.
That's what illegal immigration is.
That's what it is.
There's a guy down the street.
There was a guy down the street.
He had a chicken shop.
He was a really nice guy.
He had a chicken shop.
been working on for like 10 years.
They were just dismantling the shop the other day.
Why?
Because a year or so ago, a year and a half ago, an illegal ran him over in his own parking lot.
lot killed him in his own parking lot If particular Democrats had not pushed this, that guy wouldn't be in the country.
That guy would be alive.
That chicken shop would be around.
That family would be doing better.
That's illegal immigration.
That's what illegal immigration looks like.
And no amount of whitewashing and soft soap is going to get the blood off people's hands.
That is really what it looks like.
And any statistical argument, which is probably dubious anyway, is really just around to obfuscate the particular victims of that.
These people, these Democrats should be given no quarter for what they've done.
Okay, on that happy note.
No member block today.
We got to move on, but there's all will be revealed in time.
