The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1608 - The New York Times Attacked Me In The Dumbest Way

00:00:00.000 It's back. One last chance. This time, it's more important than ever. Get 47% off your new Daily

00:00:05.120 Wire Plus annual membership with code FITE. Then make sure you're with us on election night. Our

00:00:08.860 full coverage starts at 6 p.m. Eastern. We'll be live all night until the winner is declared,

00:00:12.920 giving real coverage in real time on the night. It really matters. Dailywire.com slash subscribe.

00:00:17.380 Use code FITE for 47% off your new Daily Wire Plus membership. Be here to watch history unfold

00:00:24.680 live on Tuesday. November 5th. The night America's fate is decided. As the final votes are counted and

00:00:33.920 a nation waits for the outcome, join us to break down the live election results as only Ben Shapiro,

00:00:39.460 Matt Walsh, Michael Knowles, Andrew Klavan, and Jeremy Borek. And with special guests appearing

00:00:44.960 live in studio, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, Dennis Prager, and Spencer Clayton. Daily Wire,

00:00:51.120 election night 2024. Get real-time results and exclusive insights from the most trusted names

00:00:57.580 in conservative media. This is more than an election. It's history in the making. Join

00:01:03.160 the Daily Wire as each vote is counted, each state called, and each race decided.

00:01:11.720 With just four days to go before election day, the New York Times is officially campaigning to get

00:01:18.500 your favorite cigar salesman's podcast kicked off YouTube. They're also campaigning to get at least

00:01:25.400 eight other conservative shows kicked off YouTube. I think this means the Times has a hunch about who's

00:01:33.020 going to win the election. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show.

00:01:48.500 Welcome back to the show. J.D. Vance does Joe Rogan's show over three hours, well over three hours. We

00:02:01.540 have the highlights. There's so much more to say. First, though, text Knowles to 989898. We have a big

00:02:07.180 election coming up. There's a lot at stake. Four years of a conservative presidency will not be enough

00:02:12.040 to turn the tide on our $35 trillion national debt. You don't have much control over the election's

00:02:17.180 outcome. You can protect your savings by diversifying now into gold from my friends at Birch Gold.

00:02:22.500 That's right. For millennia, gold has stood firm in the face of greedy governments, economic upheavals,

00:02:27.600 and global strife. It can protect you now. Birch Gold will help you convert an IRA or 401k into an

00:02:32.740 IRA in physical gold. The best news doesn't cost you a penny out of pocket. I have a decent chunk of

00:02:39.480 my portfolio in gold, and I'll tell you, I'm pretty happy about that, especially right now.

00:02:43.100 Things are looking pretty good. Gold at all-time highs. Text Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to 989898. Get

00:02:48.320 your free info kit on gold, and then diversify, especially as we head into the election. People

00:02:53.000 are looking at some economic turmoil, and it's when they look to diversify. As the exclusive gold

00:02:58.000 partner of The Daily Wire for eight years, you can trust Birch Gold, as I do, to protect your

00:03:02.420 savings. Text Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to 989898 today. Speaking of luxurious things, I also have to tell you

00:03:11.220 about these smoking jackets. You can see, if you're watching the show right now, you can see

00:03:15.140 I'm wearing the black smoking jacket. A couple days ago, Mayflower rolled out a project we'd been

00:03:20.380 working on for about six months. That is a super premium smoking jacket made in partnership with

00:03:26.000 Shepherds, a company owned in part by Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker. This jacket uses the finest

00:03:33.780 mills velvet in all of Italy. It has working sleeve buttonholes. It's customized to your

00:03:41.360 measurements, to the slope of your shoulders. It's got this beautiful Bemberg liner with a

00:03:46.660 Mayflower repetition inside. It's got your initials embroidered in it. It's the real deal. It's good

00:03:52.740 stuff. So I mentioned on the show a couple days ago, I said, I think these are going to sell quickly.

00:03:57.480 Um, so if you want it, I would order it now. I was even more correct than I thought I would be.

00:04:04.100 We basically sold out within 24 hours. Uh, even though it's not as though the jacket is

00:04:08.700 inexpensive. The jacket's, I think about $895. However, as I pointed out, anything even remotely

00:04:14.620 comparable to this quality off the rack would easily be double that price. When you add in the

00:04:18.980 made to measure, you're looking more like triple or quadruple that price. So I said, if you want it,

00:04:22.880 look, $900 smoking jackets, not everyone wants one. That's not, not for everyone. But if, if you

00:04:28.480 are the kind of person who does want that, uh, I would order it quickly because they're, they're

00:04:32.880 going to disappear. And that is exactly what happened. So the good news is if you did want

00:04:37.580 the jacket, we spoke to shepherds and the way it worked, we ordered a certain amount of the velvet

00:04:43.440 from this superb mill in Italy. And so I said, is there any, do we have any extra fabric? Is there any

00:04:48.940 way we can make it squeeze out even a handful more jackets? And the answer was yes, we have

00:04:53.980 enough fabric left for six black smoking jackets and we have enough fabric left for one burgundy

00:05:01.080 smoking jacket. So we are talking like none left. We have very, very few. If you want it though,

00:05:06.660 I know a number of people were disappointed that they weren't able to get it in time. Uh,

00:05:10.200 if you want it, you can get it. They, these will disappear, you know, immediately probably. So,

00:05:16.340 uh, go get it now, mayflowercigars.com if you want your jacket and to celebrate, you know,

00:05:21.620 we did the jacket, not really to make money. We're not, we're not really going to make much

00:05:24.780 money at all on, on this jacket. We did it more to celebrate the first year of Mayflower

00:05:28.680 cigars, which has been very successful. And so I want to celebrate that with a little Mayflower

00:05:33.040 on the show.

00:05:37.760 D-lish. Uh, I also want to celebrate, uh, something that seems like a little bit of a dubious honor. 0.88

00:05:45.380 This is the New York times coming after your boy. I, I was tagged in this yesterday. Uh,

00:05:52.420 it's an article from the times election falsehoods take off on YouTube as it looks the other way.

00:05:56.800 And the New York times has this header picture with, with nine conservatives on it. Uh, that would

00:06:03.180 be, uh, people from all representing all parts of the conservative space, a little bit on cable news,

00:06:09.780 a little bit associated with the Trump campaign, uh, little bit, you know, you got Tucker, you got

00:06:15.320 Ben, you got all, you got Tim Poole, you got, but right in the middle of it is your boy is, is me.

00:06:21.380 So I said, huh, what did I say that the New York times considers an election falsehood?

00:06:28.240 Because I try to be rather precise in my speech. So I said, I don't, I don't think I've said anything

00:06:34.240 that they could get me on. So I read through the article. Well, I had someone print me out a copy

00:06:39.040 of the article. Cause obviously I don't want to subscribe to the New York times. And I looked

00:06:43.700 through and the answer is they didn't get me on anything. They didn't cite a single supposed

00:06:50.420 election falsehood that I've uttered. They didn't even mention me in the article. They once again,

00:06:58.100 I am being used merely as a pretty face. They put me right in the center of their election

00:07:06.240 falsehood banner. They've made me the face of election falsehood. According to the New York

00:07:10.100 times, they don't even mention me because they can't because I haven't said anything false about

00:07:16.180 the election. What they are doing is obviously just trying to get my show and all these other

00:07:23.560 shows kicked off of YouTube that you hear the headline election falsehoods take off on YouTube

00:07:28.620 as it looks the other way. And then here's the kicker. I did start to read some of the article

00:07:33.340 within months, the largest video platform became a home for election conspiracy theories,

00:07:39.100 half truths and lies. They in turn became a source of revenue for YouTube,

00:07:42.860 which announced growing quarterly ad sales on Tuesday. Okay. What's the New York times is

00:07:47.720 evidence for this during four tumultuous months of this year's presidential campaign,

00:07:51.700 researchers from media matters for America, a group that monitors information from conservative

00:07:56.180 sources, examine the consequences of YouTube's about face. This is the most embarrassing thing.

00:08:00.060 I mean, look, it's embarrassing that the, that, that the New York times made the, the centerpiece of

00:08:04.560 their election falsehoods claims, uh, someone to whom they can't cite even once for election

00:08:11.520 falsehoods. That's embarrassing. But even more embarrassing as the New York times, the gray lady 0.99

00:08:15.220 used to be the paper of record is citing media matters, a Democrat operative organization to,

00:08:23.880 to their, they're outsourcing their journalism to media matters. That is so humiliating for the New

00:08:31.160 York times. I'm not surprised because the quality of their journalism has plummeted in recent years,

00:08:36.460 but that is absolutely pathetic. So they go on. Time says, yeah, you know, media matters. It has a 0.97

00:08:43.080 point of view, but the New York times has independently verified the research. Oh yeah.

00:08:46.740 Okay. Apparently you didn't verify very well. This is amazing. The New York times independently

00:08:50.320 verifies research, examining all of the videos identified by media matters, determining whether

00:08:53.940 YouTube placed ads or fact check labels on them. Okay. So you're, hold on here. That could mean a

00:08:59.160 couple of things. You're saying you, you independently verified that YouTube,

00:09:02.900 which also suppresses conservatives agreed with media matters, which endeavors to suppress

00:09:08.300 conservatives. And then you reported this in the New York times, which is campaigning to suppress

00:09:11.720 conservatives. Okay. Uh, I guess that could be the case, but that doesn't prove anything. It

00:09:15.980 doesn't actually prove that the claims made were false, but furthermore, you say, oh, the New York

00:09:21.620 times has independently verified all of this. Oh yeah. Well, sorry. You got to excuse my skepticism

00:09:27.380 because you put my face in the middle of it and you can't cite me even once. So I don't know,

00:09:31.480 man. It doesn't look like your independent verification is, is all that trustworthy.

00:09:37.760 It's not just the New York times, the Washington post has a piece out in the podcast election,

00:09:44.720 top shows cast doubt on integrity of the 2024 vote in the podcast election. Now you can't see,

00:09:51.380 this is the printable version, but on the online version, it's just Ben Shapiro's face.

00:09:55.120 So here two in the New York times piece, two out of the nine heads they cite or daily wire heads in

00:10:01.000 the Washington post piece. Uh, the one, the one person whose picture is the banner is a daily

00:10:05.460 wire host. They they're coming for the daily wire. They're calling this the podcast election.

00:10:09.860 Notice in the New York times piece, they don't, they don't include anyone from Fox news up there.

00:10:15.460 I mean, I'm not making any point about Fox news. I'm just pointing out they're coming after the

00:10:20.240 podcasters. They're coming after the streamers. They're coming after the people in new media.

00:10:24.380 They're coming after the people who are on the cutting edge of, of broadcast media as TV

00:10:31.380 goes. The way of radio is that that kind of declines. There's, they still have some power,

00:10:36.200 but it's on the decline. The New York times, the Washington post coordinating, obviously together

00:10:41.440 on the basically the same story coming out the exact same day, going after the exact same people.

00:10:47.140 They're trying to suppress the conservatives. But then the question is, why are they doing it

00:10:51.500 with, with four or five days to go until the election? What's the point of that? You're not

00:10:56.640 going to, YouTube's not going to take us down three days before the election. I don't think.

00:11:01.160 I think this is a play for the future. I think the New York times and the Washington post are concerned

00:11:07.200 that Trump is going to win. I have it on good authority that people in the upper echelons of the

00:11:14.460 Democrat establishment think that Trump is going to win. And so they are trying to one point to people

00:11:19.740 who they can blame. They're going to blame me. They're going to blame Tim Poole. They're going

00:11:23.500 to blame Steve Dace. They're going to, they're going to blame all these people here, Ben Shapiro.

00:11:28.420 They want to, they want to blame people for it. And they want to suppress the conservatives in the

00:11:33.280 future. Now, if it is a squeaker and Kamala somehow pulls it out, or if the count goes Kamala's way

00:11:38.680 in any case, then this is going to be an opportunity to say, oh, look how close it was. We can't let it

00:11:43.480 get that close again. We need to cut off the ad revenue to the conservative broadcasters who are

00:11:47.780 moving the needle that that'll kill the conservative media, the future of the conservative media. 1.00

00:11:52.500 And then that'll let Democrats win elections again. That's what this is all about without

00:11:57.000 question. But there is something hopeful here, which is that I think the way you get these articles

00:12:04.560 is because the liberal establishment thinks that Trump very well will win. Now, speaking of election

00:12:11.040 falsehoods, I don't think it's us. It's not, it's not the people in this picture spreading the

00:12:14.560 election falsehoods. It's the establishment media itself. There's a story from the New York Post

00:12:19.640 citing a local ABC affiliate, WNEP, ABC 16, which ran a chyron

00:12:27.420 saying that Kamala Harris beat Donald Trump, 52 to 47. This was really bizarre. Reporting 100%,

00:12:37.060 Democrat Kamala Harris, 52%. How many votes? 3,293,712 to Donald Trump's 47%, 2,997,793. What?

00:12:49.160 The election hasn't happened yet. Oh, well, according to the New York Post, ABC mistakenly

00:12:57.120 aired the election results declaring Harris the winner of this, the key state of Pennsylvania.

00:13:02.140 Pennsylvania. And, but this was just a mistake. They were just testing their system.

00:13:10.720 WNEP said the results came up on the screen in error. They were randomly generated as part of a

00:13:15.080 test. Okay. They shouldn't have appeared on screen. Whoopsie daisy, no big deal.

00:13:21.800 That's the fear, guys. The fear is that the results are going to be randomly generated.

00:13:26.980 I can believe the excuse that they're working on their graphics packages,

00:13:30.260 and I can believe the excuse that producers are going to misfire. What worries me and other people

00:13:35.700 is that the results are going to be randomly generated and that they're not going to reflect

00:13:40.580 reality. If you really wanted to downplay any fears of rigging, many more people expect

00:13:49.620 any rigging that could occur to be rigging in favor of the Democrats against the Republicans.

00:13:55.340 Then why not throw up the test graphic and say Trump wins?

00:13:59.940 That would still not assuage a lot of people's fears because people don't believe in the

00:14:05.520 establishment media anymore. They don't have credibility anymore. But

00:14:08.000 it would be better than throwing up a graphic of randomly generated numbers in the crucial swing

00:14:14.100 state to say that Kamala Harris won and then say, oh, whoopsie daisy, never mind. But believe us on

00:14:18.860 Tuesday. No, four days from now, we'll have it all tucked away. This is why the Washington Post is

00:14:27.820 not endorsing this election. This is why Jeff Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, recognizes

00:14:32.560 that the WAPO, that the whole establishment media are facing a crisis.

00:14:37.580 There's so much more to say. First, though, go to supremecoup.com slash Knowles. The radical left

00:14:42.980 is plotting a Supreme Court coup. They're not even trying to hide it anymore. These progressive

00:14:46.980 ideologues want to eliminate the court's conservative majority by packing it with their

00:14:50.280 own handpicked justices. It's not court reform. It's a blatant power grab to get the outcomes they

00:14:54.880 want. Here's the frightening part. If one party controls the House, Senate, and presidency come

00:14:59.260 January, they could restructure the court overnight. With a simple majority vote and a president's

00:15:03.280 signature, their plan becomes reality. But there is hope. First, Liberty is leading the charge to

00:15:07.440 protect the Supreme Court from this radical plan. They're fighting to preserve the legitimacy of the

00:15:10.940 court and the separation of powers that safeguards our freedom. Don't let them Venezuela your 1.00

00:15:14.700 United States. Go to supremecoup.com slash Knowles. That is supremecoup.com slash K-N-O-W-L-E-S 0.99

00:15:24.020 to learn how you can help stop the left's takeover of the Supreme Court. The future is in your hands.

00:15:30.580 Right now, go to supremecoup.com slash Knowles. This is one of the biggest issues at stake in this

00:15:37.900 election. Supremecoup.com slash Knowles. Jeff Bezos is defending the Washington Post's decision not to

00:15:45.660 endorse a candidate in this campaign. He wrote an op-ed. He pointed out that Americans no longer

00:15:50.540 believe the media. He said, in the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists

00:15:54.960 in the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. This year's Gallup

00:15:59.600 poll, we managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are

00:16:04.800 doing is clearly not working. I challenge you to find one instance in the 11 years, this is Bezos

00:16:11.600 writing, the 11 years in which he's owned the Washington Post, where I have prevailed upon anyone

00:16:16.260 at the Post to favor my own interests. It has not happened. While I do not and will not push my

00:16:21.520 personal interests, I will not allow this paper to stay on autopilot and fade into irrelevance,

00:16:26.040 overtaken by unresearched podcasts and social media barbs, but not without a fight, it's too important.

00:16:29.740 So you got two big plays here from the establishment media within days of each other,

00:16:36.200 and they seem to be on opposite ends of things. On the one hand, you have Bezos saying,

00:16:41.100 we want to earn back the respect of readers, so we're not going to endorse Kamala Harris. We're

00:16:44.700 not going to endorse anyone because you don't trust us anyway. On the other hand, you have the

00:16:49.260 Washington Post, that very same paper, and the New York Times saying, YouTube needs to censor

00:16:55.820 conservatives. We need to take down these conservative podcasts. On the one hand, he

00:16:59.840 seems like he's trying to be nonpartisan. On the other, the very same paper seems hyperpartisan.

00:17:04.300 How do you reconcile the two? Easily. It's that headline from the Washington Post.

00:17:10.740 In the podcast election, dot, dot, dot. In the podcast election. Don't forget, of all the

00:17:17.820 conservatives they're trying to take down in the New York Times, there's one big face missing. It's

00:17:22.680 the biggest podcaster in the world. That's Joe Rogan. Trump's appearance on Rogan has garnered

00:17:28.280 tens of millions of views. J.D. Vance went on Rogan yesterday. We'll get to it.

00:17:33.520 This is the podcast election. The podcasts are much, much, much more influential than the cable

00:17:39.960 news shows in this election. This is the first time that's ever been true. So Bezos, in his op-ed

00:17:45.460 about defending the integrity of the Washington Post, he says, we in the establishment media,

00:17:50.240 not just cable news, but newspapers, are having our lunch eaten by the podcasters,

00:17:54.680 by the streamers, by the digital platforms. And we need to stop that. We hate those guys.

00:18:00.720 We want to control the narrative still. So on the one hand, we're going to try not to seem so

00:18:06.880 hyperpartisan. On the other, we're going to try to kill off all the competition. 0.99

00:18:10.160 And who's the competition? Right here. The New York Times put all of our pictures up 0.98

00:18:13.640 right in the header of their article. Now, some in the establishment media don't get the message.

00:18:21.200 So you got CNN's Abby Phillip is arguing with Jeff Bezos. She says, no, no, no. The problem is not that

00:18:29.040 people don't trust the media, so the media have to react to that. The media need to double down in

00:18:33.320 their partisan attacks. She says, the reason people don't trust the media is because of the politicians.

00:18:38.520 I want to recognize that for all the flaws of the mainstream media, and we have a lot of them,

00:18:43.620 it's not just the media's fault that trust has been declining for decades. It's also

00:18:47.080 decades of attacks by politicians. That is the main issue, is that like,

00:18:51.280 I mean, yeah, it could be that the Washington Post is endorsing candidates, or it could be

00:18:55.580 that there are millions of voters who believe lying politicians who tell them lies,

00:19:01.740 knowing that they are. I mean, that could be the problem too.

00:19:05.660 This is Principal Skinner on The Simpsons.

00:19:07.400 Hmm. Is it possible that I'm out of touch? No, no. It is the children who must be wrong.

00:19:14.140 No, no. It's not. We haven't done anything to destroy our credibility. It's not our fault

00:19:19.720 that people don't trust us. No, no, no. It's Trump's fault. It's the politicians' fault. Who

00:19:24.480 are the politicians? The politicians are the representatives of the people.

00:19:31.520 And specifically the politicians that they're talking about here, I think they're talking about

00:19:38.220 Donald Trump. They're talking about the more populist politicians. Those are especially the

00:19:42.820 representatives of the people. They're not the representatives of the establishment that's

00:19:47.200 removed from the people. They're the choices of the people. So what CNN is saying here,

00:19:52.060 Stelter and that woman, what they're saying is, no, no, no. The reason that people don't trust us

00:19:58.880 anymore, the fault for that lies with the people, not with us. It's their fault that they're so

00:20:04.140 stupid and gullible and angry. They're garbage, these people. It's you garbage people. Read our 1.00

00:20:08.980 newspaper, you garbage people. Trust us. I don't think so. So this is how you get someone like 1.00

00:20:15.760 Rob Reiner here. I love this. Rob Meathead from All in the Family. He posts,

00:20:21.720 the Washington Post editorial board is a disgrace for the newspaper that exposed the Pentagon papers

00:20:26.020 and the Watergate scandal to not take a position and endorse a candidate in the most consequential

00:20:30.200 presidential election in 165 years is reprehensible. I love this. He's citing the Nixon

00:20:34.840 example. He's saying, look, the Washington Post led the way in getting rid of Richard Nixon.

00:20:41.000 But I don't know. I think the whole Watergate scandal is going to be considered rather differently

00:20:46.240 by the light of history than it was at the time. Because when I look at the Watergate scandal,

00:20:51.500 first of all, pales in comparison to anything we saw from Barack Obama or

00:20:54.840 Joe Biden in recent years. Really, it was just that some campaign operatives didn't tape a door

00:21:00.600 correctly for the sort of dirty tricks that every campaign has played for just about all of history.

00:21:07.000 But what it looks like to me is you had Richard Nixon, one of the most popularly

00:21:11.640 reelected presidents ever in American history. You had Richard Nixon ousted by a deep state coup

00:21:18.480 led by the Washington Post, which was the propaganda arm for the deep state.

00:21:23.100 It was a federal agent who was leaking this information.

00:21:28.660 And then the Washington Post ran with it as the arm of that Washington establishment that had hated

00:21:33.020 Richard Nixon for decades because Richard Nixon routed out commies in the State Department,

00:21:37.160 notably Alger Hiss, an actual card-carrying communist who was instrumental in the founding of

00:21:42.380 the UN and in crafting a lot of American policy. That's what it looks like to me.

00:21:47.100 It says, can you imagine that the organization, the newspaper that led a deep state coup to oust

00:21:53.380 one of the most popular presidents in American history, can you imagine that they might do

00:21:57.340 something underhanded? Yeah, wow, shocking to me, isn't it? There's so much more to say.

00:22:01.480 First, though, go to lumen.me, use code Knowles. It is tough to prioritize your health, especially

00:22:06.120 if you're not sure where to start. However, it's not just about making a decision.

00:22:09.720 It's about making a commitment to a better quality of life. That is why I love lumen.

00:22:15.040 Lumen is the world's first handheld metabolic coach. It is a device that measures your metabolism

00:22:19.740 through your breath. All you got to do is breathe into your lumen. First thing in the morning,

00:22:23.880 you will know what's going on with your metabolism, whether you're burning mostly fats or carbs.

00:22:27.700 For me, I need things to be simple, okay? If I'm going to take care of my health,

00:22:30.920 it's got to be real simple. That's what I love about lumen. It makes it simple. You wake up,

00:22:35.720 you breathe into it, and you get all this information on your phone. You don't need to

00:22:39.700 go hire a nutritionist. You don't need to go hire your trainer to tell you about this,

00:22:43.080 that, and the other thing. Lumen does all of it for you, crafts a plan for the day.

00:22:48.700 If you want to take the next step in improving your health, I strongly recommend lumen.me

00:22:54.220 slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S. It's got the Knowles stamp of approval, and if you use that code,

00:22:59.040 you will get 15% off your lumen. Lumen, L-U-M-E-N dot M-E. Use code Knowles for 15%

00:23:06.140 off your purchase. Thank you, Lumen, for sponsoring this episode.

00:23:10.360 My favorite comment yesterday is from Hymea523, who says, vote so your husband can't afford

00:23:14.820 anything so you can complain when he doesn't buy you enough. Yes, that's the point of the Julia

00:23:18.480 Roberts Democrat ad. J.D. Vance does Joe Rogan. J.D. has come out. It's a three and a half hour

00:23:26.900 interview. I'm not going to get to all of it. It's worth listening to J.D. The big takeaways are that

00:23:31.180 J.D. sounds really, really intelligent. He sounds really, really educated. He sounds really

00:23:36.160 in command of his facts. He is a normal guy. The libs tried to make him weird. That was the

00:23:41.900 word they tried to stick to him. That fell apart. They dropped that attack because, ironically,

00:23:48.260 when you hear this guy talk, he sounds so normal. He sounds so much more normal than other politicians,

00:23:54.780 certainly compared to Tim Walz or Kamala Harris. So they ended up dropping that attack,

00:23:58.820 and this, I think, was really the final nail in that coffin. Why did J.D. go on Rogan? Because

00:24:03.440 the Rogan interview was so good for Trump, and it's going to be really good for Vance,

00:24:08.340 and it's going to be good for the Trump-Vance ticket. The only clip I want to pull out is this

00:24:12.960 bit where Joe and Vance are talking about the transgender ideology, which is a huge political

00:24:19.420 winner for Republicans. It flipped Virginia red for Glenn Youngkin. It helped reelect Ron DeSantis in

00:24:24.640 Florida by an even wider margin than he would have otherwise, and it's just a winner. People who

00:24:29.140 disagree on all sorts of things—abortion, bioethics, marriage, sexual revolution—people

00:24:36.860 who are all across the political spectrum in America can agree it is wrong to castrate little

00:24:42.220 kids. We're not even talking about transgender ideology for adults. My views on that are probably

00:24:48.440 different than a lot of liberals' views on that, but we pretty much can all agree it is wrong to

00:24:53.340 castrate kids. And so they hammered this issue. And there are even people who wave the rainbow flag.

00:24:58.520 There are even LGBT-identifying people who say, this transing the kids stuff is really awful.

00:25:03.820 And J.D. Vance made a comment that made waves because it seems so out of step for many Republican

00:25:10.640 politicians. Some were calling it a contradiction in terms. I think it's politically pretty smart,

00:25:14.800 though, and I think it's incisive and correct.

00:25:17.540 I think that, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if me and Trump won just the normal gay guy vote. 0.96

00:25:25.260 Because, again, they just wanted to be left the hell alone, and now you have all this crazy stuff

00:25:29.720 on top of it that they're like, no, no, no, we didn't want to give pharmaceutical products to

00:25:34.140 nine-year-olds who are transitioning their genders. We just wanted to be left the hell alone. 1.00

00:25:38.100 That phrase, the normal gay guy vote, that's the phrase that is resonating and that some people 0.92

00:25:45.620 are going to take issue with. Because people are going to say, well, that's a contradiction in

00:25:49.520 terms. No knock on our friends who are a little light in the loafers, but that's not normal,

00:25:53.800 right? That's an abnormal kind of behavior. It's not normal by ideal standards. It's not normal

00:25:59.660 even by behavioral standards. It's abnormal. So what's the normal gay guy vote? 1.00

00:26:05.280 You know what it is. You know what the normal gay guy vote is. I'm from New York. I went to the most 0.93

00:26:12.580 homosexual university in the world. I lived in Los Angeles, worked around show business. I have

00:26:18.240 known a disproportionate number of people who are a little eccentric in their behaviors and desires.

00:26:25.140 You know what he's talking about here. He's talking about something that is, by the way,

00:26:31.500 not even just rewinding the clock 10 or 15 years. He's talking about a perennial fact.

00:26:39.320 I'm about as traditionalist as they come. However, it is simply a fact that throughout all of history,

00:26:45.640 certainly going back to ancient Athens, there have been fellows who, you know, engage in some

00:26:50.360 aberrant behavior. That's just been the case. And there have always been kind of Paul Lind characters

00:26:56.460 who, you know, confirmed bachelors, don't really want to get married. You don't really ask too much

00:27:01.040 about it. That's existed. You know, it's a fallen world. There are all sorts of eccentric things that

00:27:08.640 take place. And that was broadly, you know, kind of understood. Even when there were laws against that

00:27:17.500 kind of behavior, they were very rarely enforced. They really only existed as a matter of setting

00:27:23.100 standards and setting norms. But in the West, you know, we're not, we're not the people who go up

00:27:29.220 and, you know, they say, are you, are you a little light in the loafers or are we going to toss you

00:27:32.760 off a rooftop? That's not, they do that in other cultures, but we don't really, we've never really

00:27:36.340 done that in the West. When he says, look, there's some people who they just want to, they want to do

00:27:42.420 what they do and be left alone. They don't want to parade it in the street. They don't want to change

00:27:45.900 the laws. They don't want to pretend that marriage is something different than it is. They just,

00:27:48.900 they just kind of want to be left alone and not bothered. And that's existed for a long time.

00:27:55.020 And those, and you know, okay, that's, this is the world. All right. That's how it's been for,

00:27:59.400 for ever. That's different than militant activists who want to ram these kinds of crazy ideologies

00:28:07.300 down, down your kids' throats in elementary school. Okay. That's very different. And the guys who just

00:28:13.380 are kind of, you know, they, they want to, they want to do their own thing. It's a little different

00:28:17.960 than other people do, but they don't, they're not trying to make an issue about it. They just

00:28:21.080 want to do their own thing. I think JD's right. I think those guys are going to vote for Trump.

00:28:25.840 By and large, I think they're going to vote for Trump. The militant activists who want to

00:28:30.020 redefine reality, those people are going to vote for Kamala. The more normal guys, they're going to

00:28:35.420 vote for Trump. No question. Now the Trump Vance ticket is getting all sorts of support, not just from

00:28:41.880 the so-called normal gay guys, but also from prominent Democrats, not just Bobby Kennedy and Tulsi,

00:28:46.440 but also Bill Clinton. I don't think it's right to say that people have to vote for Donald Trump

00:28:55.420 because the economy was better there. I don't believe that. I don't think, now listen here,

00:29:01.580 listen here, folks. You're going to hear a lot of people tell you that the economy was a lot better

00:29:06.880 under Donald Trump and it was, it was a lot better. Okay. But you don't have to vote for Trump just

00:29:14.780 because your inflation was way down and wages were rising for the first time in 40 years. And

00:29:20.740 because things were just so great and we were so rich and it was awesome, man, it was awesome. But

00:29:24.700 you don't, I do not believe you have to vote for Trump just because of how awesome it was when he

00:29:30.160 was president. Feel your pain. Brutal. Brutal for Kamala. I don't think that Bill Clinton is

00:29:39.080 intentionally undermining Kamala Harris here, but he is undermining her. I think, I think Joe Biden

00:29:43.860 is intentionally undermining Kamala Harris because he hates her and she took his job and she launched 0.96

00:29:47.780 her presidential campaign calling him a racist. I think she, he truly hates that woman and wants 0.91

00:29:51.640 her to lose. Bill Clinton, I think, wants Kamala to win because I think he's trying to get an 0.97

00:29:55.160 ambassadorship for his daughter, Chelsea. That's at least the scuttlebutt in the DC reporting.

00:30:00.600 So I think he's trying to help her, but, but Bill Clinton recognizes, you know, voters aren't stupid. 1.00

00:30:05.340 Kamala thinks voters are stupid. Joe Biden, to some degree, thinks voters are stupid. 1.00

00:30:09.540 Bill Clinton respects voters. You got to give him that. He might lie to your face, but he thinks 1.00

00:30:14.320 you're relatively clever. So he's going to try to do a good job lying. And, and if he can, he's going

00:30:18.540 to try to work with the facts to, to spin them in such a way that they seem plausible. Bill Clinton

00:30:24.680 respects voters and he knows that voters know that the economy is horrible right now. That eggs are much

00:30:32.720 more expensive than they used to be. That everything is 22 and a half to maybe 30% more expensive than

00:30:38.180 it was when Joe Biden took office. And they know that Kamala is promising exactly the same policy.

00:30:42.600 She said she wouldn't have differed from Biden in any way. So he knows he's not going to say,

00:30:47.300 no, the economy has been awesome under Biden and Harris. And she's so good. No, he, he say,

00:30:51.800 he's going to say, look, yeah, the economy is terrible. And it was way better under Trump, but

00:30:55.480 just think about how great abortion is or whatever, whatever it is that Kamala can offer that,

00:31:01.200 that Trump cannot. He's like, forget about the economy. It's kind of ironic too, because the

00:31:06.040 motto of his 92 campaign was it's the economy stupid. That was James Carville's line, one of 0.99

00:31:11.240 his top advisors. And yet now Bill Clinton, the only thing he can run it is it's not the economy

00:31:18.500 stupid. It is still the economy stupid, but please think about something else. Now, speaking of people 1.00

00:31:25.740 who are a little, who are not, who do not respect voters quite as much and who are also making weak

00:31:31.360 arguments for Kamala Harris, the Avengers have assembled the Avengers. I think I watched one of

00:31:37.620 those movies. I can't, I don't like the superhero movies, but, uh, and I really don't like those with

00:31:42.160 like Mark Ruffalo and all these insufferable libs, but they just came out and they, they put together

00:31:47.760 their very best version of a, of a commercial for Kamala. How about we start with, uh, what our

00:31:54.360 voting plans are going to be, who we're going to bring to the polls with us, that sort of thing.

00:31:58.300 I think Kamala Harris needs a catchphrase. How about I'm down with democracy? It's just clean, 1.00

00:32:04.620 it's simple. Okay. I like that. It's hard to argue with that. Kamala Harris down with democracy. 0.96

00:32:10.020 Oh yeah. I'm Kamala Harris and I say down with democracy. I don't know if that sounds the way

00:32:15.920 we want it to sound though. I think we just need, can we get some production though?

00:32:19.640 Jarvis? My name's not Jarvis, but whatever. Oh yeah. Oh yeah. That's right. Hmm. Down with

00:32:25.720 democracy. Down with democracy. Is that what we mean though? Yeah, together we're going to tear

00:32:30.680 down democracy. Will you stop playing heroic music under yourselves? I'm Kamala Harris and I am down

00:32:38.440 with democracy. Did I sound enough like her on that one? That was great. How many Golden Globes have

00:32:43.900 you been nominated for? I'm just curious. Yes. All right. That was awesome.

00:32:54.300 It's a little weak. It's a little weak, right? These guys, they want to do an ad for Kamala

00:32:57.940 Harris. They won't even all get in the same room. I think most, if not all of them live in LA. It's

00:33:02.060 not like they're that far from each other, but they do it as a Zoom thing. So it's a little weak sauce.

00:33:06.340 And then, but what's the bit? The bit is they're saying I'm down with democracy. We'll shorten it to

00:33:10.940 down with democracy. Oh, ha ha. That makes it sound like Kamala hates democracy. That she's 1.00

00:33:15.240 the undermining of democracy. Ha ha ha. Vote for Kamala anyway. In jokes, there is often a little

00:33:22.000 kernel of truth. The reason this joke works is that Kamala's candidacy, Kamala's nomination does

00:33:30.140 in fact represent an undermining of democracy because no one voted for her. All the Democrats voted for

00:33:36.640 Biden. And then they just booted Biden out. The party elites booted Biden out and replaced him

00:33:41.600 without any voting with Kamala. So the joke is true. If you vote for Kamala, you are actively

00:33:50.800 undermining democracy. Ha ha ha. Isn't that funny? Anyway, because this is what the Democrats are

00:33:56.740 saying. The real Democrat argument going all the way back up to the New York Times trying to kick

00:34:02.440 your boy and other conservatives off of YouTube and the Washington Post trying to do exactly the

00:34:07.800 same thing. And the Harris campaign, the Democrats changing the election rules in some ways illegally

00:34:15.040 in 2020. The point of all of it, if you, if you, if you got a couple of drinks in them and had them

00:34:20.660 be really candid with you, they would say, well, look, sure, this is kind of undemocratic what we're

00:34:25.360 doing. Replacing our nominee, kicking out the guy that everyone voted for and replacing this woman, 0.99

00:34:30.140 replacing him with this woman that no one voted for. But, but if we want to save democracy,

00:34:35.340 we have to undermine democracy right now. That's what they're saying. To save democracy,

00:34:39.760 we have to imprison Donald Trump. To save democracy, we have to keep people from even being able to vote

00:34:45.080 for Donald Trump by kicking him off the ballot. To save democracy, we need to kick the conservatives

00:34:48.580 off YouTube. To save democracy, we need to undermine democracy. That's what, that's their real

00:34:53.060 argument here. And it's a ridiculous argument. In this case, there's no way a Kamala Harris 0.99

00:35:00.600 presidency would strengthen democracy. But, but that is their argument. Because ultimately, by the

00:35:08.360 way, what they really mean by democracy is not allowing the people to have a say. They're blaming

00:35:12.300 the people for not believing the mainstream media. That's the people's fault. Everything's the people's

00:35:15.960 fault. What they mean is liberalism. And when there's a disagreement between the people and

00:35:19.580 liberalism, they're going to pick liberalism every time. Our box office hit, Am I Racist,

00:35:24.880 is streaming exclusively on Daily Wire. Plus, right now, get 47% off with a new membership with

00:35:28.860 code FIGHT. Want to know how Matt Walsh pulled it off? Well, he breaks it all down with exclusive

00:35:33.920 bonus content, taking you behind the scenes on the greatest troll against the libs in history.

00:35:39.060 Plus, there's a deleted Johnny the Walrus scene that Matt did not show in theaters. The only way to

00:35:43.340 see it is on Daily Wire. Plus, get 47% off now, dailywire.com slash subscribe, code FIGHT.

00:35:49.820 Finally, finally, I've arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you

00:35:52.660 in the mailbag. Our mailbag is sponsored by Pure Talk. Go to puretalk.com slash Knowles,

00:35:57.100 Canada W-L-E-S today. Switch to a qualifying plan. Get one year free of Daily Wire Plus Insider.

00:36:02.040 Take it away.

00:36:03.440 Hi, Michael. Thank you so much for all that you do. Love this show. So I'll make this quick. I am 30.

00:36:10.440 I am currently at a crossroads in my life. I have been pursuing a career. However, it doesn't hold

00:36:17.940 the significance that I've thought it would because obviously I want to get married. I want to have

00:36:23.800 children. That's very important to me. But I'm single and I'm trying to meet someone and I'm

00:36:28.600 trying to make that the priority in my life. So my question to you, is it wrong to almost forsake

00:36:35.000 the career that my family's been supporting me in and helping me financially to pursue

00:36:42.580 a family? Please let me know your thoughts. Thank you so much. God bless.

00:36:49.240 No, it's not wrong. It's right. Obviously, you know that answer. The way you're asking me,

00:36:53.860 you're just asking me to affirm that and I agree with you. You say, well, my family has been

00:36:59.320 supporting me in this career. They've been giving me money even to help support my career. Okay.

00:37:04.420 Why have they been doing that? What's the purpose of the career? What's the point of the career?

00:37:09.180 And what's the point of all your work toward the career? And what's the point of your family's

00:37:12.540 support of your work toward the career? The point is your happiness. The point is your flourishing.

00:37:18.740 The point is you're living a good life. And what you're saying is, I've now realized that my career

00:37:25.260 career is not the be all and end all. The career is not in itself conducing toward giving me a good

00:37:31.040 life. The career is not making me happy. Family is much more likely to make me happy. And so I'd like

00:37:39.620 to maybe work a little bit less and maybe not quite make partner at the big firm, but also not work 80

00:37:46.180 hours a week so that I have time to go on a date and find a husband and get married and have kids.

00:37:50.540 And that's going to make me happier. Do that. That's the point. The only reason to have even

00:37:57.920 pursued the career in the first place is as an instrument in the furtherance of your flourishing

00:38:05.160 and your happiness. If it's not achieving that, as it will not in and of itself, almost certainly,

00:38:13.760 then you got to change course a little bit. It's the C.S. Lewis point that the man who's going

00:38:20.340 down the wrong road and then stops and turns around and goes back the other direction is more

00:38:26.760 progressive than the man who just keeps moving forward and forward forever. Because progress

00:38:32.420 is dependent upon some end that you're seeking. Obviously. If you said, wow, I'm just totally

00:38:40.780 flourishing my career. I really have no interest in marriage or children. I'm the unicorn. I'm the rare

00:38:45.940 person who really, and there are people like that, and marriage is not for everyone. Kids are not for

00:38:49.340 everyone. The religious life is not for everyone. But if you're that rare person, okay. But for most

00:38:56.180 people, they're going to come to the conclusion you've come to. And then the question is, are they

00:39:00.280 going to have the wisdom and the courage to follow that insight and maybe give up a little bit of the

00:39:07.060 career and pursue what will make them happy or not? Will they stubbornly and stupidly go down the 0.98

00:39:11.980 path that's making them unhappy? Next question. Hi, Michael. You mentioned that you're close friends 0.99

00:39:17.820 with someone who is liberal, and I'm curious how you manage that dynamic. My husband and I have lost

00:39:23.580 quite a few friends over the past year after openly sharing our conservative views, which has made me

00:39:29.580 hesitant to form new connections, especially with people who may hold more liberal or far-left

00:39:35.760 beliefs. What advice would you offer for building and maintaining friendships with liberals? I'd love

00:39:41.600 to hear your thoughts on how you navigate those differences. By the way, I hope you're still

00:39:46.160 enjoying the Trump Perfectation Era t-shirt I made and gave you at CPAC. Looking forward to your response.

00:39:52.560 Thanks so much, Michael. Thank you for the marvelous t-shirt. That was absolutely wonderful.

00:39:57.440 I vividly recall you were giving it to me at CPAC. I am friends with liberals. I'm from New York. I went

00:40:04.880 to a very liberal university. I lived in LA. I am friends with liberals, but I have lost friends.

00:40:09.520 I've lost a number of friends, especially as I've gotten a little bit more of a public profile,

00:40:15.040 as the show's done well and the books have done well. My views haven't changed all that much. I've

00:40:20.000 become more conservative. My views have deepened and developed, but they haven't really fundamentally

00:40:25.040 changed all that much. So I don't think it's the development of my views. I think it's the

00:40:30.160 undeniability for some of my liberal friends to say, oh, gosh, he's really out there. He's really

00:40:38.620 saying that thing on YouTube or TV or something. I really, and they will end a friendship sometimes.

00:40:44.800 I've lost friends. I still have plenty of liberal friends, but I've lost a number of liberal friends.

00:40:50.260 If you lose friends over politics, it will be the liberals ending the friendship.

00:40:57.380 999 times out of a thousand. If friendships are to be lost over politics, it will be the liberals

00:41:03.240 ending the friendship with the Republicans, with the conservatives. Conservatives don't really do that.

00:41:10.000 If you meet people who never interact with anyone of the opposite political persuasion,

00:41:15.100 it is most likely to be liberals who don't know Republicans, who don't spend any time with

00:41:20.260 Republicans or conservatives. It will be the liberals who cannot tolerate being friends with

00:41:24.220 conservatives rather than the conservatives not being tolerating the liberals. 999 times out of

00:41:30.100 a thousand. So what can you do? You can be winsome. You can, you know, have some humor. You can,

00:41:35.720 you know, be tolerant to a reasonable degree. You can agree to disagree on certain things. You can

00:41:43.020 focus on whatever. But at a certain point, if the liberals don't want to be friends with you,

00:41:47.040 there's nothing you can say. You don't need to beg for their friendship. You don't need to plead

00:41:50.300 with them or grovel. If they don't want to be your friend, then okay, they don't have to be your

00:41:53.220 friend. But most of the time, the sad fact is the choice will not be yours whether or not to end

00:42:00.120 that friendship. It'll, it'll be the liberals. It's a pity. It wasn't always totally like that,

00:42:04.320 but it is today. Next question.

00:42:07.000 When I was attending grad school, my composition professor, I'm a music student at this time,

00:42:11.000 turned to the class and said, if you're looking for an objective way to measure beauty,

00:42:15.200 it's whatever unifies opposites successfully. When I heard this, I rejected it because it

00:42:20.180 sounded like a bunch of Hegelian dialectics to me, which is just neo-Marxism. But ever since then,

00:42:24.620 I've come to learn that he was actually right. I'm still a musician. I'm a full-time musician.

00:42:29.220 Every piece of art that I consume operates dialectically. And I think Andrew Klavan understands

00:42:33.400 that fiction operates dialectically. I think the mistake that leftists make is that they try to force

00:42:39.840 dialectical values on top of the real world and morality and politics and history. And I think

00:42:45.960 conservatives tend to shy away from the arts and they tend to shy away from dialectics and reject it

00:42:51.980 completely. I think that conservatives should recognize that art operates dialectically and art

00:42:57.900 is basically something false, but nevertheless says something true if it's good. What are your thoughts?

00:43:04.880 I respect that insight. I respect that you have had that insight. I don't really agree with any of

00:43:11.920 that. I don't. Even, you know, dis and Hegel. Hegel's difficult to read and understand. But, you know,

00:43:19.120 Hegel is not just doing Marx or neo-Marxism or whatever. Hegel comes before Marx. And, but even that,

00:43:26.760 I don't, you know, I don't think it's, the art is necessarily dialectic or reconciling opposites.

00:43:31.620 I think, uh, you asked about beauty. What is beauty? I think I go with Thomas Aquinas on most

00:43:37.660 things. Uh, beauty is that which pleases when seen and not just seen meaning noticed with the eyes,

00:43:44.480 but, but seen, you know, as in, uh, beheld in the mind. Um, that beauty is that which pleases when

00:43:51.700 seen. And there's some debate over whether or not beauty is a transcendental like, um, you know,

00:43:57.060 goodness or truth or, but, but that's it. Beauty is that which pleases when seen. And, uh, I think

00:44:03.400 that that's a lot simpler than, uh, you know, there, there can be some beauty in, uh, reconciling

00:44:10.860 apparent opposites, not real opposites, but apparent opposites like mercy and justice within God. Both

00:44:16.980 God has both perfect mercy and perfect justice. Those are from our, uh, mere, mere mortal, uh,

00:44:22.180 standpoint, uh, you know, apparent opposites, but the, you know, they're reconciled in God. Um,

00:44:28.280 but I think it's simpler than that. Beauty is that which pleases when seen. I can think of art that

00:44:33.940 does not seem dialectic to me, but, but I can't think, or rather I can think of beautiful things

00:44:39.800 that are not dialectical, you know, like a sunset or something or a beautiful waterfall or something

00:44:46.440 like that. But, um, but they all please when seen. Yeah, there's so much more I want to get to,

00:44:51.140 but we're gonna have to do in the member block. And I have my friend Dinesh D'Souza on. The rest

00:44:54.200 of the show continues now. You don't want to miss it. Go to dailywire.com. Use promo code

00:44:58.380 Knowles. Get two months free on all annual plans.

The Michael Knowles Show - November 01, 2024

Ep. 1608 - The New York Times Attacked Me In The Dumbest Way

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript