The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 932 - Whoever Biden Picks Groped Me

00:00:00.000 It's official. Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer has announced his retirement from the Supreme Court

00:00:04.980 and President Joe Biden has announced that he will not consider any nominee to replace him

00:00:10.480 who is not a black woman. Our process is going to be rigorous. I will select a nominee

00:00:17.720 worthy of Justice Breyer's legacy of excellence and decency. While I've been studying candidates'

00:00:23.880 backgrounds and writings, I've made no decision except one. The person I will nominate will be

00:00:32.060 someone with extraordinary qualifications, character, experience, and integrity. And that

00:00:38.220 person will be the first black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court.

00:00:43.640 It's long overdue in my view. I made that commitment during the campaign for president,

00:00:48.680 and I will keep that commitment. So there you have it. Joe Biden will be nominating

00:00:53.760 some black lady to the Supreme Court. He does not really care who the black lady is,

00:01:00.520 doesn't seem to have much of a preference. He is not suggesting any names, probably doesn't know

00:01:06.360 very many if we're being totally frank about it. But that doesn't matter to Biden. All he knows

00:01:11.300 is the sex and skin color of his nominee. And all I know is that whoever Biden picks

00:01:18.260 groped me at a party in 2003. I'm Michael Knowles. This is The Michael Knowles Show.

00:01:23.760 Welcome back to the show. My favorite comment yesterday from Robbie Hobbs, who says,

00:01:34.520 it will be sad if a liberal black woman is selected. No one will believe it because it was because of

00:01:39.700 merit. She herself probably will have doubts, as she should. It's pathetic that we're even at this

00:01:45.020 point selecting people based on race and sex. I was thinking that. You know, if you make it to the

00:01:49.980 Supreme Court, I guess you win. I guess that's fine. And people are willing to put up with a lot

00:01:55.460 of losing their dignity of debasement, of all sorts of struggle and suffering to get to that point.

00:02:04.360 But still, you think you're a woman. You've made it through your law school, through your career.

00:02:11.220 You've made it to the point where you are even in the running for the Supreme Court.

00:02:15.360 And then the president who nominates you says from the outset, you are a diversity hire.

00:02:21.460 It says from the outset, we are not doing this based on merit. We are doing this primarily based

00:02:26.740 on skin and sex. That's got to be kind of annoying. That's got to be kind of upsetting to think,

00:02:31.060 huh, I've worked very hard. I'm a talented person. And the only thing that the president sees about me

00:02:37.320 is my race and sex. That's one of the real downsides of identity politics.

00:02:42.580 Now, fortunately, I can tell you about a wonderful upside. That would be

00:02:46.440 GetUpside. I am giving you money. You're welcome. How do you get the money? You download the free

00:02:52.340 GetUpside app. You use the promo code Knolls. And then whenever you go to the gas pump,

00:02:58.920 you will get 25 cents per gallon cash back, except on your first fill up. Then you will get 50 cents

00:03:08.340 per gallon cash back. That's a lot of money. People who are driving a lot are making up to

00:03:13.640 $200 to $300 a year cash back. I'm just handing you $200 to $300. You want it? Yes or no? You want

00:03:20.400 to take it? I would, especially now with gas prices going through the roof. There is no catch.

00:03:25.560 There is only cash back. You get the cash back straight to your bank account or if you prefer

00:03:30.820 through PayPal or Amazon or an e-gift card to some other shop. Super easy. Just download the free

00:03:37.620 GetUpside app right now. Use promo code Knolls, K-N-W-L-E-S, to get up to 50 cents per gallon cash

00:03:45.500 back on your first tank. That is code Knolls. I would just like to say this off the bat. I guess

00:03:51.760 we are breaking news right here. Joe Biden's nominee groped me. Whoever she is, she groped me.

00:04:00.720 I was terrified. It was horrible. I was at a party and she groped me. It's traumatized me and it's

00:04:08.320 affected the course of my life. If you give me a little while longer, I'm sure I can muster up some

00:04:13.440 tears. I have exactly as much proof that that happened as Christine Blasey Ford had about Brett

00:04:21.600 Kavanaugh. So I just want that on the table now so the journalists can start digging into whoever

00:04:27.120 the nominee is. She totally groped me and it was terrible and she should not be on the Supreme Court.

00:04:36.960 Okay, we've established that. Okay, good. Should we Kavanaugh the nominee? Should,

00:04:45.180 and I'm not talking about boothing or any parties with Squee. I'm saying, should we smear the nominee,

00:04:50.340 dig through their personal life and come up with some cockamamie story to try to derail the Supreme

00:04:57.940 Court nominee? I don't think we should lie. The Democrats lied about Brett Kavanaugh. They just

00:05:04.060 completely lied. They made stuff up. They had zero evidence. We have no evidence that Christine

00:05:09.000 Blasey Ford ever met Brett Kavanaugh. And then when you move beyond Christine Blasey Ford to Julie

00:05:15.000 Swetnick, that was the client of Michael Avenatti, the criminal lawyer. I'm not saying he's a criminal

00:05:19.880 attorney. I'm saying he's a lawyer who also is a criminal. And the Democrats had on their news

00:05:24.020 networks constantly. Julie Swetnick, who said that Brett Kavanaugh ran some kind of gang raping

00:05:29.980 underground party. Obviously, there was no evidence whatsoever that she ever met Kavanaugh. That was

00:05:37.560 completely discredited. And with Christine Blasey Ford, she never mustered even one tiny shred of proof

00:05:42.620 that the two knew one another. Should we do that to the Democrats? No, I don't think we should lie.

00:05:48.680 I don't think that we should do something immoral for a good end. The good end being keeping a liberal

00:05:54.560 off the court. I don't think the ends justify the means. I'm not even saying we should make the process

00:06:02.880 a living hell for the nominee. But I do think we should make it a living purgatory. I do. I think

00:06:14.280 that we don't want to make it a living hell because we don't want to put ourselves in the position of

00:06:19.780 the devil. But we should make it pretty hot, pretty fiery, pretty difficult. We should make this a truly

00:06:27.680 miserable experience for whoever the nominee is. And the reason for that is, it is the only way to

00:06:34.540 make this process better. Democrats started it. Democrats are the reason that Supreme Court

00:06:39.280 nominations are so miserable. They started it with Robert Bork, Ronald Reagan's nominee for the

00:06:44.820 Supreme Court. They didn't like that Robert Bork disagreed with Roe versus Wade, meaning they didn't

00:06:50.600 like that Robert Bork was literate and that he could read the Constitution. So they hated that.

00:06:55.400 And Ted Kennedy stood on his soapbox and said that in Robert Bork's America, women would be dying of

00:07:01.560 back alley abortions. And he was a racist and a thisist and a thatist. And this hideous,

00:07:07.660 dishonest character attack on Bork and they get rid of Bork. Now we have a verb. It's called Borking

00:07:12.860 when you Bork a nominee. And it's only gotten worse since. The next time we really saw this happen

00:07:17.220 was Clarence Thomas. Clarence Thomas, who the Democrats attempted to lynch in the metaphorical sense.

00:07:24.920 Thomas called it a high tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deigned to think for

00:07:28.520 themselves. Then they did it again, obviously to Brett Kavanaugh, a little bit to Amy Barrett,

00:07:35.720 not as much. They've done this a lot. The only way to make this better is for it not to only be

00:07:41.240 one sided. If the Democrats can't get away with it, they might think twice the next time. It's like

00:07:45.880 the bully on the playground. The way to stop bullying on the playground is not to never fight

00:07:51.200 back against the bully. The way to stop bullying on the playground is to punch the bully right in

00:07:55.620 the nose. And when you punch the bully right in the nose, you know what happens? You get less

00:07:59.880 bullying. Well, it's the same thing here with Supreme Court nomination fights. When you push back a

00:08:08.380 little bit, when you give as good as you can get on digging through the past, on giving these people

00:08:17.420 to second degree, then you have a much better chance of a, of a more orderly and civilized

00:08:22.860 confirmation battle. There's one last point on the Biden announcement. Did you notice

00:08:29.420 the pronoun that he used? Can we play it again? Let's play the Joe Biden announcement again.

00:08:34.740 Our process is going to be rigorous. I will select a nominee worthy of Justice Breyer's legacy of

00:08:43.200 excellence and decency. While I've been studying candidates' backgrounds and writings, I've made no

00:08:49.440 decision except one. The person I will nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications,

00:08:57.560 character, experience, and integrity. And that person will be the first black woman ever nominated to

00:09:04.260 the Supreme Court. It's long overdue in my view. I made that commitment during the campaign for

00:09:10.880 president, and I will keep that commitment. Okay, so you heard that. That made perfect sense to me. And

00:09:16.160 that person will be the, the first black woman nominated to the court. But then when Joe Biden

00:09:21.580 tweeted this out, he changed the pronoun. So the person I nominate to replace Justice Breyer will be

00:09:27.020 someone with extraordinary qualifications, character, experience, and integrity. And they will be the first

00:09:32.160 black woman nominated to the Supreme Court. But you've already said it's a woman. So why don't you

00:09:38.520 use the singular female pronoun? Why are you using the plural pronoun? They will be the first woman.

00:09:44.900 Are their pronouns multiple? Or do they identify as having multiple people in their heads? And their name

00:09:51.160 will be Legion, for they are many. I don't think so. Why the discrepancy? If I had to venture a guess,

00:09:59.140 I would imagine that the person running social media maybe is a little bit younger than the person

00:10:04.040 writing the speech. If, if I had to venture a guess, because I've seen this with a lot of

00:10:08.700 millennials and zoomers, they will use they as a singular pronoun, not even the super politically

00:10:14.800 correct ones, but other people as well. Because, because we all feel these days that it is somehow

00:10:20.000 politically incorrect to use he as the gender neutral pronoun or, or she, just say they,

00:10:25.820 it's easier. That way it blurs the difference between men and women. This is one of the paradoxes

00:10:31.220 of leftist identity politics. On the one hand, everything is about identity. The most important

00:10:38.060 thing about you is that you are a woman, is that you are black, is that you are this, is that you are

00:10:43.760 that. But then on the other hand, nothing is about identity and there's no such thing as identity.

00:10:49.600 And men and women are exactly the same. And all the races are exactly the same. And all the

00:10:55.640 geographies are exactly the same. And all the countries are exactly the same. And all the

00:10:59.080 cultures are exactly the same. And there's no difference at all. It's this strange duality.

00:11:07.420 I mean, you really see it play out with the LGBT movement. On the one hand, we're born this way.

00:11:11.480 Sexual desire is immutable. There's no changing it. On the other hand, a man can be a woman.

00:11:15.520 And nothing's real. And there's 57 genders. And actually, there are infinite genders because

00:11:20.140 it's all just kind of fluid, man. Why? How does this make sense? The only reason that makes sense

00:11:26.520 is because your identity comes from God. Whether you're an atheist, whether you're an agnostic,

00:11:32.220 you might not believe that God exists, but he believes in you. God is I am. In the Bible,

00:11:38.480 when Moses says, who are you? He says, I am that I am. Christ says, I, before Abraham was,

00:11:44.240 I am. I'm being itself. So if you find your identity in God, if you say man is made in the

00:11:48.560 image of God, your identity makes sense. If not though, then you're left with this pathetic

00:11:53.500 question. Who am I? And you find all these subsidiary sort of identities. But the problem

00:11:58.320 is if God doesn't exist, then there's no meaning. If we're all just flesh puppets, if we're all just

00:12:02.700 kind of moving around and all of the things that we love and hope for and desire are just illusions,

00:12:07.120 then nothing really has meaning at all. And identity doesn't have meaning either. And if a man wants

00:12:11.300 to chop himself up to look more like a woman, then sure, I guess he really is a woman because

00:12:15.420 he doesn't, there's no meaning in his life. This is why, this is one of probably the most corrosive

00:12:20.600 aspects of identity politics is you, you, you have this huge swing from everything is excessively

00:12:28.160 about your, your identity characteristics, but, but nothing means anything either. And we're all just

00:12:34.340 kind of babbling into the chaos. Now, if Senator Mazie Hirono, speaking of babbling and chaos,

00:12:43.460 if Senator Mazie Hirono is to be believed Democrat Senator from Hawaii, we can expect a very bad

00:12:51.280 nominee for the Supreme Court. We have a number of really highly qualified black women, and I very

00:12:58.520 much support President Biden's decision to put a black woman on the court high time about time.

00:13:06.580 What I'm looking for is a justice who can be fair and impartial and who does not have an ideological

00:13:12.980 ax to grind, which is what we saw as far as I'm concerned in President Trump's nominees,

00:13:19.560 including to the Supreme Court. So yes, I am expecting a fight, but there you have it. And I'm

00:13:27.700 looking for someone who's going to be not only highly qualified as all of the people that you

00:13:32.020 already talked about are, but who really brings to the, the judiciary, the kind of diversity that I'd

00:13:40.520 like that someone who will consider the impact, the effects of whatever decision making is on people

00:13:49.780 in our country so that they're not making decisions just based on which I would like them to base it on

00:13:54.520 law, which would be nice and precedent and who are not eagerly trying to get rid of decades of

00:14:01.480 precedent that would protect a woman's right to choose, for example, and voting rights, et cetera.

00:14:05.540 But I'd like a justice who also will take into consideration the real life impact of the

00:14:11.380 decisions he or she will be making. You remember in school when a student would get called on and the

00:14:17.880 student hadn't done the homework and the student hadn't paid any attention in class and the student

00:14:22.260 would get called on and they would just start babbling. They would just start and they would

00:14:27.300 contradict themselves and they'd digress and they'd, and they'd just try to run out the clock.

00:14:33.860 That's what you just heard. I'll try to, I'll try to come up with an analogy. Let's say you had a

00:14:39.360 pack of light bulbs and some of the light bulbs, because of peculiarities of the manufacturing process,

00:14:46.080 some of the light bulbs were brighter than other light bulbs. And let's say you had one light bulb

00:14:51.800 that was the brightest of all in the pack of light bulbs. That light bulb would not be Maisie Hirono.

00:14:57.720 If you had a shed, let's say a lot of you probably have a shed outside of your home.

00:15:03.720 You've got, you've got a lot of tools in your shed, right? Some of those tools through use or

00:15:08.320 manufacturing are going to be sharper than the other tools. And so let's say you have one tool that is

00:15:15.420 the sharpest tool in your shed. That tool would not be Maisie Hirono. Maisie Hirono is a little

00:15:23.400 confused on a lot of topics. And here she has just contradicted herself many, many times. She says,

00:15:31.800 I want a nominee who is selected for being a black woman. I want a nominee selected for under sex and

00:15:38.260 on her race. And I want the nominee to be the top, most qualified, unbiased, impartial. I want that,

00:15:46.060 I want the nominee to be picked based on merit. And also I just want the nominee to be picked based

00:15:50.240 on her race and sex. You can't have both. You can't have both. I'm not saying that black women

00:15:59.820 can't be the top of the heap. They could be. Not saying that the top of the heap can't be a black

00:16:05.120 woman. But I'm saying that if you're, if you are choosing one priority over the other, then

00:16:10.480 necessarily you're excluding the other, right? If there's a conflict, Biden's going to go with the

00:16:14.760 black woman, not with the most qualified candidate. Then it gets even crazier on the contradiction

00:16:19.540 because she says, I want a judge who doesn't have an ideological ax to grind, who is impartial,

00:16:26.980 who is fair, but who doesn't just look at the law. Well, hold on. I thought you wanted a judge who

00:16:35.520 was impartial, who is fair, just like lady justice, totally blind, reading the law, interpreting the

00:16:39.700 law, treating everyone equally, but also someone who doesn't just read the law. Someone who considers

00:16:46.920 the social outcomes of decisions. Well, you can't have both. And she actually catches herself. She

00:16:53.320 realizes in the moment that she's saying that she wants a judge who won't follow the law. So she

00:16:57.920 says, look, yeah, we want to follow the law. It's really good. They got to follow the law. Wouldn't

00:17:01.100 that be great if they follow it? Because now they're not following the law. What are you talking

00:17:04.580 about? She's insinuating these things that she doesn't explain. Then she says, but we need someone

00:17:08.840 who goes beyond the law. Okay. All well and good. You have to pick one. You have to pick one. You can

00:17:15.600 have a judge who follows the law and, and pursues justice, giving to each what he deserves. Or you

00:17:25.380 can have a judge who is a social engineer who merely attempts to figure out what the most socially

00:17:31.880 useful outcome will be in this judge's view on how society should look. And so you ignore the law and

00:17:41.080 you say, okay, look, if, uh, let's say a, um, straight white 31 year old man comes before the

00:17:48.300 court and he broke the same law that a, uh, 52 year old black Muslim midget broke and they both

00:17:56.360 broke the same law. I am going to maybe put the straight white guy in jail and I'm going to let

00:18:02.300 the 52 year old black Muslim midget off the hook because I think that there are too many 50 year old

00:18:08.120 black Muslim midgets in jail and there aren't enough white guys in jail. So because I'm going

00:18:11.600 to consider the end result, the consequence, the end of, of what's going to happen in this trial.

00:18:20.120 I'm going to, I'm going to consider that. And instead of what the law says, okay, fine, that's

00:18:25.620 your, but you can't have both. You can't have both. This goes back to good old uncle Aristotle,

00:18:30.180 the law of non-contradiction. You cannot simultaneously, two things that are contradictory cannot

00:18:35.120 simultaneously be true. It's amazing how little people understand about the Supreme Court and the

00:18:43.480 way the law works and the judiciary, even prominent people. Speaking of tools and sheds and light bulbs

00:18:51.400 and packs, the women of the view were just debating the Supreme Court nomination and Joy Behar and Whoopi

00:19:00.880 Goldberg went on some discourse, gave some lecture on the law and the courts that was very nearly

00:19:08.360 incomprehensible. You know, you could make the case that, that somebody like Amy Coney Barrett was put in

00:19:15.980 there because she's a white woman who they say, well, she'll go against abortion rights and she's a

00:19:22.900 woman. So that was deliberate. I think Clarence Thomas, a black guy, a black man, a justice. Okay,

00:19:30.160 I'll give it to him. He's a smart guy, but he is to the right of Attila the Hun, this guy. And they

00:19:35.700 put him in there thinking, oh, a black man will go against voting rights, which is what he does.

00:19:40.700 And it was a terrible. And it's a very tricky business they're pulling over there when you

00:19:44.180 think about it. Not to mention the fact that Mitch McConnell has no concept of the law when it comes

00:19:48.820 to the Supreme Court. They know the law. They're not following it. They don't want to follow it.

00:19:53.400 And he's allowed to not follow it. It was terribly disrespectful to appoint

00:19:56.620 someone like Clarence Thomas with his philosophies to the seat of Thurgood Marshall,

00:20:01.520 a civil right. I know.

00:20:02.940 And it was a big thing for Ace with his wife's activities involving the insurrection.

00:20:08.420 Let's not even get into that because that's the whole show.

00:20:12.700 Can anybody tell me what these hens are clucking about? What on earth are any of these people

00:20:21.060 talking about? Mitch McConnell, he doesn't know anything about the law. Yeah. Mitch McConnell,

00:20:28.580 who's been in the Senate since 1831, one of the most adept parliamentary geniuses in the history

00:20:35.880 of the US Congress. He doesn't know anything about the law. And Whoopi Goldberg realizes that what Joy

00:20:40.820 Behar said doesn't make any sense. And so she says something to contradict that. But that also doesn't

00:20:46.260 make any sense. Namely, that they know the law. They're just not following the law. What law

00:20:50.960 are they not following? They have no answer. It's just this vague sort of insinuation.

00:20:58.860 Amy Coney Barrow was put in that position. She's a woman, but she was put in that position to vote

00:21:03.440 against Roe versus Wade. And Clarence Thomas, he's a black guy. Okay, I'll give it to him.

00:21:08.780 Joy Behar says, okay, I'll grant he's a black guy. Thank you, Joy. Thank you for giving Clarence

00:21:15.060 Thomas his race. That's very kind of you. Yeah, okay, I'll grant he's a black guy. Sure,

00:21:19.540 he's smart enough, but he's bad. He's got a bad judicial philosophy. I, Joy Behar, who does not

00:21:25.580 have one one hundredth the IQ of Clarence Thomas. I am, I who have never studied anything about

00:21:32.100 constitutional law. I am going to pontificate about what adult Clarence Thomas is, one of the most

00:21:39.460 accomplished jurists in the history of the court. He does, he's voting against voting rights.

00:21:45.800 What does that, what does that mean? And then the other one, I don't even know her name,

00:21:49.560 but the other one on the view, she says, yeah, and his wife and the insurrection and the whoopie

00:21:52.840 says, that's the whole show. What are you people talking about? You have no idea what you're talking

00:21:56.760 about. It's just cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck, cluck. I don't like this. This is, there's a lesson here

00:22:02.960 for conservatives, not merely that if you want to preserve your, your brain cells, you don't tune into

00:22:07.640 this show, a show hosted by five women and four brain cells. It's, that's not just the lesson.

00:22:12.920 The lesson is, it is a losing game for conservatives to play identity politics.

00:22:19.200 It's a losing game. We think sometimes we conservatives, we try to get really clever.

00:22:23.940 We say, ooh, if we play the game and we nominate a, I don't know, racial minority woman

00:22:32.360 of a minority religion of this, then, but then that person does what we want them to do.

00:22:38.140 Oh, that'll, that'll own the libs. Yes, that'll convince them. That'll prove to them we're not

00:22:41.720 racist. They don't care. What they're insinuating here is that Amy Coney Barrett isn't really a woman,

00:22:47.320 that Clarence Thomas isn't really a black guy. Sure, they might look like a woman and a black guy,

00:22:51.620 but really because of their beliefs, they're not. And so, and actually Republicans are even more racist,

00:22:56.440 even more sexist for choosing a woman and a black guy. Just tune it out. Just go with the best

00:23:02.000 people. Go with the best people, okay? Clarence Thomas is not a great jurist because he's a black

00:23:06.520 guy. He's a great jurist because he's Clarence Thomas. Speaking of different sets of rules,

00:23:13.720 Howard Stern. Howard Stern, the shock jock, par excellence. Really a pioneer in the field of shock

00:23:22.380 jockery, variously obscene, profane, pro-free speech. That's what he is. He's anti-censorship.

00:23:32.000 Until, until he and his friends became the dominant ruling class, the establishment,

00:23:40.800 at which point they defended censorship, specifically in the case of Neil Young trying

00:23:47.360 to get Joe Rogan censored from Spotify. Here is Howard Stern twisting himself into logical pretzels

00:23:55.660 to try to defend Neil Young without explicitly defending censorship.

00:24:01.220 I don't think he's for censorship. I don't think Neil Young is for censorship. I just think he's

00:24:06.880 saying, look, I don't want to be part of this organization because if my music is helping

00:24:11.900 people bring people to the table and then they're spreading something as lethal as don't take the

00:24:16.440 vaccine, do this. That makes sense. Yeah. I, you know, I'm against any kind of censorship, really.

00:24:24.360 You know, I really am. I don't like censorship. But when you're talking about life and death,

00:24:28.720 like poor Meatloaf got sucked into some weird cult. I'm against all forms of censorship. Really?

00:24:37.120 I'm against all forms of censorship. But you hear that but? That but is doing a lot of work there,

00:24:45.940 Mr. Stern. Neil Young, he's not for censorship. Neil Young just explicitly called to censor Joe

00:24:53.720 Rogan on Spotify. Neil Young just said, if you don't take Joe Rogan off Spotify, then you don't

00:25:00.720 get Neil Young. I want all my songs gone. And then, then Spotify said, okay, they're gone.

00:25:05.080 I said, what? I said, yeah, they're gone. No, no, guys, I'm serious. I'm going to take all my

00:25:11.020 songs off. Yeah, I know. I know. We heard you, Neil. They're gone. Bye. Don't, don't let the

00:25:16.720 door hit you. Guys, come on. Don't, I'm serious. Yeah. Okay. Right. Because they weren't going to

00:25:21.600 stand for that. Good for Spotify. And now Howard Stern is defending Neil Young and, but try, but he,

00:25:27.040 he's positioned himself as the anti-censorship guy. And yet now he is overtly defending censorship.

00:25:33.660 A lot of conservatives are wondering what happened to these guys. What happened? Howard

00:25:39.980 Stern was, Neil Young and, and Crosby, Stills and Nash, they had the free speech tour in 2006. What

00:25:47.120 happened? UC Berkeley, all those hippies, they had the free speech movement in the 1960s. What

00:25:53.300 happened? They were all against censorship. Now they're the censors. They were never against

00:25:59.660 censorship. They were only against your censorship. They were never against censorship. They just

00:26:08.300 wanted to stop your censorship of their stupid ideas and their perversions. The minute that they

00:26:15.880 broke the conservative censorship of their terrible ideas and their perversions,

00:26:21.660 they reinstituted censorship, but it was a censorship of your good ideas and your normal flourishing way of

00:26:29.240 behavior. That, that's what they did. As I wrote in a particular book called Speechless, Controlling

00:26:36.200 Words, Controlling Minds. Uh, where's the bell? It's gone. Okay. That's fine. The, the battle that

00:26:41.620 we're talking about here is not a battle between free speech on the one hand and censorship on the

00:26:47.420 other. It's a battle between two competing sets of standards. It's a, every society is going to have

00:26:53.640 taboos. Every society is going to have limits. The genius of the free speech movements and the

00:26:59.880 anti-censorship movements was that they convinced a society that we could have absolutely unfettered

00:27:07.120 license. And that would be totally, you could just say whatever, but that's obviously not true.

00:27:11.060 That's never been true in any society ever, least of all in America. There were always going to be

00:27:17.180 limits. Ask Howard Stern, if he supports teaching the Bible in schools, you're against censorship of

00:27:22.820 all sorts, right? Howard. Okay. So certainly we shouldn't censor the Bible, Bible from schools.

00:27:28.420 One, it's the most important book ever written from which all of Western civilization springs. So

00:27:32.380 surely you said, Oh, you don't. Oh, that's so weird. I thought you were against censorship.

00:27:38.480 Oh, right. You won't even support Joe Rogan bringing on well-respected medical experts to discuss

00:27:45.000 the major medical public health questions of our day. Of course they support censorship.

00:27:50.200 Speaking of schools, really bad news out of Loudoun County. So you remember in Loudoun County,

00:27:56.580 Daily Wire broke this story. In Loudoun County, a school district covered up a rape that occurred in

00:28:01.880 a girl's bathroom, a rape perpetrated by a young man who wore a dress, who was confused about his sex,

00:28:08.800 who went into the girl's bathroom and raped and sodomized a girl. Then the school covered it up.

00:28:13.340 They moved him to another school. What happened? He did it again. There's actually a third allegation

00:28:18.280 that he did it a third time. So this kid was sentenced. The judge in this case said that she

00:28:24.880 has never put a minor on the sex offender registry, but the details of what he did were so horrifying

00:28:32.100 that she felt to protect the public safety, she had to put him on the sex offender registry.

00:28:36.880 Well, another judge has just reversed that decision. Loudoun County judge Pamela Brooks just said,

00:28:43.140 this court made an error in the initial ruling. The court is not vain enough to think it's perfect,

00:28:47.820 but I want to get it right. And they're taking the kid off of the sex offender registry. This judge,

00:28:52.620 Pamela Brooks, should be impeached without question. This is deeply unjust. Conservatives

00:28:57.460 should wield political power. This is a winning issue. First of all, this is the current governor

00:29:04.480 of Virginia, Glenn Youngkin, won largely on this issue. It's a winning issue and it's the right thing

00:29:08.920 to do. Speaking of the wrong thing, I have to get to the story. I've been meaning to get to it for a

00:29:14.000 few days now. Speaking of the wrong thing to do and the relationships between men and women,

00:29:18.540 Cheryl Hines was the wife on Curb Your Enthusiasm and she's married to RFK Jr., who is a generally

00:29:23.720 liberal lawyer. He's the son of Robert F. Kennedy, who was assassinated and ran for president.

00:29:30.200 So RFK has come out and he's made these comparisons between, he's very anti-vaccine,

00:29:35.820 he's very anti-Dr. Fauci, and he's used some lurid language and he compared some of the medical

00:29:40.860 regime to the Holocaust. Everyone makes Holocaust comparisons. I don't really think it's a great

00:29:45.260 idea, but he made it. And the wife comes out and tweets out, quote, my husband's reference to Anne

00:29:49.480 Frank at a mandate rally in D.C. was reprehensible and insensitive. The atrocities that millions

00:29:53.900 endured during the Holocaust should never be compared to anyone or anything. His opinions are not a

00:29:58.020 reflection of my own. In other words, yes, I take you to be my husband in sickness and in health

00:30:02.860 for good times and bad till death do us part or until you express a political view with which I

00:30:08.100 disagree. This is a PSA for all the young marriages out there, all the young ladies.

00:30:14.180 Ladies, never do this. This is not what a marriage is. You become one flesh. Wives, submit to your

00:30:20.860 husbands. Husbands, love your wives. I know that's controversial now to read the gospel, but you're not

00:30:26.720 pitted against one another. You're not just atomized individuals, either of you, duking it out in

00:30:32.460 public and having to throw your own husband or your own wife under the bus. Don't do it. Love and

00:30:37.160 respect one another. Goodness gracious. If you didn't catch it yet, the latest episode of Adam

00:30:43.300 Carolla's Daily Wire exclusive comedy series, Truth Yeller, is streaming right now. It might just be

00:30:49.260 the best one yet. Adam takes on Hunter Biden and is joined by comedian T.J. Miller, who drops some

00:30:54.760 comedy gold and proves he's the real deal. What do I mean by that? Well, head on over to

00:30:58.940 dailywire.com slash watch right now to find out. Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code

00:31:04.880 Miller for 25% off your membership. Get ready for some serious laughs. Also, if there's anyone that

00:31:10.660 the Biden administration, the mainstream media, big pharma don't want you to hear, it's the voice

00:31:15.660 of Dr. Robert Malone. Actually, the interview that Joe Rogan had with Robert Malone is one of the

00:31:20.860 reasons why Neil Young begged Joe Rogan to be censored from Spotify. He's one of the pioneers

00:31:25.880 of mRNA vaccines. He was removed from Twitter and most social media for his public skepticism of the

00:31:32.480 COVID vaccines. Then he went viral on Rogan. So you should head on over right now. Check it out.

00:31:39.300 Our very own Candace Owens sat down for a three and a half hour interview with Dr. Malone.

00:31:43.880 She does not leave any stone unturned. Together, they touch on some of the most alarming statistics,

00:31:47.960 questions and trends that the media and big tech don't want to acknowledge. It's available

00:31:52.540 exclusively at dailywire.com this Tuesday, February 1st. If you don't already have a Daily Wire

00:31:57.640 membership, join now to catch Tuesday's episode of Candace premiering at 9 p.m. Eastern,

00:32:02.900 8 p.m. Central. We'll be right back with the mailbag.

00:32:04.660 Welcome back to my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag. First

00:32:20.980 question up from Arun, who says, Dear Dr. Covfefe, I think that over the past 23 months,

00:32:27.480 you have had a better take than any other conservative on the matter of the COVID hoax.

00:32:31.260 Thank you. But among your opinions, my favorite is your belief that we ban people from wearing

00:32:36.200 masks in public. Was this a hypothetical musing or do you really believe there is a political path

00:32:41.820 for us to implement a mask ban at the federal or state levels? In my home state of Minnesota,

00:32:46.660 we actually have a law on the books banning face coverings in public and Governor Waltz had to

00:32:51.900 illegally order us to ignore this law when he mandated masks in our state. Could we realistically

00:32:57.400 use laws like this to prohibit public masking? Can we look forward to that glorious day when

00:33:02.180 Karens are handcuffed in the streets for covering their faces? I'm so glad you brought this up

00:33:06.360 because some people seem to think that I'm kidding when I say that not only should we not mandate the

00:33:13.160 masks like the liberals want us to do, not only should we not, not only should it be the case that

00:33:19.980 we should just choose to wear the masks whether we want to or not, like the sort of squishes and

00:33:25.760 center-right people want us to do, but actually we should not permit people with rare exceptions

00:33:30.960 to wear the masks. We should not allow that in public. And some people think, oh, Michael,

00:33:36.340 you're just being provocative. You're just being to the right of Attila the Hun. You're just imagining

00:33:40.920 some law that could never exist that is so beyond the bounds of American law. It's already the law.

00:33:47.900 In a lot of places, there are already laws about this. Not only is my position not so far off the

00:33:55.820 edge of the right, my position was the mainstream position two years ago. You are not allowed to

00:34:02.920 dress up like a bandito throughout your entire public life. That's not good. There was a video we

00:34:09.100 played yesterday of the comedian, liberal comedian Michael Rappaport in New York, filming a video of a

00:34:15.920 criminal robbing a right aid and just walking out and he had a big mask over his face and no one

00:34:20.560 really did anything. Part of the reason that you're seeing an uptick in these robberies

00:34:23.960 is because people are masking up and so you can't, it's very hard to identify the people who are doing

00:34:29.900 it. This is not some new technology. This is what train robbers did in the Wild West.

00:34:37.000 Of course, I really do believe, I know that sometimes people think I'm a little more on the right-wing

00:34:43.080 side of things, whether it's, you know, at our outlet or whether it's just in the conservative

00:34:47.780 movement. I consider myself a moderate. Moderation is a virtue, but moderate with respect to what?

00:34:56.180 With respect to the law as it stood throughout most of America two years ago, my view that we should not

00:35:02.760 be allowed to put our secular keffias on constantly and our, our, our medical burkas on everywhere we

00:35:11.460 go. That was the law. And I think we should go back to enforcing that law. From Andy, esteemed love

00:35:18.940 guru. I've recently joined a dating site. A lovely young lady and I have been texting here and there

00:35:24.200 for a couple of weeks and she seems like a good fit for me so far. Not to mention she's cute. I don't

00:35:29.520 know if it's going anywhere since she lives a few hours away, but I'm praying that it does.

00:35:33.580 Now, a family member wants to introduce me to one of her friends on a double date. On one hand,

00:35:38.180 I'm not actually dating the girl I'm texting with at this point, but I'm hoping to. On the other hand,

00:35:42.420 the girl in the double date situation lives in my area. So we would be able to see each other much more

00:35:46.440 often if we want to keep it going. Is it acceptable to go on the double date so I don't pass up on an

00:35:51.520 opportunity to meet someone? Or should I only focus on the girl online in hopes that we do start dating?

00:35:57.100 Your advice and any prayers would be much appreciated. Sincerely monogamous, yet contemporaneously

00:36:01.320 amorous. Go on the date. Of course go on the date. You're not married. You're dating. And you're not

00:36:09.820 even dating the girl you're texting. You're texting that girl. If you want to date that girl, you should

00:36:14.340 go date her. But she lives far away. All right, go drive. Go meet up with her. Have her visit you or you

00:36:21.100 visit her? This is one of the real temptations of our modern world is we think that time and space

00:36:29.180 and physicality don't matter at all. We're all just living in the metaverse. So yeah, you're texting

00:36:34.620 this girl and that seems like a relationship, but it's not a relationship. You don't know this girl.

00:36:39.740 You haven't seen her in person. Now maybe you'll hit it off. Maybe you're soulmates. Maybe you're meant

00:36:44.940 to be you and this girl three hours away. You're not going to know that unless you meet her. You're

00:36:52.000 not going to date her unless you go on dates with her. So if you want to do that, go do it.

00:36:57.120 But don't allow the simulation of a relationship, the virtual relationship, prevent you from engaging

00:37:07.300 in an actual relationship. I don't like that word relationship. How about love affair? How about

00:37:12.780 courtship? How about going to get a girlfriend? How about that kind of thing? Absolutely. You're

00:37:17.340 not married. There's also a difference between dating and marriage. These days we blur it because

00:37:20.980 there's obviously so much cohabitation. People just live together in perpetuity and they don't even

00:37:25.340 ever really get married. But it's different. The rules are different. The stakes are different.

00:37:30.980 Your ability to leave is different. And so yes, we should not treat marriage like dating.

00:37:40.260 Right? We shouldn't treat marriage like it's the sort of thing that you can just break up and walk

00:37:43.780 away and go date somebody else. And you know, it's really not a lot of stakes. We shouldn't treat

00:37:49.020 marriage like dating. But we also shouldn't treat dating like marriage. Because if dating is treated

00:37:53.540 like marriage, then there's no inducement to get married. I can pray for you. Best of luck. I hope

00:37:58.400 you enjoy the dates and find a nice lady. From Jessica. I'll get straight to the point. I'm glad,

00:38:04.200 Jessica. I don't want you to beat around the bush. She says,

00:38:06.340 do guys care about a woman's body count? Not of the murder type. Oh, okay. See what you're getting

00:38:12.940 at. I know that religious men would find a low to no body count, would find it or would prefer maybe.

00:38:20.740 But what about the general believes in God, but not a trad and not a total wimp? I'll clean up some

00:38:26.720 of your language. As a majority, do guys care sincerely who's counting? Yes and no. That's

00:38:37.420 not a satisfying answer, but I'll tell you why. Yes, guys do care. We don't like the idea that our

00:38:44.120 lady has been, you know, around the block many times. Okay? We like the idea that a woman has some

00:38:53.380 modesty, that a woman is pursuing virtue, that a woman is sort of saving herself, maybe just for us

00:39:00.160 even. We like that idea. So it would be good not to rack up a terribly high body count in the way

00:39:08.020 you're describing it. On the other hand, it's a fallen world. People do lots of bad stuff. All have

00:39:14.040 sinned and fall short of the glory of God. In the course of justice, none of us should see salvation.

00:39:18.560 There is redemption. There is repentance. People change. It's okay. We can move on.

00:39:24.380 But I think the key here is the repentance idea. If you're the sort of lady who, you know, has dated

00:39:30.940 every single guy on the football team, you know, in the matter of a month or something,

00:39:34.520 and you haven't changed your ways, then I don't think a man would look very kindly on that.

00:39:40.840 But if you say, look, when I was young, I mean, I was completely nuts. I was a wild child. I did all

00:39:45.400 this crazy stuff, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. And then I realized that was all bad and not conducive

00:39:50.420 to virtue or a flourishing life. And I completely turned it around. And, you know, now I'm going to

00:39:56.240 church and doing the right thing, then that's fine. That's good. Go and sin no more. From Chad.

00:40:05.580 Hey, Michael, love your show. I listen every day. Thank you. What's keeping the Republicans from

00:40:10.200 getting out in front of the SCOTUS pick and saying, we're really glad the next nominee will be a black

00:40:14.300 female. And we look forward to Condoleezza Rice, who is well qualified being the next nominee.

00:40:19.800 Thanks so much. That's a good idea. I don't think that would trigger the libs enough.

00:40:26.700 I don't think it would. I mean, it would never happen anyway. There's no non-leftist nominee who

00:40:31.320 has any chance of going through and actually taking Justice Breyer's seat. So the only utility in

00:40:39.340 pushing a candidate on the right is to trigger the libs. That's the only, that's the only,

00:40:44.440 it's not going to happen. And I just fear that the libs sort of like Condoleezza Rice. She's a

00:40:48.980 little more moderate. Provost of Stanford University, for goodness sakes. I think if we're going to back

00:40:56.600 a candidate, though I have great, great deal of respect for Condoleezza Rice, it's got to be Candace.

00:41:01.840 It's got to be Candace. I, you know, I'll, I'll do it right now. I officially endorse

00:41:06.280 Candace to be the nominee to replace Justice Breyer on the court.

00:41:11.980 Now I know that I said at the top of the show that whoever Joe Biden picks groped me at a party

00:41:18.320 in 2003. All right. So let's just start that rumor. That's fine. From Alex, what are your

00:41:24.940 favorite nonfiction and fiction books? The Office or Parks and Rec? Also nice transition on Thursday.

00:41:32.160 Seems like everything is upside down. One way to remedy this upside down world we live in is to get

00:41:36.260 upside. Thank you. I was proud of that. Oh, you say yes. I can tell you're particularly proud of

00:41:39.340 that. P.S. Do a transition challenge with two seemingly unrelated things and see how well you

00:41:45.300 can transition it. Examples. Monkeys in Africa and a girl playing with a doll. I would, except I,

00:41:55.960 I fear that you're, any, you've mentioned, you've mentioned things that are going to get me in trouble

00:42:02.180 with political correctness. I'm not, you're not allowed to say anything about Africa.

00:42:06.760 That's, that will become racist. I don't think you're really allowed to say anything about girls

00:42:11.220 anymore. That will be sexist and phobic and all sorts of things. So no, in the interest of my show

00:42:16.220 and career, I will not do that transition because there would be a lot of downside and I much prefer

00:42:24.680 upside, which is why, why you should get upside. I'm sorry. What was your question? I don't even

00:42:29.080 remember what the question, oh yes. My favorite fiction and nonfiction books. My favorite fiction

00:42:34.700 book, I don't know. In terms of a novel, you mean? I guess my favorite novel is Crime and Punishment.

00:42:41.720 My favorite poem is The Divine Comedy. My favorite, all right, let's leave it at that. My favorite

00:42:49.660 nonfiction books, just in no particular order, Poetic Diction by Owen Barfield, Abolition of Man by C.S.

00:42:56.620 Lewis. Gosh, not my favorite. How do you bet Dawn to Decadence by Jacques Barzin. I love that history

00:43:04.520 book. Symbolism and Belief by Edwin Bevin. It's kind of a weird little book, but I love that one.

00:43:11.660 Oh gosh, I don't know. The list could go on and on. Between The Office and Parks and Rec,

00:43:15.660 that's not even close. Parks and Rec. From Jacob. Hey Michael, I was watching your Face the Mob episode

00:43:21.060 and you mentioned that you don't believe bodies should be cremated. Can you expand on this? I was not

00:43:25.260 aware this was a part of Catholicism. Sincerely, don't burn me, bro. Sure, I think the Catholic

00:43:29.840 Church now permits people to be cremated, but I am still against it. I think it makes a mockery of

00:43:36.040 the resurrection of the body. I think a lot of pagan cultures, maybe most pagan cultures, burn their

00:43:41.820 bodies. They dispose of their bodies. Zoroastrian cultures leave them out for vultures and dogs to eat.

00:43:48.200 Christians have traditionally treated the body in a more respectful way. We bury the body. We put the

00:43:54.660 body in a tomb. This is in no small part because we look forward to the resurrection of the body.

00:43:58.940 This doesn't mean that the body will not decay in most cases, but it just means that we treat the

00:44:03.900 body in a way that is a little bit more respectful and a little bit more looking toward the day when

00:44:10.320 these bones shall live and jump out of their graves. The popularity of cremation has really come

00:44:16.460 about in modernity during a period of intense anti-Christianity. I think it has become popular

00:44:21.800 in no small part as a mockery of the resurrection. So I wouldn't recommend it.

00:44:28.160 From Nate. Hey, Michael. This is Nate. I have a quick question about relationships. You and

00:44:32.700 everybody else, Nate. Get online. I've been with my girlfriend for what will be two years in July.

00:44:37.220 However, we have been best friends for over three years. There is no question that we are going to

00:44:40.820 get married, but there is a snag to the plan. She will be graduating six months to a year earlier than

00:44:44.880 I am and moving to Florida with her family. I don't know if I should propose when she graduates and

00:44:49.580 spend most of our engagement apart or if I should wait and risk losing the relationship we've worked

00:44:53.800 so hard for. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, Nate. Pronouns nor slash mull. Depends what you're

00:45:00.700 graduating. Are you graduating high school or college? The reason I ask is because if you're,

00:45:05.900 it sounds like you're graduating from high school or she's graduating from high school because she's

00:45:09.940 saying she's going to graduate and move to Florida with her family. So if she's 18, I don't really,

00:45:16.940 so she'd move to Florida with her family and then is she going to go to college? Maybe she's not going

00:45:21.920 to go to college. Okay. If she's graduating from college, then why is she going to move with her

00:45:25.740 family? She's 22 years old. She's an adult. She can move with her family. That's fine, but she's her

00:45:30.680 own person. She can also just go get an apartment. She can also just go live somewhere. She can also just

00:45:35.640 get engaged. Why, why wouldn't she live near you if you're going to be engaged? I would need more

00:45:44.540 details on this. Look, I married my high school sweetheart, spent a little bit of time apart,

00:45:49.140 but then we got back together. And, and so that, that's a wonderful thing. And I wish we'd gotten

00:45:52.460 engaged and married sooner. So I'm, whether it's a high school or college relationship, I'm, I'm all

00:45:58.940 for it. I think that's great. But the, the snags here are a little confusing to me. If you're going to

00:46:05.780 do it, just do it. You know, you don't need your, her, you need her father's blessing, I suppose,

00:46:09.520 but you don't, you don't need anyone's permission. It, yeah. If it's, if it's high school, you might

00:46:16.180 be a little young, I guess. If it's college though, I don't, I don't think you are. Just go for it.

00:46:20.440 All right. That's the show. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Next time you want

00:46:23.860 me to solve all of your love problems, all you wonderful people out there, I need the details.

00:46:28.600 Okay. That's, I need, that's where the real advice is going to come from. I'm Michael Knowles.

00:46:32.320 This is the Michael Knowles Show. See you Monday.

00:46:39.520 If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the

00:46:44.640 word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe. We're available on Apple

00:46:50.140 Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Also, be sure to check out the other

00:46:55.700 Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, The Andrew Klavan Show, and The Matt Walsh Show.

00:47:00.760 The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies. Executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Our technical

00:47:06.160 director is Austin Stevens. Supervising producer, Mathis Glover. Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.

00:47:12.600 Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico. Associate producer, Justine Turley. Audio mixer,

00:47:18.460 Mike Coromina. And hair and makeup by Cherokee Heart. The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire

00:47:23.220 production. Copyright Daily Wire 2022.

00:47:26.120 Hey everybody, this is Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show. You know, some people are

00:47:30.620 depressed because the republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon's

00:47:34.980 turned to blood. But on The Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started.

00:47:39.220 So come on over to The Andrew Klavan Show and laugh your way through the fall of the republic

00:47:42.840 with me, Andrew Klavan.

The Michael Knowles Show - January 28, 2022

Ep. 932 - Whoever Biden Picks Groped Me

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript