Erika Kirk addresses conspiracy theories surrounding her husband's assassination, the U.S. seizes a Venezuelan oil tanker, and Marco Rubio destroys woke fonts.
Ep.1873
- - -
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
CrowdHealth - Join CrowdHealth to get started today for $99 for your first 3 months using code KNOWLES at https://joincrowdhealth.com
Equip Foods - Equip’s Prime Bar is a real food protein bar with nothing to hide: just 11 ingredients and 20g of clean protein - made from ingredients you can pronounce like collagen, beef tallow, colostrum, cocoa butter - and sweetened naturally with just date and honey. Michael Knowles listeners will get 25% off one-time purchases, or 40% off first subscription orders for a limited time by heading to https://equipfoods.com/michaelknowles and using code MICHAELKNOWLES at checkout.
Shopify - Sign up for your $1-per-month trial and start selling today at https://Shopify.com/knowles
- - -
DailyWire+:
🎄✨ LET’S KICK OFF THE CHRISTMAS SALE! ✨🎄
Campaign Dates: 12/10/2025 – 1/5/2026
Bring out the cocoa, cue the carols, and crank up the cheer — because the DailyWire+ Christmas Sale is officially here!
https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe
🎁 Santa came early:
⭐️ 40% Off DailyWire+ New Annual Memberships
⭐️ 50% Off DailyWire+ Annual Upgrade Memberships
⭐️ 50% Off DailyWire+ Annual Gift Memberships
Finally, Friendly Fire is here! No moderator, no safe words. Now available at https://www.dailywire.com/show/friendly-fire
GET THE ALL-NEW YES OR NO EXPANSION PACK TODAY: https://bit.ly/41gsZ8Q
- - -
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 podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Erica Kirk breaks her silence in responding to conspiracy theories around the assassination of her husband three months to the day after he was murdered.
The U.S. seizes a Venezuelan oil tanker in the prelude to our next regime change war.
And Marco Rubio, this is really big and no one's appreciating this.
Marco Rubio banishes woke fonts from the State Department.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
The Islamic Society of Philly is going viral for a video in which they're instructing young girls to want to chop people's heads off.
So that's not great.
We'll get to that momentarily.
First, though, I want to tell you about CrowdHealth.
Go to joincrowdhealth.com promo code Knowles.
Very, very important to have healthcare.
And it's open enrollment season and insurance companies are betting you will just auto-renew without asking questions.
But you're smarter than that.
If you're tired of overpriced premia and confusing fine print, there is a better way.
A response or CrowdHealth is a community where people fund each other's medical bills directly.
No middlemen, no networks, no nonsense.
Stop playing the insurance game.
Take control of your healthcare with CrowdHealth.
You get healthcare coverage for under $100 a month.
And that is not some bare bones plan with a million exceptions.
That includes access to a dedicated team of health bill negotiators who fight on your behalf, discounted prescriptions and lab tests that actually save you money, and a vetted database of affordable, high-quality doctors handpicked by CrowdHealth.
If something major happens, you only pay the first 500 bucks, then the crowd steps in to help fund the rest of your medical expenses.
It is what healthcare felt like before everything got overcomplicated by these corporate middlemen.
This open enrollment, take your power back.
Join CrowdHealth to get started today for $99 for your first three months using code Knowles at joincrowdhealth.com.
That is joincrowdhealth.com.
Code Knowles.
CrowdHealth is not insurance.
Opt out.
Take your power back.
This is how we win.
First, the most viral clip that was going around yesterday, really powerful stuff from Erica Kirk, Erica, Charlie's widow, who is making the rounds right now because Charlie just had a book come out.
A lot of people are asking, why is Erica Kirk going around on TV?
Yesterday was the third, not anniversary, it was the third month since Charlie was assassinated.
And they're saying, why is she going on TV?
The reason is that Charlie had a book coming out.
And this will be his final book.
It was published posthumously.
But you just think with this poor woman, everything she's dealing with, she's grieving the death of her husband, the assassination of her husband, right at Christmas time, which is very difficult.
She's got these two young kids.
She's got to deal with all of that.
She and Charlie, of course, were very much in the public eye.
So she's leading now this organization that is Charlie's life's work and his legacy.
And she's dealing with all of the public scrutiny that comes with that.
And on top of it, because Charlie did a million things, Charlie had a book coming out.
Now, some people said, why don't they delay the release of the book?
Why don't they?
And the way publishing works is you plan the release of a book 18 months or two years or three years sometimes in advance.
And I also don't see why they would delay the book.
You know, it's going to be only less and less pertinent the further out you get from it.
I guess the one reason that you would delay the release of the book would be because no one would be willing to go out and promote it.
You always have to promote a book when it comes out.
And this woman, amid everything, goes out and has the strength, the fortitude to go out and do it.
And it's really just superhuman, you know.
Charlie had a lot of those qualities too.
So anyway, she goes on outnumbered on Harris Faulkner's show on Fox News, and she's asked about a lot of the conspiracy theories that have cropped up since Charlie was killed.
Here's her breaking her silence.
Talk to me about this part of the conspiracies that are out there, this disturbing part that people are trying to guess where Charlie is.
Can I have one thing?
Can I have one thing?
Can my children have one thing?
Everything was public.
We will be building the most beautiful memorial for my husband at Turning Point USA, and it will be for the world to see, and it will be spectacular.
And it will have basically museum style for our Charlie, for my Charlie.
But can I have one thing?
Can my babies have one thing where we hold it sacred, where my husband is laid to rest, where I don't have to be worried about some secular revolutionary coming and destroying my husband's grave while my daughter is sitting there praying one thing, that this is my husband.
Yes, he was Charlie Kirk to the world, and I know so many people love my husband, and I am grateful for that, but this is my husband.
And I want to be able to have one thing left that is sacred to our family, to my in-laws, to my babies, and to my parents.
Really powerful stuff.
And what the point she's hitting on is key here.
And I think a lot of people don't really appreciate it.
She says, can we have one thing?
Can we have one thing that's private?
You know, she and Charlie lived a public life.
Charlie would have been president.
They had a very public life.
But they're people.
And her kids are people.
And Charlie's friends are people.
They're real people.
They're actual people.
And I think for a lot of stuff that you see flying around on Twitter or message boards or social media, a lot of people don't recognize that.
I mean, maybe at some base level they do.
But to most people, Charlie is a bunch of pixels on a screen.
And Erica Kirk is a bunch of pixels on a screen.
That's kind of like a whodunit.
It's a game almost.
Not to say there aren't, obviously there were plenty of questions about the assassination of Charlie.
There's an investigation going on.
There are prosecutions that will take place.
There are all sorts of questions about who else knew, how many associates of the suspect knew.
Did the tranny boyfriend, was he in on it?
Were they trying to cover themselves when they had that text message set released?
All sorts of questions, of course.
And that investigation is ongoing.
But this is a woman who had a real husband, who has real kids.
And she says, look, we're public and everything, but I just want to have some things be kind of private.
And I remember a couple of years ago, I was giving some speech and people asked about the perennial drama among conservative politicians and talkers and everything.
And this person and that person and you disavow and this and that and all this stuff.
And I said, you know, guys, I get why this is interesting and scintillating, kind of entertaining for a lot of you.
I said, but for the players that you're talking about, these are real people to me.
They're not real people to you.
They're pixels on a screen to you.
To me, they're real people in flesh and blood that I actually know and I'm friends with and I spend time with.
And so they'll say, you know, why don't you, I mean, gosh, this has been going on for years and years and years.
I say, why don't you call out this person for, you know, I don't know, adopting this left-wing view or this kind of liberal behavior or this, that, or the other thing.
I said, you know, I talk to these people off camera too.
Not everything happens on camera.
And it's this very, very human kind of crie de cur from Erica who's saying, hey, guys, can you let me have my husband?
The fact that we want to have like private memorials too, there was a very public memorial, but we want to have private things too, is so that some lunatic secular revolutionary, as she says, doesn't come down and attack the memorial.
So that this, you know, this might be entertainment to some of you.
This might be kind of a fun game in your head, you know, who killed Kennedy?
But to me, it's real, you know, it's personal.
And she has, she has a lot of credibility.
She has a lot of authority here.
The fact that she's able to go out and do this, she's, you know, maintained, I think, a lot of dignity and quiet resolve on this issue.
The fact that she's able to do that is very impressive.
It reminds you of something, though.
The right was so unified when Charlie was assassinated.
It's clear as day.
Charlie goes out there, the most prominent promoter of civil dialogue on the American right.
He's going out in these unsecure locations, just having open conversations with people, letting people come up and ask him whatever questions.
Everybody knew, everybody knew that there was a security risk there.
And Charlie had gotten plenty of death threats.
Anyone, especially on the right who speaks in public life, gets death threats, sometimes even attempts.
And as Charlie is talking about the transgender issue, where the trans-identifying people have been much, much more violent, just from firsthand experience and from the data, I guess, too.
The pro-trans crowd, the LGBT crowd, this guy, I guess, was a furry who was dating a trans furry or whatever, goes out as Charlie's talking about that and kills him.
You know, the right was, it was just so clear.
It was just so clear.
However, I think a lot of us couldn't, not a lot, some of us could anticipate what would happen.
You know, there was this immediate response which said, you know what, you tried to strike Charlie down, but we're going to come back stronger than ever and you've awakened a beast and we're going to be more unified than ever.
And I didn't think that.
We could be strong.
We could perhaps be unified.
We could win elections and cultural battles and hegemony in the country.
All those things could happen.
But the assassination will not help that happen because of the very sad conclusion that no one wanted to admit after Charlie was assassinated, which is that assassinations work.
That's why people do them.
That's the really hard fact, is assassinations really work, actually.
Maybe not forever, maybe not, but they really can work.
And the other part that people were missing, as they talked about Charlie, as a masterful orator, debater, writer, political advisor, Charlie's most important skill and asset was that he held the coalition together.
It's one reason that they would try to kill Charlie.
All of these political battles that we've been fighting for years and years and years, all these leftists who are threatening a bunch of the talkers, Charlie was holding the coalition together.
And that creates a vacuum.
So when people predict, oh, there'll be all this unity on the right.
Are you sure?
Because they killed the guy who was largely, really more than anybody else, holding the coalition together.
Really?
You sure?
And of course, three months, it's been three months.
It feels like it's been three years, doesn't it?
Three months.
I couldn't believe it when I heard that.
There was this moment of unity, right?
I gave a speech where Charlie and I were supposed to do an event together in Minneapolis 12 days after he died.
I did it.
And at that moment, there was a real bit of unity.
But without his strength, his leadership within that organization, within the conservative movement, then a lot of division and chaos ensued.
It's probably going to happen for a while.
It seems to me that the person who still has that capacity, that vision, that ability is the vice president, is JD Vance.
Especially he was so close with Charlie.
But it's a knock.
I mean, even given all of that, it's a real knock.
Assassinations work.
That's why people do them.
And I think the task for all of us now is to not let them win in the long run.
You know, do not give Charlie's killer the satisfaction.
Don't give the political left, which opposed Charlie.
And, you know, he had critics all over the place, but specifically the political left, which really was organized to get him.
Don't give them the satisfaction.
Now, speaking of conflict and war, it looks like we're going to war in Venezuela.
I will get to that momentarily.
First, I want to tell you about Equipped Foods.
Go to equipfoods.com slash Michael Knowles, all one word.
This episode is sponsored by Equip Foods.
I hate protein bars.
I think you know that.
I've made that very clear.
They're gross.
They're chalky.
I just, I don't get it.
I don't like it.
Which is why the team and I love, love Equip Foods Prime Bar.
The Equipped Foods Prime Bar is the first of its kind.
It is a grass-fed protein bar with only real food ingredients and absolutely nothing to hide.
20 grams of clean protein.
Starting today, our listeners will receive an exclusive discount on Prime Bar, which has become our team's very favorite protein bar on the market.
These bars pack 20 grams of grass-fed beef protein using just 11 clean ingredients like collagen, beef tallow, colostrum, naturally sweetened with dates and honey.
They are free from whey, seed oils, and artificial additives, plus rigorously third-party tested for contaminants with flavors like chocolate and mixed berry.
They taste like dessert, but they're actually the cleanest protein bars on the market.
I absolutely love them.
If you want to try the cleanest protein bar on the market, they're already sold out once, go to equippedfoods.com slash Michael Knowles.
Equippedfoods.com slash Michael Knowles.
Use code Michael Knowles, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, Canada W-L-E-S, all one word.
Get 25% off one-time purchases or 40% off your first subscription.
Order for limited time.
E-Q-U-I-P-Foods.com slash Michael Knowles.
Use code Michael Knowles at checkout.
The U.S. has seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela.
It's not a good sign, is it?
Maybe it is a good sign.
I don't know.
But where is it?
Where is it?
Where's the story?
Here it is.
Bloomberg reporting, U.S. seizes oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela.
They intercepted a sanctioned oil tanker.
Why did they take the oil tanker?
Well, most of the Venezuelan oil goes to China, usually through intermediaries, but that's not great.
So they're sending oil to China, one of our geopolitical adversaries.
It's not great in our own hemisphere.
More reporting.
U.S. has imposed sanctions on the tanker for what Washington said was involvement in Iranian oil trading when it was called the Ediza.
Venezuela has had to deeply discount its crude to its main binder, China, because of growing competition with sanctioned oil from Russia and Iran.
So what's going on?
We have a major military buildup in and around Venezuela.
We've got the CIA is active.
So do we support this?
Do we not support this?
If this were some regime change war in the Middle East, I don't think anybody on the right seriously would support that.
I think we've had enough of that.
However, it's a little bit different strategy.
One, you've got Donald Trump leading this.
Trump has more grace when it comes to foreign policy because he's been better at it than any president in my lifetime.
Two, this is our hemisphere.
And the U.S. has dominated the Western hemisphere for over 200 years.
We have the Monroe Doctrine to say that foreign powers can't interfere in the Western hemisphere.
So if some of our geopolitical adversaries are interfering, we're going to pay attention.
Furthermore, this is what we always do.
I just looked up just a brief little history of U.S. interventions in Latin America going back to 1910, 1915.
We have intervened, led coups, supported coups, supported oustings of leaders in Nicaragua, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Bolivia, Brazil, Dominican Republic again, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, El Salvador, Grenada, Nicaragua again, Panama, Haiti.
Is that Haiti again?
Yeah, Venezuela and Honduras.
So maybe we're going to add Venezuela again to that list.
What is the takeaway for all of us?
Well, the takeaway is the U.S. has decided Maduro has to go, and they can do it the easy way or the hard way.
And they're just incrementally ramping up the pressure on Maduro.
They started zapping his drug boats.
Then they have built up a major military presence around there.
Then reportedly the White House calls and says, hey, man, you got to go.
We'll let you go now if you leave peacefully, but otherwise it's going to get tough.
Then we intercept their oil tanker.
Venezuela can't survive five seconds if we seriously interrupt their oil exporting.
So we've just decided he's going to go.
Is this just?
You know, there are principles.
We talked about this in the war in Ukraine.
We talked about this in the war in Gaza and Israel.
Is this just?
Is there a good cause for the United States to go to war in Venezuela?
It's pretty dubious.
It's a little sketchy.
But to me, the deeper question is not, is this war just?
The question is, is this war?
And to my mind, it's not really war.
In my mind, it's closer to politics than war.
Was it Bismarck who said that war is the extension of politics by other means?
It's not like we're going to send in the Marines or something.
We're going to occupy Venezuela and make it safe for democracy.
Probably, if I were a gambler man, what I would say is the way that we would oust Maduro and Venezuela is the same way we've ousted unsympathetic leaders throughout our history with Venezuela, or sorry, with Latin America.
It's probably a little bit closer to politics.
But in order for that to make sense, you have to recognize that America is closer to an empire than a nation state.
We're the dominant global hegemon.
We're not a yeoman republic.
And for that to make sense, you have to recognize that when President Trump says America first, he's not talking about isolation.
He's never been talking about isolation.
He's not some arch libertarian.
That has never been him.
When he talks about America first, he talks about buying Greenland from Denmark.
He talks about invading Canada because he doesn't like the cut of their jibs on their mooses.
When he's talking about America first, he's talking about pushing people around who are our adversaries and driving hard deals and making our allies pony up and get in line.
And he's talking about a strongman kind of America first.
We're going to prioritize our interests everywhere, not just within the confines of our borders.
Will the right back him on this?
I think they're going to be a little bit confused because what happens in politics is you have facts on the ground that reflect to some degree ideas that get turned, concentrated into slogans.
You know, no war for oil.
It would be an example of one during the Bush years in Iraq.
They get turned into slogans, and then we adopt the slogans and we chant them, and then we get hoisted on the petard of our slogans because the slogans can never comprehend the totality of the political reality.
So a good example of this is five, 10 years ago, the right decided we were going to embrace free speech in an absolute sense.
Free speech absolutism was a left-wing issue in the 1960s, and it was BS even then because it was just a bunch of leftist terrorists in some cases and leftist activists who said, we need total free speech.
And on this supposedly liberal principle, they destroyed the old conservative norms.
Then they got power and they implemented their own left-wing norms.
They really believe it.
And then we, because we wanted to crack the left-wing norms and the PC culture, woke culture, we came in and we said, no, we're the free speech absolutists.
But then we get hoisted on the apatar too, because every society needs standards.
It's the same thing here.
Say, no more war.
What does it mean?
No more war.
No more war.
There's not going to be no more war this side of the second coming.
There are going to be wars.
Wars are a fact of life.
No more war.
There are good reasons for wars in some cases.
There are bad reasons for wars too.
So you got to be more specific.
It's not that you want no more war.
You say, why are we going to war?
The big reason I think that a lot of people on the right adopted the no more war slogan is because you had these liberal globalist wars to neocon wars to spread Madisonian democracy throughout the world and usher in the end of history.
That's ridiculous.
That was never a good idea.
Doesn't mean we don't support any kind of war.
Certainly doesn't mean that Trump supports it, doesn't support any kind of war.
So I can see some confusion.
I think this would be another issue where I think the right will become divided.
The unity that we had has been cracked because of the removal, the forceful removal of certain figures, because of the eventual removal of Donald Trump, who is looking ahead at the end of his second term, and because of changing political circumstances, because we're going to be trying to apply the logic of 20 years in Afghanistan to interventions in Latin America, which is as American as apple pie.
Speaking of the State Department, a very, very exciting turn of events, and no one's paying enough attention to it.
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, has totally destroyed woke fonts with facts and tradition and Times New Roman.
What's the story here?
The story is, New York Times is so angry about it.
At State Department, a typeface falls victim in the war against woke.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the Biden-era move to the sans serif typeface, wasteful casting the return to Times New Roman as part of a push to stamp out diversity efforts.
We'll get into this very important story, and then we'll get into the Republican op.
It was apparently a Republican op to get Jasmine Crockett to run for Senate in Texas, and it totally worked.
We'll get into that.
There's great reporting on it first, though.
I want to tell you about Shopify.
Go to shopify.com slash Knowles.
This episode is sponsored by Shopify.
You know how hard it is, not just to start a podcast.
That's relatively easy.
But to start a business in this country, it can be hard.
All these questions, all these problems.
I've actually started a few of them.
If only Shopify had been around the whole time.
Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S.
We even use it for our own daily wire shop to make sure things are running smoothly and efficiently so you get all the goods.
Now, you might be asking, what if I can't design a website?
What if I'm worried people haven't heard of my brand?
No problem.
Shopify has got you covered from the start with beautiful, ready-to-go templates that match your brand style, helps you find customers through easy-to-run media and email campaigns.
Now, if you need a hand with everyday tasks, their AI tools created specifically for commerce, can help enhance product images, write descriptions, and more.
Their award-winning customer support is available 24-7.
Turn your big business idea into with Shopify on your side.
Sign up for $1 per month trial and start selling today.
Shopify.com slash Knowles.
That is Shopify.com slash Knowles.
Shopify.com slash K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
So when we were a good civilized country, the State Department used good, traditional Times New Roman font.
You know, Times New Roman.
It's the default font before the libs got their hands on everything.
And it's a serif font, meaning it's got these little adornments, these little feet and stuff on the font.
You know, it's not just, it's not, it's not, here, do I have a pen?
Let me show you.
Let me give you a lesson in typefaces.
It's not just like, you know, this would be like a lame sans serif font, like a three-year-old can draw, right?
But a nice, like nice serif font.
It's got these nice little adornments on here.
I promise you I'm going somewhere with this.
And you see, like, look at that.
That's nice.
Okay, that's kind of nice, huh?
You got the little adornments on there.
Okay.
So what does it matter?
Does it really matter?
Well, for a long time, we used the serif font, Times New Roman, a little more flowery, a few more adornments.
And then Blinken in 2023, at the urging of his DEI office, I kid you not at the State Department, changes it from that nice, good, conservative Times New Roman to that lame, gay Calibri, which is a sans serif font.
It's like Helvetica.
And truly, I'm not exaggerating.
There is not an ounce of hyperbole in my statement.
Sans serif is for libs.
His sans serif is inhuman.
It is modernist.
It tries to make everything clinical and sterile and flat and minimalist.
It's like those dumb cube houses that the libs keep building in their drab clothing and their desire to eliminate all pizzazz from life, to turn the sexes into one just androgynous, fat, sexless blob of gray.
That's sans serif font.
Beautiful serif font like, oh, where do I begin?
Garimond, Georgia, the OG, Times New Roman.
It's got a little more to it.
It's got a little more adornment.
Think about it like church.
What kind of church you want to go into?
You want to go into a church that looks like you're in a dentist's office, or you want to go into a church that looks like Notre Dame de Paris.
What is more conducive to the human spirit?
Previously, we said adornments, nice, like beautiful stuff, detail, particularity.
Or ours is a particular religion.
Our God is a particular God who becomes a particular man in a particular place.
Okay.
Countries are distinguished one from another by particularity.
So really, it actually matters.
I know it seems like it doesn't matter to a lot.
Who gives a damn about these fonts?
You know, it's kind of like the same people who didn't care about wokeness and PCs.
Ah, who cares?
It's just words.
Just words.
Words are how we communicate and govern each other.
We mean just words.
I'll use the gender pronouns.
It's just, well, you mean you'll don't do that.
You're giving away everything.
If you use the gender pronouns, you're implicitly endorsing the gender ideology.
Same thing here.
If it didn't matter, if the font didn't matter, why did the State Department DEI office make such a big deal out of switching it to the lame, lib, sterile, gay sans serif font?
Why?
It's always like, oh, what's the big deal about men using a women's bathroom?
Oh, it's not a big deal.
Good.
Then don't change it.
We like it the way it was.
Then you, it's not a big deal.
Then don't make a big deal about changing it.
Well, we want, but we want to change it.
Oh, so it is a big deal.
Yes.
This is literally significant.
Literal, which refers to letters.
Significant, which refers to signs.
This is literally significant.
And we are returning.
We are returning to tradition and Times New Roman.
I could talk about this for six hours.
Mr. Davies is going to yank my microphone off me if I talk about fonts any longer.
I don't care.
It matters.
Secretary Rubio, great job.
I don't want to see any sans serif nonsense.
I want to live sans sans-serif.
Serif man.
Okay, speaking of DEI, Jasmine Crockett is running for Senate.
Jasmine Crockett's the new AOC.
She's the new wild, crazy, maybe not the sharpest tool in the shed, but she gets a lot of attention, Democrat member of Congress.
And she said she was actively considering running for Senate in Texas, and now she's running.
And the problem with this is she's not that likable.
She doesn't seem, you know, to be the brightest crayon in the box.
And even the Democrats are a little worried that she's going to get wrecked by John Cornyn, the Republican in Texas.
Here is Jake Tapper, a liberal in good standing on CNN, raising some issues, saying, hey, Jasmine, how are you going to get over these terrible things you've said with the voters?
Let me ask you about a quote that you've made that has some Democrats worried about your ability to win statewide.
In a December 2024 Vanity Fair profile, you talked about, quote, and I'm going to read a lot of the quote just to put it into context, quote, all the complexities within the Latino community.
The immigration thing has always been something that has perplexed me about this community.
It's basically like, I fought to get here, but I left y'all where I left y'all, and I want no more y'all to come here.
If I wanted to be with y'all, I would stay with y'all, but I don't want y'all come into my new home.
It almost reminds me of what people would talk about when they would talk about kind of like slave mentality and the hate that some slaves would have for themselves.
It's almost like a slave mentality that they have.
Now, about the time that that was published last year, around a million Latino voters in Texas were voting for Trump.
Do they all have slave mentality?
No, and that's not what that said at all, to be clear.
It did not say that every Latino has that type of mentality.
No, no, but the ones that vote for people who believe in strong or Trump's immigration policy.
So I don't believe that the people that voted for Trump believe in what they're actually getting.
Well, hold on.
So Jake Tapper says, hey, here is verbatim exactly what you said.
And she goes, that's not what I said, though.
It is because I'm reading your exact words verbatim.
No, it doesn't say that.
That thing that you were just reading, that doesn't say what you said it says.
Well, no, I'm Jake Tapper and I can read actually.
And maybe some people can't today, but I can.
And that is what you said.
You said a million voters in Texas who you need to win are slaves because they're idiots and they hate themselves.
Look, the point that she's making is actually a pretty standard left-wing talking point, which is that women, black people, Hispanics, immigrants, anyone that they consider their property and their coalition, any of them who vote for the other party, for the conservatives, they're slaves.
They are self-hating.
They're dopes.
They're rubes.
That's that line.
They labor under a false consciousness.
That's been their line for decades.
Now, they usually have the good sense not to say it about their own voters, their own constituents whose votes they need to win.
Jasmine Crockett's a little rough around the edges.
So, and Jake Tapper asked, how are you supposed to win over the votes of some of the, look, some of these Hispanics are clearly Republicans.
They're not going to vote for you, but I don't know.
Trump won the popular vote.
So some of them are moderate or maybe even left-wing voters who might vote for a Democrat, but just crossed over and voted for a Republican.
You're calling them all idiot slaves.
Yeah, no, I didn't say that.
I mean, I did, but yeah, they're not, but that's bad because they don't, the Republicans don't deliver for them.
Not a good answer.
Not a good answer.
Where did her run come from?
According to excellent reporting from Notice, N-O-T-U-S, the National Republican Senatorial Committee recruited Jasmine Crockett to run for Senate as a Democrat.
An AstroTurf recruitment process, National Republicans propped up Jasmine Crockett to push her into a Senate run.
The NRSC started including Crockett's name in polling and conducted a sustained effort to get Crockett, the Republican Party's preferred candidate to run against, into the race.
So initially, there was this grave concern.
You got John Cornyn, two senators from Texas, Ted Cruz, who already won re-election against Colin All Red last year, Ted Cruz and John Cornyn.
Cornyn's running for reelection, and he's fine, but he's not the strongest Republican out there.
Democrats had two formidable candidates.
Cornyn was caught in the middle of a bruising three-way Republican primary.
People were concerned it would weaken the eventual nominee.
So the NRSC, the Republican Senate Committee, puts out a poll back in July.
And they've got, you know, the Democrat names who were running, but they included Jasmine Crockett's name in there.
Very sneaky.
No one was talking about Jasmine Crockett running for Senate.
Jasmine Crockett had not expressed any desire to run for Senate.
It was the NRSC that put it in there.
Said when we got the results, we were like, okay, we got to disseminate this far and wide.
So they put her in the poll and they amplified those polls.
And they're now taking credit for helping, quote, orchestrate the pylon of these polling numbers to really drive that news cycle and the narrative that Jasmine Crockett was surging in Texas.
It turns out that she's not.
She's getting positive news coverage.
Her office was being flooded with phone calls urging her to run.
So now they're saying, look, this is great.
We got this total loony tune and we're going to run against her.
And then Cornyn's going to win and we're all good, right?
Okay.
It's that's clever.
Good, good on the NRSC staffers for doing some clever politics.
That's great.
However, are we sure that's going to work in the end?
It's clever that you did the op.
I like that as a tactic.
I'm a little worried about it as a strategy because what it reminds me of is 2016 when the Democrats were dancing.
A good buddy of mine, he's a huge Dem, and he was laughing when Trump got the nomination.
He said, ha ha, you idiot.
It was even before he got the nom, but he was looking good.
He goes, your party is being held hostage by this madman.
This guy's going to lose in the general.
It's terrible.
Sucks to be you.
And then what happened?
There was a story that came out.
I remember it.
It was reported by local NBC News.
Do you remember who encouraged President Trump to run for president?
Well, Chris, thanks, this is a big story broken by the Washington Post that before he formally declared for the White House, Donald Trump had a secret conversation with one of America's best-known politicians who Trump aides confirm, talked to the Donald about how to better relate to the Republican base and how to get more involved in Republican politics without the aides, say, specifically suggesting that Trump run, which Trump then decided to do.
Who was it?
Bill Clinton.
It was Clinton.
And it's not that Clinton said, Donald, hey, buddy, you really got to run right now.
I'm writing your name in.
But he called and in that subtle bubba kind of ways, oh, you got to get more involved.
You got a lot to say.
You can really shape this primary, Donald.
You really, it might be a good idea, you know, Donald.
Meanwhile, his wife is the presumptive nominee.
And the husband, who's one of the greatest politicians of his generation, says, you know what I'm going to do?
I'm going to recruit Donald Trump to run as a Republican.
He's going to screw up the Republican Party.
By golly, could you imagine if he got the nomination, all the better?
We could beat him in two seconds.
And then what happens?
They get hoisted with their own petard.
A lot of petard hoisting going on today.
And so when I look at this, I get what the Republican staffers are saying.
They're saying, Jasmine Crockett sounds like an idiot.
She does sound like that sometimes.
I don't think she's an idiot.
I think she's an idiot like a fox.
Is that the expression?
I think, because people listen and they hear her when she really turns up this minstrel show that she does.
She said, you know, she goes out and she really turns up what people perceive as Ebonics.
You know what that is, honey?
You know, well, she's talking to like a black crowd and she's really pandering with this, with this stereotypically black voice.
And I tell them what they is doing is uh-uh-uh, dooba-duba-doo-doo-doo.
You know, it's like a show on UPN in the 90s or something.
But then you listen to other interviews of her when she's not just pandering to an audience.
She sounds totally normal and she knows how to use the English language well and she sounds downright sober.
And furthermore, I remember we all made this mistake with AOC.
And we all thought 2018, look at this total lunatic.
She's a dummy.
She can't.
She's got her foot in her mouth every day.
We got to promote her.
I remember even Cocaine Mitch McConnell came out when she proposed the Green New Deal.
He said, I think that every single senator on the Democratic side needs to vote for this.
I can't wait to bring the Green New Deal up for a vote immediately.
And it worked in the short term.
Now the Green New Deal is mainstream Democrat policy.
All the Dems support the Green New Deal.
And AOC is not just a plausible Senate candidate in New York, could take Chuck Schumer's job.
She's one of the most plausible presidential candidates in 2028.
So be careful what you wish for, guys.
Jasmine Crockett is much smarter than people think she is.
She is.
I know.
Look, that's going to be unpopular.
Sorry.
Jasmine Crockett's much smarter than most people think she is.
She's a much more capable politician.
I don't want to be sitting here saying, wow, Senator Crockett, boy, Democrat from Texas.
Man, maybe we shouldn't have encouraged her to run.
Maybe we should, I don't know.
I wouldn't count her out.
Now, speaking of President Trump, there, Jasmine was talking about Trump's migration policy and all these self-hating Hispanics.
President Trump has just expounded a bit on his immigration policy, the kind of migration he doesn't want, the kind of migration he does want.
Our brand new Daily Wire host, Matt Fred, just released a special Christmas episode of Plines with Aquinas.
It is streaming now on Daily Wire Plus.
It's smart.
It's meaningful.
It's exactly what you want during Christmas, during Advent too, by the way.
Right now, our Daily Wire Plus Christmas sale is live.
New annual memberships are 40% off.
If you're already a member, you can gift an annual membership for 50% off.
Watch Matt Fred's Christmas show, get the Daily Wire Plus Christmas deal right now, DailyWire.com.
I want to tell you about Theo G. SkyKing6107, who says, welcome home, my dear Nubian brother from Michigan with love.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I mentioned yesterday when I heard this proposal from Jasmine Crockett that black people not pay any taxes.
I said, look, the Sicilians are basically African.
Okay, so power, sister, brother.
When do I get my tax rebate?
That sounds great.
President Trump has expounded on his new immigration policy.
Don't forget, there was this earth-shattering, maybe I'm slightly exaggerating, but not by a lot, change in the Trump immigration policy.
Previously, his view had been destroy illegal immigration, but we want more legal immigration.
Sometimes he said, we want more legal immigration than ever.
We just, we want to stop illegal immigration.
In other words, the problem with our immigration system is just a procedural problem.
It's not a substantive problem.
It's not about all the people coming here.
It's just how they get here.
He has shifted that view.
Now, look, at the time that he was promoting that, I think that was probably the politically salient view.
I think where the base is now, where a lot of, maybe where most Americans are now, is we want to drastically reduce all migration.
We don't have enough social solidarity.
We want less illegal and less legal.
Now, can we make distinctions between where, you know, this Somali fraud scandal in Minnesota has started to open up that conversation too.
Previously, you had to talk about migration like it was all the same.
A guy comes to us from Merry Old England.
We've had Englishmen coming to America for over 400 years.
And a pirate shows up from Somalia to rape and murder and steal our welfare.
And we had to pretend that was the same thing.
Oh, it's all migration.
They're all migrants, aren't they?
Yes, John David Chattenworth IV and Jabba the Hud, Gishi Gushi-Gashi Han Solo.
Oh, they're all just migrants, right?
It's all the same.
We're talking about migrants.
No, I don't think.
Obviously, some cultures are more assimilable.
Some cultures fit in here, like the English, for instance, because America comes from England.
And Somalia is a little bit tougher.
President Trump made this point.
He's being excoriated by the left.
And we had a meeting, and I say, why is it we only take people from shit whole countries, right?
Why can't we have some people from Norway, Sweden, just a few?
Let's have a few.
From Denmark.
Do you mind sending us a few people?
Send us some nice people.
Do you mind?
But we always take people from Somalia, places that are a disaster, right?
Filthy, dirty, disgusting, ridden with crime.
The only thing they're good at is going after ships.
Here he goes.
Very important conversation to open up.
This is how we used to talk about immigration before the 1965 Hart Seller Act.
Used to say, okay, we want to restrict immigration, all immigration, including legal immigration.
And if we're going to take migrants, we want them to be from countries that are going to help us.
We want them to be the kind of people who can assimilate from places that are assimilable.
In some countries, we really don't want them.
And I know that's not liberal, but if you don't believe the stuff we believe in, and if you haven't been raised in the institutions that are similar to our institutions, and you don't do the kind of stuff that contributes to our economy and society, and you don't, if you just don't fit in, then we don't really want you to come.
We didn't have Somalis in this country in any meaningful sense until the 90s, okay?
The 1990s, not the 1890s, not the 1790s.
We had like zero, we had statistically zero Somalis in America until after 1991.
And they don't fit in that well.
It's not even a knock on them.
It's just like, come on.
That's what Trump is saying.
What's really funny about the distinction that's irritated the Libs, he says, why not nice places like Norway?
Why they got to be bad places like Somalia is that the Libs until very recently were always talking up how great the Scandinavian countries are.
The Libs, when they were more focused on economics on promoting socialism, they would say socialism works so well in Scandinavia.
We need something like the Scandinavian model.
Why is it that Scandinavia works so well and socialism, you know, more socialistic policy?
Now, they didn't always work so well.
They actually caused a lot of economic problems there.
But one reason that socialism, to some degree, you know, a big welfare state worked better in Scandinavia is because they had a completely homogenous population.
That was the part you weren't really allowed to say.
Furthermore, you don't need to have some lengthy argument to prove Trump's point right because all of the Somali, not just Somalis, but all of the people from the Middle East and Africa are going to Scandinavia.
Scandinavia also didn't have any of those people until very recently.
And now they're being flooded with those people and their crime and their rapes have gone absolutely through the roof.
So when he says, why don't we have people from nice countries like Norway and not bad countries like Somalia?
His premise is obviously true because all the people from countries around Somalia are trying to go to Norway and none of the people from the countries around Norway are trying to go to Somalia.
So it's obviously true.
And that should tell you something.
There's something about those Scandinavian countries where things are nice there.
So yeah, we want to bring more of the people who live in a nice way and we don't want to bring in the people who live in a bad way.
Speaking of this cultural enrichment, I do have to get to this video.
It's an old video, but it's going viral again as this issue of Muslim enclaves is really kicking up as the Somali fraud scandal is kicking up.
This is from 2019.
The Islamic Society of Philadelphia, I will translate.
Young girls, some little girls will defend.
We'll sacrifice our souls without hesitation.
We will chop off their heads and we will liberate the sorrowful and exalted Alexa Mosque.
We'll lead the army of Allah, fulfilling his promise.
We'll subject them to eternal torture.
Rebels, rebels, rebels.
All these little kids.
Rebels, rebels.
One ummah.
Glorious steeds will lead us into paths leading to Alexa Mosque.
The blood of martyrs protects us.
Paradise needs real men.
We've got some boys in there too, some girls, some boys from the Islamic Society of Philadelphia.
Not Gaza or the West Bank or Syria.
That was from Philadelphia.
And I don't want that in Philadelphia.
Frankly, Margaret, I just don't want them here.
Margaret, I don't care.
I just don't want them here.
And I think most people would agree with that.
That is an unassimilable culture.
Now, there are people who come from Muslim countries who can assimilate.
Again, it's got to be small numbers, but there are people who there are plenty of people who can.
But notice the way that they assimilate from Islam, which has been trying to invade and conquer the West for 1,400 years now, sometimes more successfully than others, the only way that they assimilate is to the degree to which they give up Islam.
Isn't that strange?
Christians assimilate to cultures, and frankly, the more Christian they are, the better they assimilate in many cases.
Jews assimilate to cultures.
They've been assimilating to cultures for 1,700 years.
Buddhists assimilate to cultures because they're pretty chill.
They're pretty lo-fi.
Muslims assimilate into cultures only in as much as they lose their religion.
I think that's just in the nature of Islam.
The nature of Islam, which does not tolerate development, which is quite literalist, which claims an unbridgeable chasm between man and God, totally contrary to Christianity, which says that there is the God-man, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, who bridges the gap between man and God.
It just doesn't work.
It just doesn't really work.
Okay, speaking of violent criminals, there's a story I really want to get to.
I think I have to get to it tomorrow, which is a Pennsylvania sheriff doing something crazy, arresting teenage thieves.
And now everyone's upset.
They're on the teenager's side instead of the sheriff's side.
The sheriff's totally right.
We'll get to that.
Also, HHS just flipped on the Hep B vaccine for babies.
