Ep. 932 -Â Whoever Biden Picks Groped Me
Summary
Joe Biden says he will not nominate a Black woman to replace Justice Stephen Breyer, and Christine Blasey Ford says she was groped by a woman at a party in 2003. Michael calls for a thorough investigation into the matter.
Transcript
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,
00:20:02.940
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
00:47:26.120
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