2 Liberals vs. Michael Knowles: BAR FIGHT | Mike Nellis & Michael DeFeo

Summary

The Michael Knowles Show

Episode: 2 Liberals vs. Michael Knowles: BAR FIGHT | Mike Nellis & Michael DeFeo
Date: February 14, 2026

---

Main Theme

This episode of "Bar Fight" features Michael Knowles debating two left-leaning guests: Mike Nellis (a senior advisor to the Kamala Harris campaign) and Michael DeFeo (a liberal content creator). The trio tackle three explosive issues: the killing of Alex Preddy and Second Amendment rights, Trump and the prosecution (or lack thereof) of Jeffrey Epstein associates, and a previewed final round on homelessness in NYC, which was cut short for subscribers. The tone is tongue-in-cheek but heated, with sharp personal jabs and lively (often combative) back-and-forth.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Alex Preddy’s Death & the Second Amendment

• DeFeo’s Argument: Alex Preddy’s killing by federal agents after legally carrying a firearm at a rally reveals Trump’s hypocrisy and hostility towards the Second Amendment, especially given Trump’s public comments following the incident ([01:30]-[04:13]).
  • “Donald Trump said you should not and cannot have guns in protests … is this not the exact nightmare that Alex Jones pushed that the NRA pushed for decades?” – Michael DeFeo [03:39]
• Knowles’ Response: Trump’s record is largely pro-Second Amendment with exceptions (e.g., bump stock ban). He believes the officers' actions may have been justified given Preddy’s prior activity and circumstances ([04:13]-[06:55]).
  • “Trump overwhelmingly has a pro Second Amendment policy agenda, albeit with some caveats.” – Michael Knowles [06:22]
• Nellis Interjects: Stresses Preddy did not threaten officers, was disarmed, and was killed on the ground—argues it was murder, not justified force ([07:05]-[08:23]).
  • “There’s no reason for him to be dead right now. And then the reaction from the right is that he died because he brought a gun to a rally.” – Mike Nellis [07:39]
• Nuance on Legal Rights: Group debates if carrying in context of obstructing law enforcement equates to a death sentence (Knowles says officers must assess “imminent threat”; DeFeo and Nellis insist this logic undermines the core of Second Amendment protections) ([09:00]-[09:51]).
  • “Americans should not face death at the hands of the state for just carrying a registered firearm.” – Michael DeFeo [09:09]
• Comparisons to Kyle Rittenhouse: Rittenhouse’s situation is contrasted with Preddy; Knowles argues difference is Rittenhouse fired back in self-defense ([10:08]-[10:31]).

Memorable Exchange:

• “What’s your evidence for that?” (Knowles challenging Nellis’s accusation that Trump only supports constitutional rights for his side) [13:54]
• “He’s got no problem using the power of the FCC to silence a comedian that he doesn’t like.” – Mike Nellis, referencing Jimmy Kimmel [13:56]
• “Is Jimmy Kimmel off the air?” – Knowles [14:05]

---

2. Trump, Epstein, and the Rot in Federal Government

• Nellis’s Argument: Trump’s failure to prosecute Epstein’s other high-profile associates (beyond Maxwell) exemplifies government corruption and elite impunity ([17:56]-[19:57]).
  • “There is a group of wealthy and powerful people who want us to hate each other so that they can get away with abusing little girls and little boys. And I’m sick of this shit.” – Mike Nellis [19:49]
• Knowles’ Counterpoint: Epstein and Maxwell—the main perpetrators—were prosecuted during Trump’s term, which actually undermines Nellis’s core premise ([20:05]-[20:49]).
  • “The two top people in the Epstein operation … were arrested and charged by Donald Trump, not by Barack Obama, not by Joe Biden.” – Michael Knowles [20:49]
• Calls for Names: Knowles repeatedly asks Nellis and DeFeo to name specific (prosecutable) individuals and charges; they argue they can’t because many documents are redacted and the DOJ has shielded information ([21:07]-[23:41]).
  • “I don’t have a specific name — because guess what, I’m not in the FBI.” – Mike Nellis [22:06]
  • “Why didn’t prosecute Bill Clinton — start there!” – Michael DeFeo [22:09]
• Legal Barriers: Knowles details the 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement that shields several of Epstein’s close associates (e.g., Adriana Ross, Nadia Marcinko, Sarah Kellen) and argues there is insufficient evidence to pursue others ([22:51]-[23:41]).
  • “Those are the ones you’d want to prosecute. All women, by the way … you know why we can’t prosecute them? Because they’re protected by a 2008 non prosecution agreement long before Trump entered the scene.” – Michael Knowles [23:14]
• Audience Q&A: Listeners express cynicism about the lack of justice and frustration about the “FUBAR” nature of the case; Knowles claims total transparency is not realistic or possible ([26:38]-[28:41]).
  • “In either case, we are not going to get any more information.” – Michael Knowles [26:38]

Notable Moments:

• Nellis: “You should be pissed off that the federal government is lying to you like this.” [30:32]
• Knowles: “Other than arresting Epstein and Maxwell, releasing three and a half million files, other than that…” [30:46]

---

3. The Limits of Transparency & Systemic Rot

• Debate on Releasing All the Files: Nellis insists critical names are still concealed, while Knowles says some concealment is necessary to protect due-process and avoid undermining justice ([32:44]-[34:46]).
  • “Given the number of times they’ve lied, we should take nothing this administration says at face value.” – Nellis [33:06]
  • “It would undermine the bedrock principle of our system of justice. Which is that people are innocent until proven guilty.” – Knowles [34:23]
• Broader Implication: Nellis asserts both parties and many institutions are protecting elites; Knowles claims the practical obstacle is a lack of actionable evidence.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Second Amendment hypocrisy:
  “Americans should not face death at the hands of the state for just carrying a registered firearm.” – Michael DeFeo [09:09]

• On executive power and selective enforcement:
  “I believe that Donald Trump’s support for the Constitution is completely situational. He wants the Second Amendment for him and his people.” – Mike Nellis [13:40]

• On the Epstein question:
  “So you're saying Trump's a bad guy for not prosecuting anyone? I say great, who do you want to prosecute? You said, I have no idea.” – Michael Knowles [23:42]

• Audience skepticism:
  “I tend to agree with Mike … the whole situation is FUBAR.” – Audience Member [25:22]

• Bar Fight spirit:
  “Why do you expect to be taken seriously in a political debate when you showed up to the debate in a hoodie?” – Audience Member (to Nellis) [35:11]
  “It’s called Bar Fight!” – Nellis [35:19]

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:14 – Show rules explained (debate format, audience participation)
• 01:30-13:50 – Round 1: Alex Preddy’s death & the Second Amendment (in-depth back-and-forth)
• 17:56-34:46 – Round 2: Trump, Epstein, and elite impunity (debate, audience Q&A)
• 35:11 – Memorable audience question about dress code and “Bar Fight” spirit
• 36:10 – Lighthearted scoring and wrap-up

---

Tone & Dynamics

• Energetic and confrontational: Banter is rapid-fire, with all three mics jumping in, arguing over facts and philosophy. There is political theater but also substantive sparring on core issues.
• Bar-room atmosphere: Occasional joking and “shots fired” about clothing, personal credibility, and beer preferences maintain a lively mood, even as the topics get serious or heated.
• Audience participation: Listeners are encouraged to question the hosts and vote for the VIP guest of the night, reinforcing the informal bar-fight format.

---

Conclusion

This “Bar Fight” episode was a raucous, highly-charged debate over gun rights, government transparency, and the ability of Americans to trust their institutions. The hosts didn’t resolve the hot-button issues, but the episode delivered passionate arguments, earnest frustrations, and plenty of memorable barbs—true to both the “fight” and the “bar” in the show’s title.

---

For new listeners:
If you want lively point-counterpoint on headline scandals from both sides of the aisle—complete with audience heckling, irreverence, and occasional tequila shots—this episode captures the spirit of The Michael Knowles Show’s “Bar Fight” series.

Transcript

[Michael Nellis]

You should be pissed off that the federal government is lying to you like this.

[Michael DeFeo]

Did we say military run camps?

[Michael Knowles]

Military camps force people to be straight. I like that. That's a strong idea.

[Michael Nellis]

I want to know why you expect.

[Michael Knowles]

To be taken seriously in a political.

[Michael Nellis]

Debate when you showed up to the.

[Michael Knowles]

Debate in a hoodie.

[Michael Nellis]

It's called bar fight.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, welcome to Bar Fight. I'm Michael Knowles. I'm joined tonight by two guests. Co founder of White Dudes for Harris, senior advisor to Kamala Harris presidential campaign, Mike Nellis.

[Michael Nellis]

We should take nothing that this administration says at face value.

[Michael Knowles]

And now our next guest. He's a liberal content creator who spends most of his time complaining about the Democrat party, which is something that he and I actually have in common. That is Michael DeFeo. Thank you so much, sir. Here is how the show works. We will be debating three of the most controversial topics of our day. The bell rings, we duke it out for that round, and then our friends in the crowd can come up to the microphones and and pick a fight with any of us. And anyone who comes up to the mic can win special prizes and a seat at our VIP section sponsored by Redneck Riviera Whiskey. Mike. Mike, are you ready to begin? Michael, am I ready? I am ready to begin. It's round one.

[Michael Nellis]

I love this.

[Michael Knowles]

Now, Mike that Mike, you kick us off. What is your topic?

[Michael DeFeo]

My topic is Alex Preddy's death proves Trump hates the Second Amendment.

[Michael Knowles]

All right, make your case.

[Michael DeFeo]

All right, so to the crowd for a moment. Raise your hand if you ever heard of the siege of Waco, Texas. Few people, right?

[Michael Nellis]

Did somebody woo that?

[Michael DeFeo]

We're all too weird.

[Michael Knowles]

I don't know what side they're on.

[Michael DeFeo]

So after the siege of Waco, Texas, there was a massive increase in sponsorship and membership of militias and paramilitary groups here in the United States. It skyrocketed after 1993 through 2000 and then skyrocketed again in 2009 through 2012. I wonder what happened in those four years. So during that time, people began to be concerned about American military operations here on our own soil in something called Jade Helm 15, where Obama was using special forces to do training in Texas, Governor Abbott said that he was mobilizing the National Guard to defend the Second Amendment property rights and civil rights of Texans. They made it a whole thing. On Fox News, they called it the Texas takeover. As if we need to take over Texas. It's already part of the United States. And Alex Jones made it as mainstream as humanly possible because the United States was under siege from its military and its government who was going to take away its Second Amendment rights. Wayne LaPierre made jackbooted thugs a popular term with the NRA for years about masked agents of the state coming to take away your second Amendment rights. Alex Preddy was exercising his Second Amendment right in Minneapolis with a registered firearm, a concealed carry permit. He never unholstered the weapon and he was still killed by masked agents of the state. My question is, is this not the exact nightmare that Alex Jones pushed that the NRA pushed for decades on us? Now, Alex Jones has said that his death was not a horrible accident that deserves investigation. He said he deserves it. Donald Trump said that you should not and cannot have guns in protests. You cannot have guns around federal agents. Even the D.C. attorney said you cannot have firearms in Washington D.C. legal or illegal. So my question is, how is it possible that Donald Trump is the most pro second Amendment president in history when the exact right wing fever dream that we were fed for 25 years has come to fruition under his presidency and he is the one who has the words coming out of his mouth saying you cannot legally carry a firearm around federal agents. If that came out of Barack Obama's mouth, y' all got very mad with the tan suit. Imagine how you would react to those kinds of words.

[Michael Knowles]

I thought the tan suit was fashionable. I'll take that in order. So you claim that Alex Preddy's killing would prove that Donald Trump hates the Second Amendment. Now it's worth pointing out that Trump said that he objects to the killing of Alex Preddy. He was sad to see it.

[Michael DeFeo]

Sure.

[Michael Knowles]

Some of us think it was totally justifiable. It's always kind of sad, but I'm not losing sleep over it.

[Michael Nellis]

I'm sorry, is this the same Donald Trump who said that he's an assassin?

[Michael Knowles]

No, administration. Trump didn't say that. Trump said he was assassin. Some members of his administration. J.J. vance has called him, but we're talking about Trump. So Trump says he was sad to see it. He didn't want it to happen. So right off the bat, it would be hard to arrive at the conclusion from that that Trump hates the second Amendment. Cuz he didn't justify the killing of Alex Brady, though I would do so. Furthermore though, on the point of the Second Amendment, specifically with Trump, not Alex Jones, not Waco, Texas, not the 90s Donald Trump, I think we would all have to agree to a handful of facts. One, Donald Trump in his second term rescinded some of the ATF regulations that Joe biden had put on the gun stores. So that's very pro Second Amendment. Trump took us out of the gun grabb. UN Arms Trade Treaty. Very pro Second Amendment. President Trump has, broadly speaking, supported our traditional constitutional rights.

[Michael DeFeo]

All being broadly speaking, with a few caveats.

[Michael Knowles]

No, I'm giving you specific examples of this. But broadly speaking, he's been consistent for 10 years on the Second Amendment on a few things. He's backed off it. Like he banned bump stock. Some of the Second Amendment guys don't love that, but most of the liberals were totally fine with it. In any case, we've always had circumscription. We've always had some limits on the Second Amendment. The question here, since you bring up Alex Predd, is was the killing of Alex Preddy justified whether or not he had a gun?

[Michael DeFeo]

That's not the question we're asking. The question is whether or not his killing and the reaction to it from Donald Trump. She did say he was sad about it, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't. That doesn't mean he supports the Second Amendment around federal officers because he has said he does not want people having guns around federal officers. It's a very different question than am I upset that a man was killed? I think it's entirely reasonable to be empathetic to someone being killed like that. But do you support the Second Amendment or do you not in all circumstances when you call yourself the most pro Second Amendment president in history.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, but I guess in some of the examples I've just cited, President Trump overwhelmingly has a pro Second Amendment policy agenda, albeit with some caveats, like the bump stocks and the tightening up the.

[Michael DeFeo]

Background checks and no guns around federal officers at.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, that was a point he made, which is a prudential point. And I think this is the key here, because if we say that Alex Preddy was carrying a weapon and therefore an officer shooting him is a violation of his Second Amendment rights, I think that fundament misunderstands what's going on. Alex Preddy had a concealed carry permit. That's right. His parents told CBS News that he never actually used it. He never carried the weapon until recently. The cops.

[Michael DeFeo]

I wonder why.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, right. Why did he bring it? Why did he bring a gun that was fully loaded with two magazines to obstruct law enforcement.

[Michael Nellis]

That he's married.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah.

[Michael Nellis]

Wait, I want to jump in here for a second, because let's define the facts of the video and the facts of the case of the murder. And I believe it's a murder of Alex Predding. Okay. Standing on the sidewalk, goes to help a woman who got pushed down by an ICE agent. Doesn't brandish the weapon, doesn't touch it, doesn't use it in any meaningful way. He gets thrown to the ground.

[Michael Knowles]

That part's debatable.

[Michael Nellis]

No, that's not. That part is not debatable.

[Michael Knowles]

Go watch the video. There are questions on the video. There's going to be an investigation, but it's unclear whether or not the administration.

[Michael Nellis]

Is going to lead with quite the investigation. Jesus. Sorry. The chairs came out a little bit for me. Look, he was dragged to the ground, beaten by like eight ICE agents, shot in the back three times. They had already taken his gun at the time that they shot him.

[Michael Knowles]

But the President.

[Michael Nellis]

Just let me finish my point. Because there's no reason for him to be dead right now. There's none. And then the reaction from the right is that he died because he brought a gun to a. To a rally.

[Michael Knowles]

No.

[Michael Nellis]

And by the way, it wasn't even a protest. He was standing on stage.

[Michael Knowles]

That's not really the reaction as a card carrying member of the right. The question is, was the officer justified in shooting Alex Brady? And so then the question there would become, what would be the cause of that? The cause would be, according to federal law, the imminent threat of bodily harm to. To the officers or to anyone around him. What would a reasonable officer have perceived that when a guy shows up to obstruct law enforcement to commit a crime.

[Michael Nellis]

He did not.

[Michael Knowles]

Loaded gun. That's not true.

[Michael DeFeo]

He was already.

[Michael Knowles]

Hold on.

[Michael DeFeo]

He was already beaten to the ground.

[Michael Knowles]

Let me just finish the.

[Michael Nellis]

Since we're establishing beaten because you're not establishing the fact. I am on the ground. They taken his gun, they shot him three times in the back.

[Michael Knowles]

But you're only beginning from when he's on the ground. 11 days earlier. He assaulted.

[Michael Nellis]

11 days earlier is irrelevant to what happened A lot. What happened when they murdered him?

[Michael Knowles]

You can try to filibuster, but I'm not gonna establish the facts. You are filibuster. Guys, if we're gonna establish the facts. 11 days, 11 days prior, I'll just finish this establishment, then we can talk about it in the comments. Eleven days prior, he had assaulted a law enforcement vehicle while obstructing ice. He then showed up again to obstruct law enforcement. He had a loaded gun with two full magazines. And a reasonable officer. A reasonable officer, while he is committing a crime, certainly could believe that he was in imminent threat.

[Michael Nellis]

I just want to ask, can I give You.

[Michael DeFeo]

My last point since we all. That can be debated, but my point can't be debated. No, no. My point that Donald Trump is anti second Amendment because of this event. Americans should not face death at the hands of the state for just carrying a registered firearm.

[Michael Knowles]

What about carrying a registered firearm and obstructing law enforcement?

[Michael DeFeo]

That is not a death sentence.

[Michael Knowles]

What if you pose a threat to officers?

[Michael DeFeo]

He did not. He was already on the ground.

[Michael Nellis]

He was not even obstructing. I don't think it's possible to shoot that.

[Michael Knowles]

Is there any evidence that Alex Pred assault law enforcement? There is. He had done it 11 days prior.

[Michael Nellis]

He kicked a car 11 days prior. Like, really? Come on. Questions outside of Twitter. This is an 8020 issue. Like, this is ridiculous. Okay, I have a question for Mike number three. You know, on the right, any of us. It's the one on the way, right?

[Michael DeFeo]

On the right.

[Michael Nellis]

People believe that Kyle Rittenhouse, like, he had a right to carry the gun to that protest. But I think we all can agree that that was unwise because of what happened. How is what Alex Peretti did any different?

[Michael DeFeo]

I think under the law, he did have the right to carry that gun. What he did with it was what I take objection to.

[Michael Knowles]

He protected himself from a pedophile leftist terrorist.

[Michael DeFeo]

I take objection to him shooting people with the gun that he did legally have the right to carry.

[Michael Knowles]

What if they shoot him first or shoot at him first?

[Michael DeFeo]

So are we going to get to that now? Because the ICE agents were not. There was no gun out. First of all, Kyle Rittenhouse had his gun out and brandished.

[Michael Knowles]

Oh, hold on.

[Michael DeFeo]

Alex Pretty did not have.

[Michael Knowles]

I thought Alex Pretty had been disarmed. There wasn't.

[Michael DeFeo]

He did. I'm saying.

[Michael Knowles]

So was the gun out or the gun was in.

[Michael DeFeo]

No, no, no. I'm telling you, he did not brandish.

[Michael Nellis]

The gun out of his. He didn't ever brandish. How they know he had a weapon when they got him into the ground?

[Michael DeFeo]

They are federal law enforcement.

[Michael Knowles]

Was the gun in.

[Michael Nellis]

Or was the gun in a federal law enforcement.

[Michael Knowles]

This is Schrodinger's gun.

[Michael DeFeo]

It's his.

[Michael Nellis]

No, no, no. Listen. My father was a 34 year veteran of the FBI. Three time Trump voter, huge Republican. I've talked to him about.

[Michael Knowles]

All right, can we get him up here? I want. I want him up.

[Michael Nellis]

Oh, he'd be happy to do this, but he would he. What happened to me?

[Michael Knowles]

So what happened to you? He says, all kids rebel.

[Michael Nellis]

I tell you, I took after my mother, but she's more conservative than my father.

[Michael Knowles]

All right, all right. It's a good family.

[Michael Nellis]

My dad will tell you this is a bad shoot. And I've talked to. I've never heard my father say any law enforcement shooting was bad until this one. At the time that six ICE agents have beaten Alex Preddy, got him to the ground. The first thing they're going to do is check for a firearm. And that's what they did. And one of them took it. And then another one shot him three times in the back.

[Michael Knowles]

I'm sure your father is a very respectable guy with a nice long history serving America. And he voted for Trump, which I love. He voted for him in all three elections that Trump won. However. However, two out of three is good. I think you will find that better than common. Even the subjective judgment of one law enforcement officer or another is not gonna overcome the law. And even liberal lawyers seem to agree that the predicate here for using force was totally met.

[Michael Nellis]

No, you don't. Everybody will not go to prison.

[Michael DeFeo]

We did a good job getting to whether or not he deserved to die. When the question was, is Trump still supporting the Second Amendment by what he said.

[Michael Knowles]

I thought we had resolved that because again, again, I'm, I'm certainly happy to defend the shooting of Alex Preddy. Trump doesn't really do that himself.

[Michael DeFeo]

So that's my question.

[Michael Nellis]

That's Trump called a domestic terrorist over the weekend.

[Michael Knowles]

The Trump administration.

[Michael Nellis]

No, no. Donald Trump himself on Truth Social posted that he was a domestic terrorist like four days ago.

[Michael Knowles]

Was it a retruth?

[Michael Nellis]

No, it was him in his own trouble.

[Michael Knowles]

Interesting. Wow. Okay. I didn't.

[Michael Nellis]

I mean, it was in low.

[Michael Knowles]

Is defending the shooting of Alex Freddie even more than he had been? Do we have another question? Do we have time? No.

[Michael Nellis]

I would like to go back to the original claim of Michael 3. Are we establishing 1, 2, 3. Yes. Okay, great. I'd like to go back to your premise, which is you're saying that his description of not or request not to bring firearms around federal agents. Can you describe why his request for people not to do that because it's dangerous is him being anti Second Amendment.

[Michael DeFeo]

He didn't request. He said you can't do it. And that is that decries to me a second. A bias against the Second Amendment because he doesn't want people who he doesn't like to be around law enforcement with weapons. And that is a concerning slippery slope because as soon as you start saying only certain groups cannot practice the second Amendment to the.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, it wouldn't be Groups. It would be certain situations, certain circumstances.

[Michael DeFeo]

For any group, it would be protesters. Anti ICE protesters. Likely anti Trump protesters.

[Michael Knowles]

Yes, I agree. Criminals should not bring guns around. Cops saying it's a bad idea.

[Michael DeFeo]

First Amendment right. Doesn't make you a criminal.

[Michael Knowles]

But obstructing law enforcement is not a protest.

[Michael Nellis]

It's also in the video where he obstructed justice in that incident where he was killed.

[Michael DeFeo]

Don't.

[Michael Knowles]

Don't talk about it.

[Michael Nellis]

Don't talk about him kicking a car because it's irrelevant to the story.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, that is a good example.

[Michael Nellis]

It's not an example.

[Michael DeFeo]

It's a good example for premeditated murder if they knew who he was prior to killing him.

[Michael Nellis]

I want to just add something a little bit broader to Michael's point here, which is that I believe that Donald Trump's support for the situation, for the Constitution is completely situational. He wants the Second Amendment for him and his people. He wants the First Amendment for him and his people, doesn't want it for anybody who stands up to him. And so they blame Alex.

[Michael Knowles]

What's your evidence for that?

[Michael Nellis]

What's my evidence?

[Michael Knowles]

Other than, say, Alex Brady?

[Michael Nellis]

They talk about being a First Amendment absolutist, but he's got no problem using the power of the FCC to silence a comedian that he doesn't like. He's got no problem when he do that.

[Michael Knowles]

Which comedian?

[Michael Nellis]

Jimmy Kimmel. He got taken off the air.

[Michael Knowles]

Is Jimmy Kimmel off the air?

[Michael Nellis]

He was off the air.

[Michael DeFeo]

As a media.

[Michael Nellis]

He was off the air.

[Michael Knowles]

How long was he off the air?

[Michael Nellis]

Hold on. He was off the air for a few days, but it came to the point where guys like Ted Cruz had to come out and say what Donald Trump did was wrong.

[Michael Knowles]

I adore Ted Cruz. He's a good friend of mine, but we had a disagreement on that.

[Michael Nellis]

Okay, I mean, then your support for the Constitution is situational, too.

[Michael Knowles]

No, because.

[Michael Nellis]

Oh, no, I'm. No, I'm a First Amendment.

[Michael DeFeo]

Absolute.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, I'm not a First Absolutist. I believe in free speech. Come on. But. No, but network television is licensed through the government, so the government has a regulatory.

[Michael Nellis]

For them to shut down a comedian because they made a joke that Trump didn't like.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, basically.

[Michael Nellis]

Yeah. At least you're honest.

[Michael DeFeo]

I just.

[Michael Nellis]

I just also want to note that earlier, Michael was talking about how we have to have gun regulations, but if I were to suggest we do something about school shootings, be like, oh, my God, it's horrible. Like, come on.

[Michael Knowles]

What would I say? What would I say? In this hypothetical situation you've invented for yourself.

[Michael Nellis]

Oh, hypothetical situation like school shootings that happen every single day?

[Michael Knowles]

No, the hypothetical is the conversation that we. That we had in your head. About school shooting?

[Michael Nellis]

No, because earlier you were talking about how there has to be limits on.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, there are limits to all rights.

[Michael Nellis]

I know. Yeah, I understand that.

[Michael Knowles]

So what was that? What was the hypothetical?

[Michael Nellis]

If I was to come out and say, hey, we got to do something about school shootings. Okay, what should we do?

[Michael Knowles]

We should have more armed guards in schools, and we should arrest more criminals.

[Michael Nellis]

Make it harder for people to get a firearm.

[Michael Knowles]

I'll give you a good example. There have been a lot of people who suffer from mental illnesses, especially the transgender delusion, who've shot up schools and churches, and they should be put into psychiatric care and not begin with firearms.

[Michael Nellis]

He's talking about one person.

[Michael Knowles]

I'm talking about more than one person.

[Michael Nellis]

By the way, the NRA had to come out and rebuke conservatives like Michael here for saying that transgender individuals shouldn't be able to own firearms. Constitution protects them too.

[Michael Knowles]

Hold on.

[Michael Nellis]

It's situational for guys like you.

[Michael Knowles]

No, I just don't think that the NRA is the infallible authority, which I agree. Okay. Yeah. Trans. Someone said trans.

[Michael Nellis]

Trans. No.

[Michael DeFeo]

Are you?

[Michael Knowles]

Yes. If he's trans. All right, all right, that's enough.

[Michael Nellis]

Can we get that guy?

[Michael Knowles]

Here's your question.

[Michael Nellis]

Seems like he needs it.

[Michael DeFeo]

Okay, that's success. Right?

[Michael Knowles]

Which questioner goes to the VIP table? Number one or number two? Which is going to the vip?

[Michael DeFeo]

Number two.

[Michael Nellis]

Number two.

[Michael Knowles]

Number two is. Number two. Number two. You're going over to get some delicious redneck riviera bourbon, some nice mayflowers, cigars, and you know what I'm gonna do before I drink anymore? You know what I'm gonna do? I'm gonna look at my beautiful Zbiotics. That's right, folks. Go to zbiotics.com bar fight after a night with drinks. I'll tell you what. I don't bounce back the way that I used to. I'm an old man now, and I have three little children. It's hard. I have to make a choice. I can either have a great night or a great next day. That is, until I found zebiotics. Pre alcohol Zbiotics. Pre alcohol probiotic drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by PhD scientists. I'm an honorary doctor. But these are like the real PhD ones. They tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it works. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. Now, it's a buildup of this byproduct, not dehydration, that is to blame for rough days after drinking, which I had no idea about until I looked into it. Pre alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down so that you are actually addressing the root cause. Just remember to make pre alcohol your first drink of the night. Drink responsibly and you will feel your best tomorrow. I love it and I would guzzle more of it right now, but I have to finish my drink first. Ready to try it? Go to zbiotics.com bar fight. You get 15% off your first order when you use Bar fight at checkout. Plus it's backed by a 100% money back guarantee. There is no risk. Subscriptions are also available for maximum consistency. Remember, head to zbiotics.com Bar Fight. Use code Bar Fight at checkout for 15% off. It's time for round two. A giant Polish man has just moved me sitting in my chair. It's time for round two. Mike, what are we talking about?

[Michael Nellis]

Is that a fetish of yours?

[Michael Knowles]

Not until now.

[Michael Nellis]

I think you keep that to yourself. This is a family friendly crowd.

[Michael Knowles]

Barely.

[Michael Nellis]

All right, My, my, my claim here is Trump's failure to prosecute Epstein's associates reveals the rot in our federal government.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay, all right, what's your case?

[Michael Nellis]

All right, so look, there is a cabal of very rich and powerful individuals and it extends beyond party politics and partisanship or anything like that that. I'm sorry, what, sir? Minnesota.

[Michael Knowles]

The evil cabal is in Minnesota. Fair enough. There is an evil cabal there too. I agree.

[Michael Nellis]

Evil cabal everywhere, apparently. But these guys of these rich and powerful men think they can do anything they want with impunity. And it includes potentially Bill Clinton, most likely, based on the files. It includes Donald Trump, who's been credibly on the record from people who have signed, like done interviews with the FBI, on the record under threat of perjury, that Donald Trump threatened a 14 year old girl. And you've got, look, there's ton of Democrats, ton of Republicans in there and at the end of the day, nobody's been prosecuted even just for a second. Set aside the powerful celebrities that we've seen, the powerful politicians that we've seen. How is it possible that a thousand young girls and a thousand young boys have been trafficked and only one person's ever gone to prison? It's Ghislaine Maxwell and she Runs herself a minimum security prison. And Epstein and Epstein, who, you know, killed himself, which I don't buy at all. And I think that Trump is a huge part of it. Trump is mentioned more times in the Epstein files than Harry Potter is in the entire Harry Potter series. Okay? And so Donald Trump wants to look at the American people and say, I don't know Jeffrey Epstein. I had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Except he met his wife at an Epstein party. He partied with Jeffrey Epstein.

[Michael Knowles]

He's talking about being friends with Epstein.

[Michael Nellis]

Well, no, he says that they cut. They cut ties.

[Michael Knowles]

He knows him. He says he knows him. He never said they partied.

[Michael Nellis]

All over the 90s, there's a million photos.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, I'm just saying the claim you just made isn't true. You said he says he doesn't know him.

[Michael Nellis]

He totally says he doesn't know him all the time. Just the other day in the Oval Office he was like, I don't know anything about Jeffrey Epstein. We should move on. Like, it's ridiculous. Like there is a group of wealthy and powerful people who want to pit everybody in this room against us. They want us to hate each other so that they can get away with abusing little girls and little boys. And I'm sick of this shit and I want to talk about it with you guys.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay? So I think that you have just accidentally undercut your whole debate premise right off the top. Even without my.

[Michael Nellis]

Are you going to defend what happened in the Epstein files?

[Michael Knowles]

I'm not. I'm going to talk about the thing that you brought up in your debate. So you said Trump's failure to prosecute Epstein's associates reveals the rot in our federal government.

[Michael Nellis]

But they, I should add, by the way, Joe Biden's failure too. Cuz they didn't prosecute this when Biden was in office.

[Michael Knowles]

Sure. I'm just gonna point out. And that actually plays into it as well. I'm gonna point out you've undercut your whole debate premise because you have admitted immediately that actually the two top people in the Epstein operation, namely Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, have been prosecuted. And weirdly enough, they were arrested and charged by Donald Trump, not by Barack Obama, not by Joe Biden, it was by Trump. And so right off the bat the premise is false. But then let's go down further, cuz I think a lot of people wanna see more prosecutions in the Epstein case.

[Michael Nellis]

Or any prosecutions at this point.

[Michael Knowles]

Sure. Other than the top two. Sure.

[Michael Nellis]

Yeah. But they moved Jillian Maxwell into a minimum Security prison and promised her a pardon. Sure.

[Michael Knowles]

I mean, she's serving a 20 year sentence, but I.

[Michael Nellis]

She's pardoned. Listen, but here's my question. How many people think Jalene Maxwell is going to get pardoned at the end of Trump's term?

[Michael Knowles]

Like, come on, really?

[Michael Nellis]

Come on.

[Michael Knowles]

Nobody thinks so.

[Michael Nellis]

Of course she's not gonna be in prison at the moment. You can pull this up.

[Michael Knowles]

The question then becomes though. Cause, okay, we agree the premise is wrong, but the thrust is, fine, we want more prosecutions. Okay, who would you prosecute and on what grounds?

[Michael Nellis]

Yeah, so I would start here. 1. I don't believe that the DOJ has taken this case seriously at all. And just separate out the names for a second. How can they traffic a thousand young girls and a thousand young boys without other people who help them do that? Who help them recruit those girls, move them around.

[Michael Knowles]

I'm asking a direct question because that's the problem. You say we have to prosecute. So you think it was, you think.

[Michael Nellis]

It was a mom and pop sex trafficking operation in Florida?

[Michael Knowles]

You're inventing a bunch of things I've never said.

[Michael Nellis]

I asked you a few questions that you can answer. You may not answer.

[Michael Knowles]

You made a claim. You said, Trump needs to prosecute the. Or the DOJ needs. And I said, okay, who do you want?

[Michael Nellis]

The doj, who do you want?

[Michael Knowles]

Well, they're distinct, but no, they work for the.

[Michael Nellis]

That's how John Lemon got arrested on Friday. I'm sure it's because they're very separate.

[Michael Knowles]

You're trying to avoid the question. You said Trump needs to prosecute more people. I said, great, who do you want to prosecute? And you said, herder. I don't know.

[Michael Nellis]

That's not at all what I said.

[Michael Knowles]

Who should he prosecute?

[Michael Nellis]

I said, how is it possible.

[Michael Knowles]

You're avoiding the question.

[Michael Nellis]

Okay, I don't have a specific name because guess what, I'm not in the FBI.

[Michael DeFeo]

Why didn't prosecute Bill Clinton start there?

[Michael Nellis]

Prosecute Bill Clinton.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay, on what grounds?

[Michael DeFeo]

On. I don't like whatever the FBI has in those files is.

[Michael Knowles]

Have you looked at the files? Have any of you?

[Michael Nellis]

I have looked at the files.

[Michael Knowles]

On what grounds are you going to prosecute Bill Clinton?

[Michael DeFeo]

On what he tells Congress when he comes in to testify in public hearing.

[Michael Knowles]

You're going to prosecute him for something he hasn't done yet?

[Michael DeFeo]

Yeah.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay. Who would you prosecute?

[Michael Nellis]

Look again. I want to find the co conspirators who trafficked these kids.

[Michael Knowles]

Ok?

[Michael Nellis]

So if you're asking me for their names.

[Michael Knowles]

And by the way, I am asking you for their names. I continue out of them.

[Michael Nellis]

I don't know the names of most of the perpetrators because the DOJ blocked them out. They had no problem releasing the private information of the victims of Epstein's crimes. But they had a huge problem releasing the names of people who preyed on little girls and little boys.

[Michael Knowles]

That's not true.

[Michael Nellis]

It is true.

[Michael Knowles]

I could give you plenty of names. Adriana Ross, Nadia Marcinko, Sarah Kellen. These are the closest associates around. Jeffrey Epstein, who we have firm facts. Cuz I actually have gone through a lot of the files. We know that they were trafficking the girls. Those are the ones you'd want to prosecute. All women, by the way. Weirdly enough. You know why we can't prosecute them? Because they're protected by a 2008 non prosecution agreement long before Trump entered the.

[Michael Nellis]

Scene, which was by a Republican that Donald Trump put in his cabinet.

[Michael Knowles]

Who else do you want to procure?

[Michael Nellis]

The Labor Secretary.

[Michael Knowles]

Who else do you want to prosecute? You want to prosecute Les Wexner? On what grounds? Sure, maybe. On what grounds do you wanna prosecute Alan Dershowitz? On what? A claim that was made and then retracted by the claimant. You wanna prosecute Bill Clinton? On what? You say he went after a 14, 13 year old girl? That case was already brought to court multiple times. A California judge dismissed it and then the claimant dropped it twice. So who are you gonna prosecute?

[Michael Nellis]

You claimant dropped anyone twice.

[Michael Knowles]

You're saying Trump's a bad guy for not prosecuting anyone? I say great, who do you wanna prosecute? You said, I have no idea.

[Michael Nellis]

I. What I am trying to say is that there is a powerful group of people in this country who think they can get away with anything. And right now they're getting away with abusing little boys and little girls. And they're getting away with it because multiple presidential administrations, Democrat and Republican, sir, have refused to take these allegations seriously and investigate it. And right now if you go look at the documents that they dropped on Friday, the names of the perpetrators of the crimes are blacked out.

[Michael Knowles]

It's not true.

[Michael Nellis]

It is true.

[Michael Knowles]

I named a bunch of the associates I just named.

[Michael Nellis]

No, I'm talking about the people who are abusing little girls.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, me too.

[Michael Nellis]

No, you're talking about the people who trafficked. You had their names. I'll give you credit for that. Congratulations.

[Michael Knowles]

I'll go further than that. People have claims made against them. Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz.

[Michael Nellis]

They are blocking out the names. And they never seriously investigated the claims that have made. And again, it's not just Donald Trump's fault.

[Michael Knowles]

In the files, you can see the investigations. You just cited it because you were talking about the claims made by the women to the FBI. So you yourself admit they've been.

[Michael Nellis]

So you don't believe the claims is what you're saying?

[Michael Knowles]

Well, in some cases, the claims not only were deemed not credible by the FBI across multiple administrations, but in some cases, the claims were retracted by the accusers themselves, as in the case of Alan Dershow.

[Michael Nellis]

But again, we know that this is a real thing because Julie Maxwell.

[Michael Knowles]

Do we? You're not giving me any names.

[Michael Nellis]

What was Julian Maxwell found guilty of?

[Michael Knowles]

She was. Of conspiracy to traffic minors.

[Michael Nellis]

Yes. Yes. She's also a registered sex offender. So why is she in a minimum security prison after Todd blazed her there?

[Michael DeFeo]

Is that part of the problem that we. That we don't know? We do not have a lot of these redacted names, and so we don't know. And that's part of the big problem here.

[Michael Knowles]

Maybe we have a lot of the names without redactions. And you guys haven't given me an argument as to why we would go after them. And you haven't. Haven't named anyone else to go after.

[Michael Nellis]

It isn't about me wanting to go after them. It's at. The DJ was never taken serious.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay, question, Michael.

[Audience Member]

I tend to agree with Mike, too, this time that the whole situation is fubar.

[Michael Nellis]

Did you say fubar?

[Audience Member]

Yes.

[Michael Nellis]

I love that word.

[Michael Knowles]

I agree with that.

[Michael Nellis]

My favorite word.

[Audience Member]

Before I get into the question for you. Well, actually, both questions are for Michael. I just want to start with Michael. Where's a good place locally here to go get a Mayflower and sit down and enjoy it?

[Michael Knowles]

I have, like, five good answers for you, and I will tell you after this show.

[Audience Member]

Fantastic. Let me know.

[Michael Knowles]

But I don't want to blow up my spots on air.

[Audience Member]

Absolutely.

[Michael Knowles]

So YouTube, you're not getting it. If you want to know the good spots in Nashville, you got to show up to bar fight at John Rich's. Right. In Riviera.

[Michael Nellis]

He's saying he wants a little bit of ad money, I think. Yeah.

[Audience Member]

Now, with. With regard to the Epstein issue.

[Michael DeFeo]

Yes, sir.

[Audience Member]

And your position, Michael Knowles. Yeah, that we know all we're gonna know. I'd like to know how you suggest we react when, as Mike Tew said, the situation is so fubar, not accomplishing anything other than distractions. What do we do with this situation? What do you recommend or prescribe?

[Michael Knowles]

Yes. Okay. And to articulate my view, which you alluded to my point, which I've said from the beginning, I've been vindicated every step of the way is just like Donald Trump. Total vindicate on this. I know I have been totally vindicated on this. There are two possibilities with Epstein. Either Epstein is what the mainstream narrative tells us, just like a kind of eccentric rich guy who was a sex freak and had no connections to intelligence, or no associates, or just forget about it. Move along, move along. Either that's true, or Epstein was something else, he was a little bit more than that. In either case, we are not going to get any more information. If it were the first mainstream narrative, which I don't believe, then we obviously already know everything. If it's the second narrative, which is that this guy was mobbed up with like everybody, with intelligence services all over the place, people cite the CIA, the United States or Israel or Russia has come out in this tranche of documents, or the Arabs or MI6, or the list goes on and on and on. It seems like this guy was mobbed up with everybody. And so we're probably not going to get much more information on it. In terms of the radical transparency, we have millions and millions of documents that were released by Donald Trump. When you look at any of the potential prosecutions, no one has been able to bring one because there is not sufficient evidence. And in the cases where there are, and those four people that I mentioned, they're already protected by a non prosecution agreement. So I'm not telling you this to say it's like a great thing and how wonderful it is that all but two people got off the hook in the Epstein scandal. But I'm mentioning that because that's reality and sometimes people don't wanna hear the truth, but it's a fact. And when people go on and tell you that Trump didn't prosecute Epstein's associ, that's a lie. And when they tell you that this is Trump's fault or something like that, it's totally ridiculous. If there were something for the White House to do, I promise you they would do it. This is politically radioactive for them. The problem is there is nothing to be done. And the idea that there would be, after well over a decade of this, what is it, 15 years of this, some smoking gun document that has survived all of the intelligence agencies up until now, that's finally gonna blow the lid on it. If you believe that, I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you so.

[Michael Nellis]

I'd like to report that if that's all right. Because let's talk about how we got here. Like you say, Donald Trump released these files. As if there hasn't been like a year of a cover up in place by Pam Bondi and the DOJ at I believe Donald Trump's order.

[Michael Knowles]

What cover up? Trump's the one who arrested Epstein and Max.

[Michael Nellis]

Let's remember that was in the first term we're talking about.

[Michael DeFeo]

They violated the how long it took for them to release the last chance files.

[Michael Nellis]

Well, let's hold on.

[Audience Member]

Michael's been consistent on his show about his position. But what I my question for you, Michael, you know, a little deeper was how do either we, as normies, as a public respond to the situation at this point, or how should the administration change anything, handle anything differently? Because the whole thing is just a botched job from end to end.

[Michael Nellis]

I agree with you. And I want to talk about why it's a botched job because nobody should forget that Right after the fourth of July on a Sunday night, the DOJ announced they were done with the Epstein investigation. After throughout the entire Trump campaign, they were promised to release every document, to prosecute every single person that they could. They said there was nothing, that there was no files. And it took no.

[Michael Knowles]

They said no clients, no.

[Michael Nellis]

They said there was nothing. There's no files, nothing done. We've reviewed everything. We've got nothing for you. And after, by the way, embarrassing the shit out of libs of TikTok and other influencers by making them wave binders. And I thought that was super damn embarrassing.

[Michael Knowles]

I wasn't at that meeting.

[Michael DeFeo]

That was an embarrassment.

[Michael Nellis]

Yeah. Can we agree that was embarrassing?

[Michael Knowles]

I'm glad I didn't get a binder.

[Michael DeFeo]

Yeah, I think, yeah, that's good enough.

[Michael Nellis]

You have better sense than lives of TikTok.

[Michael Knowles]

But look, I didn't know what she was getting into.

[Michael Nellis]

It took Democrats and Republicans coming together with a discharge petition to get that bill to move forward and to create the political conditions for Donald Trump to be so scared of the public's reaction that he was forced to sign it. And I want to remind people that according to Thomas Massie, who's a Republican conservative member of Congress, he was threatened by the FBI to have his staff brought up on fraud charges if they didn't stop pushing the Epstein files. So this administration is pushing hard to make sure you never see it. And my reaction to the gentleman, he's no longer there, who asked his question is your reaction should be anger, you should Be pissed off that the federal government is lying to you like this. That's it.

[Michael Knowles]

And what should they do about it?

[Michael Nellis]

Well, you can't vote him out.

[Michael Knowles]

The same thing Trump did, I guess he released the law.

[Michael Nellis]

Trump hasn't done anything. Come on.

[Michael Knowles]

Other than arrest Epstein, arrest Maxwell unlike any Democrats, and then release three and a half million files other than that.

[Michael Nellis]

I know you got to protect your daddy, but this is.

[Michael Knowles]

Come on. Truthfully, in circumstances. Next question.

[Michael Nellis]

Hi, Michael. This question is for you. So Trump has said that he thinks it's time to move on from the Epstein files.

[Michael Knowles]

Do you agree with him and what should we do about it? Well, it's time to move on from the Epstein files in the sense that he released the files. I mean, the remaining files. There are like many legal reasons why they can't be released. Some of which is that a lot of it's child. But he's released three and a half million of them. We know a lot, you know, and there are redactions for all sorts of reasons. But I agree it's time to move on from the files. Cause the files part has been accomplished. What I want to know with Epstein is a consistent question, which is I don't need to know all the lurid details. I would like for there to be justice for the victims, if there can be. I wanna separate the credible claims from the false claims, some of which have been proven. But what I wanna know is who was Epstein working for and for what purpose? And even that is not a simple answer. Some people wanna say he was like a super spy for Mossad or for the CIA or for. Now the story is the Polish Prime Minister saying he was a super spy for and for this group and that group. And the reality is there's evidence to back up like all of that. And it's very unclear what his actual mission was. Furthermore, the claim that he was a spy makes people think that he was James Bond training at Langley or something on a mission. But I don't think that's really what he did. I think he was a dodgy influence peddler who collected connections and greased the wheels of government and business and politics around the world. And so I wanna know what that is. I wanna know the machinery of the corruption more than I want to know the lurid details that needs to be pursued that we need to continue to follow. However, I'm open to suggestions on how to do it because he obviously ran a very sophisticated operation and no one's been able to come up with answers yet.

[Michael Nellis]

Can I jump in here with two points. The first is they have not released all of the Epstein files. That is something they continue to lie about. And what they're not, should they release all the child if it's actual child?

[Michael DeFeo]

Not necessarily to the public.

[Michael Nellis]

Not to the public. Members of Congress. But like, look, I don't buy their claim that there's just a bunch of child there. It feels like you don't think there's child. I'm sure that there is, but I think the idea that the remaining files is child is all child.

[Michael Knowles]

That's saying it's all.

[Michael Nellis]

Given the number of times they've lied, we should take nothing that this administration says at face value. The second thing is. Oh, and on that first point, they still haven't released the names of everyone who's been accused of violence against little boys and little girls in the Abstein files. They are concealing those names. And the question is, why? Now number two again.

[Michael Knowles]

No, no, no, wait.

[Michael Nellis]

I'll let you talk. Can you let me finish, please?

[Michael DeFeo]

Sure.

[Michael Nellis]

Thank you. And you can tell me why I'm wrong in a second.

[Michael DeFeo]

Happily.

[Michael Nellis]

But like, the second point I wanna make is you've brought up multiple times, like, is he a Mossad agent? What's this? He's a super spy. Like what is he? And that's a very clever thing that MAGA oriented influencers are doing right now. Cuz they want you focused on that so that you can be like, ooh, was he working for Putin? Ooh, was he working for Benjamin Netanyahu? Instead of going, how is it possible that nobody is being prosecuted for these crimes? How is it possible that they're concealing these names and this information?

[Michael Knowles]

I just explained that to you.

[Michael Nellis]

Don't look over here. Don't look over here.

[Michael Knowles]

I just explained it to you because you can't name the crimes or the people to prosecute.

[Michael Nellis]

I can't because I don't have all the information.

[Michael Knowles]

There you go.

[Michael DeFeo]

Okay.

[Michael Knowles]

They're concealing the names.

[Michael Nellis]

They're concealing the names. How am I supposed to tell you the names of the things that are concealed? Is it possible that the names that are concealed could be concealed because there's an active investigation against those names and that creating or leaking those names out to the public could create a public just outcry against those people that would jeopardize the trial? That is, I would be very surprised.

[Michael Knowles]

Another reason that it would be irresponsible to release just any name willy nilly that's had an accusation is because it Would undermine the bedrock principle of our system of justice. Which is that people are innocent until proven guilty. We already know. Except for Alex.

[Michael Nellis]

Freddie, though he deserved to die.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, Alex.

[Michael Nellis]

Pretty. That's what you said earlier.

[Michael Knowles]

Again, that's a little.

[Michael Nellis]

You said it was a good shoot.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah, it was a good shoot. Yes. People who are actively obstructing law enforcement with guns and double mags are putting themselves in danger. And unlike things are not alike. I agree with that.

[Michael DeFeo]

Come on.

[Michael Knowles]

But to your point on why they might conceal some of the names. Yeah. You can't just air totally unfounded accusations. Especially accusations that have been investigated and been found, including by judges in some cases, to not be credible. That would be reckless and would undermine the bedrock principle of American justice. Okay, any other questions over there? Do we have any questions? Hello. Yes, I have a question for the man in green.

[Michael Nellis]

It's a very simple question. I wanna know why you expect to be taken seriously in a political debate when you showed up to the debate in a hoodie.

[Michael DeFeo]

Wow.

[Michael Knowles]

Wow. You wanna talk about shots fired? Justifiable shots fired. That's a. Wow, that's a lot.

[Michael Nellis]

I'm at a bar. Like, it's called Bar Fight. I showed up to drink, by the way. They asked me a week ago what beer I wanted. I said Guinness. And then suddenly at the last minute, the Guinness tap broke.

[Michael Knowles]

I know it is. That's right.

[Michael Nellis]

I sabotage. So it was rigged.

[Michael Knowles]

It was rigged.

[Michael Nellis]

It was a rigged. It was a rigged beer raid. Like, look, I don't. Like, the President of the United States wears a long red tie and wears a suit two sizes too big. Like, who cares what people wear? Like, focus on the content. Like, Michael's got a nice suit on. Michael's got, I don't know, bomber jacket on with a nice gold watch. Like, whatever. You either like me or you don't. I don't give a.

[Michael Knowles]

He doesn't care. Yeah, he's had a few non Guinness beers in him. He doesn't care.

[Michael Nellis]

Hey, bartender, bartender. Three shots at tequila, one for each of us. Let's go.

[Michael Knowles]

I gotta do another show later. Hold on. I gotta do. Who do we think won the vip? Who do we think won One. It was one. It was one. That's consensus number one. Won the vip. You are getting Redneck Riviera whiskey. And now, folks, it is time for the most important part of the night. This is round three. Round three is my topic. And my claim is that Mamdani's warmth of collectivism just killed 16 bums in New York. Oh, hey, you probably want to watch us debate how Mamdani just froze 16 New Yorkers to death, don't you? That's probably what you thought you were going to get, but you're not unless you subscribe to Daily Wire Plus. Sorry. Sorry, buddy. It's expensive to pay for all my drinks at bar fight. So I need to separate you from your money so that we can continue to put on these great debates. It was a great debate. You wanna see? I know you wanna see what happened? It's me and the mics. Just three mics up there debating Mom, Donnie. Peace be upon him. Download the app. Dailywire. On your phone, on your iPad, on your television, on your piano. Download the app. Subscribe. Give me your money, please. Thank you. I appreciate that. And then you get to see the rest of the show. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Do we have any more questions? No. We have to find out who's the VIP from that round.

[Michael Nellis]

Two.

[Michael Knowles]

It was two. It was two. Two is our. It was our lady friend, right?

[Michael Nellis]

Yeah.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay, great. I love that. I love that. Okay, please enjoy some Redneck Riviera while we get to the most important part. In my humble opinion, nobody wins a bar fight. There are. So the question is, who lost the hardest tonight? Who is buying the next round? Who is refilling the Guinness keg? Who lost? Was it that Mike. After that was.

[Michael Nellis]

You think I'm gonna vote for myself. Oh, that was more technical.

[Michael Knowles]

Was it this mic? Hey, wait. Hey, wait. Hold on. Get out of here.

[Michael Nellis]

No. Boy, your staff got you hard.

[Michael Knowles]

Was that me? That might be me that lost. Did I. How did every round but lose the game? That's awful. Did I hold?

[Michael Nellis]

Was it the same way Trump lost in 2020?

[Michael Knowles]

Michael, this is what it's. You know, it's always in that recount. Was it that mic? Oh, shit. Okay. I don't think it was you. You had the quietest one. So was it this mic?

[Michael Nellis]

Yeah.

[Michael Knowles]

This is shocking. If we did it again, it might be you. Okay, I'll take it.

[Michael Nellis]

We can try it.

[Michael Knowles]

Mike won and Mike. And Mike. No. Mike and Mike won and Mike lost.

[Michael DeFeo]

Yes. Yes.

[Michael Knowles]

Anyway, see you next time.

[Michael Nellis]

See you next time. Cheers.

[Michael DeFeo]

Cheers.

[Michael Knowles]

Cheers. Your new home is now ready. Dr. Horton, America's builder has new homes that are ready today with new construction communities in Ellensburg and throughout the Greater Seattle area. Dr. Horton has the right home for you. At Dr. Horton, we're still building with flexible living spaces, smart home technology, and two and three car garages. More communities and more homes available every day. Find your new home in Ellensburg now ready at drhorton.com Dr. Horton, America's builder and equal Housing Opportunity Builder.