← The Michael Knowles Show
The Michael Knowles Show
Ep. 1651 - Make Greenland Great Again
00:49:25
Congressman Andy Ogles introduces the "Make Greenland Great Again" bill, CNN blames the wildfires on "climate change," and a confused woman sleeps with over 1,000 men in 12 hours. Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri Ep.1651 - - - DailyWire+: Kick off 2025 with 25% off your new DailyWire+ annual membership. Go to https://dailywire.com/subscribe today! "Identity Crisis" tells the stories the mainstream media won’t. Stream the full film now, only on DailyWire+: https://bit.ly/3C61qVU Order your Mayflower Cigars here: https://bit.ly/3Qwwxx2 (Must be 21+ to purchase. Exclusions may apply) - - - Today's Sponsors: PreBorn! - Help save babies from abortion at https://preborn.com/KNOWLES PureTalk - Switch to Pure Talk by going to https://PureTalk.com/KNOWLES and save an additional 50% off your first month! - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6 Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA Follow on Facebook: ht...
Loading summary
Transcript17 lines
- [00:01]
Michael Knowles
Reminder, the Daily Wire will be live as we go to DC for the inauguration of Donald Trump. Watch live. Join the fight DailyWire.com Subscribe President Trump will not be inaugurated for another six days, and the Congress is already working to give him Greenland. One of my very favorite members of Congress has just introduced the Make Greenland Great Again bill. He joins the show momentarily to discuss our future Arctic brethren. Michael I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show. My friend Congressman Andy Ogles will be coming up with our future conquest of our snowy neighbors to the northeast. Greenland. Also, a very sad lady just claims to have slept with a thousand guys. And it's not even, it's not even the lady who was previously promising to sleep with a thousand guys to break the world record. It's some other porn lady who's doing it. And we won't get too into the details, but we will get into the political significance. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to preborn.com knowles this sanctity of Life Month, we are remembering the lives of over 66 million babies lost to abortion since Roe v. Wade. What is particularly concerning is that even after Roe was overturned, access to abortion has actually increased because of the abortion pill, which now accounts for more than 60% of all procedures. However, there is hope. Preborn is making a real difference. Having saved over 300,000 babies, they are continuing to help save about 200 more every single day. Here's what's amazing. When an expecting mother has the chance to hear her baby's heartbeat and see that baby on ultrasound, the likelihood of her choosing life doubles. Preborn provides free ultrasounds and shares a message of love and support for both mother and child. They need our help to continue this vital work. For just 28 bucks about the cost of a dinner out, you can sponsor an ultrasound that could help a mother connect with her baby for the first time. Here's the best part. Every dollar you give goes directly to saving babies. This is an organization that I personally support. I think you get an incredible return on your investment here. Give whatever you can. Dial £250, say keyword baby. That's £250, keyword baby. Or if you prefer, make a secure donation online@preborn.com Knowles K N A W L E S Before we get to the extreme weather, friends up to the northeast in Greenland, I wanna talk about extreme weather here in America because CNN is furious that Americans are not making the connection between the wildfires still raging in Los Angeles and climate Change.
- [02:50]
Jim
I don't think Americans are making this connection. And the way we can see this in right here and now, take a look at the monthly change in Google searches. Look at the searches for wildfire, up 2400%. My goodness gracious. This is the most amount of people searching for wildfires ever, ever. Going back since Google Trends began back in 2004. But look at climate change. Look at the change. It doesn't go hand in hand with wildfires. It's actually down, it's down 9%. And I also looked in California. There has been no increase in the number of searches for climate change. So the bottom line is this, Americans are definitely interested in learning about these wildfires, they're interested in following the news about the wildfires, but they are not making that connection with climate change. That's the bottom line here.
- [03:39]
Michael Knowles
That's true. And that's the bottom line. And that's happening because there is no connection between the wildfires and climate change. That's why it would be as if this CNN guy is looking up there. He says, look, searches on Google for wildfires are up 2,400%. But searches on Google for Campbell's cream of mushroom oup are down 14%. It boggles the mind. Jim, People are not drawing the connection between the devastating fires in California and a delicious mid century canned soup. It's just, can you imagine, Jim, back to you, right, they're not drawing the connection between those two things because those things are unrelated. In what way could you possibly argue that LA burning down is connected to climate change? Some people have tried to make this argument. You've seen this in certain liberal media outlets. They've said that the Santa Ana winds are unprecedented, they're historic. We've never seen winds upwards of 100 miles an hour before. That just isn't true. In fact, you can look in some of the very same liberal outlets, certainly the same type of liberal outlet, you will see reports on winds exactly as fast as these 97, 98 hundred miles an hour. Going back to 2011 or earlier. Santa Ana winds. I lived in LA for what, six, seven years? The very gusty winds this time of year have been common knowledge for a very long time. What is tied to climate change? The fact that sometimes LA catches fire. Louisiana has been catching fire since time immemorial. That's why California used to have forest management policies that would clear brush, that would perform controlled burns, that would make sure that the water systems were ready to put out fires that cropped up. All of those things failed in Recent years, President Trump himself warned Gavin Newsom about this, going back to 2018 and 2019, and even more recently, even earlier this year, said, you know, California, you gotta get back to clear and brush, otherwise you're gonna have a catastrophic fire. Hey, California, you gotta stop pouring rainwater to the tune of 95% of your rainwater from the delta into the Pacific Ocean. You gotta save that rainwater. You, you're not in a drought right now. You're just wasting your fresh water. And so you're gonna run out of water if there's a fire. Hey, you gotta fill up those reservoirs. Hey, you gotta make sure the fire hydrants work. Hey, you gotta make sure that you take any precautions whatsoever. I don't even. I'm not even making the broader argument that climate change is just a liberal cult. I'll make that point elsewhere. But just in this. What is the argument? What is the argument that there's a connection between climate change and these fires? The reason that this CNN guy is panicking over people not making the connection between climate change and the LA fires is not because of some crisis of scientific literacy. Ordinary people are far more scientifically literate than the climate change alarmists. The reason that the CNN guy is panicking, the reason that the liberal media are panicking more broadly, is because of the waning influence of a specific kind of propaganda. Back in 2004, during the heyday of climate alarmism, during the era of Al Gore and that stupid movie with the PowerPoint that won him an Oscar, even though the PowerPoint was totally bogus, that movie that had so many factual errors in it that the United Kingdom required classrooms to present a warning before playing the movie because it was so factually incorrect. At that point, yeah, people were searching climate change. And then it turned out the predictions being made by the climate alarmists weren't true. Just like in the 1970s when the climate alarmists, not only in the media but within the scientific community, were making warnings about global cooling. And then it didn't come true. And at a certain point, you say, all right, guys, your predictive power is virtually non existent. We're gonna tune into other people, especially here, when climate change is being used so cynically as a way for bad and irresponsible politicians like Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass to deflect criticism. Now, speaking of ridiculous propaganda, Joe Biden is making a claim as he leaves office that is even crazier than the economic claim he made two days ago. Two days ago he said, I'm leaving the American Economy in the greatest shape ever. It's terrific. And that wasn't true. Now he's claiming that when he became president, illegal border crossings came way down.
- [08:13]
Joe Biden
Look, let's get something in mind about the border. When I became president, the numbers came way down, number one. Number two, we had a circumstance where I pushed very hard for a bipartisan agreement to put more people on the border, more Secret Service agents, and guess what? He's on the phone saying, don't do it, don't do it. Make me look bad.
- [08:38]
Michael Knowles
Okay, two claims there. Let's take the second claim first. I had an agreement that was gonna really tackle the issue of illegal crossings, which I had already tackled previously. I just told you I'd already tackled that issue and it was not an issue anymore. But now, for the purposes of my second argument, it was a big issue and I was gonna fix that issue. Except Donald Trump didn't want to fix it. That bipartisan border bill would have made the border crisis worse. It would have given mass amnesty to people. It would have left the door wide open until you reached a threshold of thousands, thousands of illegal crossings per day. And then it temporarily would have shut down the border. But it was only going to exacerbate the problem of illegal immigration. Let's get to his first claim. His first claim is that when he took office, illegal crossings went way down. Here I have a graph from the BBC, not exactly a right wing news source, that shows migrant numbers at the US border. Total number of encounters by US border patrols per month. Here's 2018. Was Trump was president below 50,000. Below 50,000. Right around 50,000 here up until 2019. Just a little bit above 50,000. Then it spikes a little bit. Once the bureaucracy had undermined President Trump's ability to control the border, it was clear after those early days of the Trump administration, a lot of people could still get through. So it spiked. But then it did go down again, in no small part thanks to Covid. Covid allowed President Trump to wield state power in such a way that he could really close down that border. Dropped really, really low after 2020, down to something like. What was that? 15,000 crossings. That ticks up a little bit again. And then here we go. Joe Biden takes office early 2021. The numbers skyrocket. What did they? They more than doubled, Certainly more than doubled. At least. Went up, what, 2.5% or 2 and a half times, maybe even more. And then they've stayed up there and they spiked even higher in 2024. So the numbers don't lie. Joe Biden does lie. The numbers don't lie. This is a man totally disconnected from reality, just as we saw two days ago when he said that the economy was the strongest ever. And it's. Americans just know that isn't true. Americans go to the grocery store. Americans realize that eggs are expensive. Americans realize that it's harder to pay their bills. You can't lie to people about the basic realities of their life forever. This is how the Democrats lost in such a cataclysmic way in 2024, is the Democrats were pursuing a strategy common to derelict Italians in New York, which is deny till you die. They're saying, no, I got my story. I'm sticking to it. Oh, yeah, There are no illegal crossings. We fixed the border. It's great. No illegals coming in here and murdering people. No, no. And prices, they're really low. We're great on inflation. The economy, healthier than it's ever been, despite all of the evidence. Don't believe your lying eyes. Believe us. And the people, the majority of Americans with huge swaths of every demographic said, hey, that isn't true. You're lying to us. This is why the transgender issue was such an important one. Because while it's not in a daily matter as important to people as inflation or the ability to pay their bills, it's so absurd, it so represents that the Democrats have lost the common sense that they're now unmoored to reality. It's part and parcel of the same system of lies. You think the economy is bad? Well, no, I'm gonna tell you it's good. You think the border's open? I'm gonna tell you it's closed. You think that dude is a dude? No, I'm gonna tell you he's a woman, and he's gonna have to get changed in the public pool next to your little daughter. And the American people said, oh, you're just not living in reality. Either you're lying to me, which is very disrespectful, or you just have no idea what's going on. You are completely untethered from the ground. Either way, I'm voting for the other guy. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to PureTalk.com Knowles, you voted big bad government out, and you want efficient, good government in. Well, it is time to trim the fat from big bad wireless. If you're still on Verizon ATT T mobile, why, you could have PureTalk. Are you a little thick in the head? PureTalk my cell phone company gives you the exact same service on the exact same towers with better customer service because customer service is based right here in the US at half the cost. Now I know what you heard is PureTalk gives you similar service or comparable service. That's not what I said. It gives you the exact same service on the exact same towers for half the cost. There's no need to spend $85 or $100 per person on your wireless bill when you can get unlimited Talk, text and 15 gigs of data with mobile hotspot for just $35 a month. Help me help you. The average family of four saves about $1,000 a year with PureTalk while enjoying America's most dependable 5G network. Could you use an extra thousand bucks a year? Who couldn't cut the fat out of your wireless Bill? Switch to PureTalk by going to PureTalk.comKnowles PureTalk.comKnowles KWLAS Save an additional 50% off your first month with PureTalk, America's wireless company. Speaking of Joe Biden bragging about dubious accomplishments as he leaves office, one last brag. Joe Biden is bragging about bringing a bunch of Afghans. No, Afghans are the rugs. I always confuse Afghan and Afghani. I think Afghani is the person, Afghan is the rug. In any case, maybe he brought both in, I don't know. He in any case brought a number of Afghanis into the United States and he touts this as a great accomplishment.
- [14:18]
Joe Biden
I've done so much to help thousands of Afghan families resettle in the United States.
- [14:24]
Michael Knowles
So much. We've brought so many people from the most backwards country in the world, so many people in the most notorious hotbed of terrorism in the world. Well, we brought them totally unvetted into your communities. You're welcome America. How is this an accomplishment? First of all, to brag about bringing all these Afghanis here just reminds people that the reason he had to bring Afghanis here is because of his disastrous and deadly pullout from Afghanistan during which the Taliban immediately took over again. So the only reason we had to bring these people here is because they couldn't continue to live in Afghanistan because Joe Biden conceded Afghanistan to the enemy we had been fighting for 20 years. So not, not a great accomplishment. So called to leave office on. But then at a deeper level, this reveals a Democrats political problem right now. The Democrats biggest political problem right now is that their base supports things that most Americans hate. So the things that they have to brag about to rile up their base are things that are gonna turn off. Most Americans like bringing a ton of Afghanis to America. Their base might like that. Most Americans will say, hey, hold on. Can you not bring people unvetted from the most notorious terrorist country in the world to our country? Maybe. Hold up on that. The Democrat base loves it when Joe Biden says, we've got more illegal border crossings than ever before. That's right. We opened up the door and we said, come on in here, foreign nationals. We want you to invade our country. The Democrat base thinks that's great, but most Americans hate that. When Joe Biden comes out, he says, we've got the strongest DEI policies in the country. The base loves that. Most Americans hate that when Joe Biden says that he understands the plight of Hamas or whatever, when he comes out and he defends people that most Americans don't like, maybe the base loves it. Maybe Greta Thunberg wearing the keffiyeh is cheering in the streets. Most Americans don't like that. And so on and so forth. When Joe Biden says, we're gonna defend trans kids or we're gonna trans your kids parents, and you're not gonna do a damn thing about it, the Democrat base loves it. Most Americans hate it. So what can Biden do? A lot of political pundits will say, well, Biden just has to moderate. He just needs to play to the middle. Well, easier said than done when your base is so divorced from reality. You can't win an election without your base. I have sympathy for Joe Biden and the Democrats political problem here, but it's why, as he's leaving office, he's caught between Iraq and a hard place. Anything that he touts as a great accomplishment, as a great part of his legacy, some huge faction of his Democrat audience is going to hate it. Now, speaking of legacies, President Trump has the opportunity for an even more historic legacy than he's already gotten. He's looking pretty good right now. Trump is only one of two American presidents to win a non consecutive second term. He is simply a world historic figure. He has recalibrated the Republican Party after decades of stagnation. And now he might expand the territory of the United States by bringing in our Arctic neighbors and liberating them from their Danish tyrannical overlords. And he will do that with the help of my friend, Congressman Andy Ogles. Andy, thank you for coming on the show.
- [17:55]
Andy Ogles
Absolutely. Thanks for having me.
- [17:57]
Michael Knowles
So President Trump floated this back in the first term. He said we should have Greenland. It's strategic, it's close to us there's no reason that Denmark should be ruling Greenland. The Greenlanders don't really like Denmark that much. We want Greenland. And everyone made fun of him and everyone laughed. And then in the last month or so, President Trump brought up this Greenland idea again. People still thought he was joking, but he's been telling this joke for a while. Maybe it seems like there's some truth to it. And then just yesterday, I believe you introduced a beautifully named Make Greenland great again bill in the US House of Representatives. To do what? What would this legislation do?
- [18:38]
Andy Ogles
Well, it would authorize the purchase of Greenland. And so essentially what would happen is that the President would begin negotiations with Denmark, come up with some sort of deal, and then he would transmit the details of that Congress. And, and look, it might sound crazy and one might ask why would you want Greenland? But when you look at the activities of China and Russia in the Arctic Circle, they're literally operating on our doorstep. Not to mention that that Greenland is rich with resources and China has been making a play for those resources. So we have an obligation to the American people, to North America, quite frankly, to secure that territory. And Denmark has acknowledged that they have failed in securing it. I mean, we have a military security presence in Greenland than freaking Denmark does. Look, they're pissed off at me, quite frankly. They called yesterday and demanded a meeting. But look, at the end of the day we. It's America first, right? It's not America second. We're not isolationists, but we have to take care of ourselves because when the world gets in trouble, who are they going to call? They're going to call the United States of America. And if we're taking, not taking care of ourselves can be hard pressed to take care of anyone else.
- [19:49]
Michael Knowles
They're not calling Denmark, I'll tell you that. I think that the Greenland issue is a great political IQ test actually. Because if you ask the average Democrat establishment media listening lib on the street, they say, what do you think? Trump wants to buy Greenland. They'll probably pull their hair out. They'll say it's the craziest idea, he's a madman, whatever. But if you just look at the political history of this question, it's not difficult. You can just Google it. One sees the United States has been attempting to purchase or otherwise acquire Greenland for about 150 years now. This has been going on since the 19th century. Shortly after the Civil War, then again after World War II, President Truman tried to purchase Greenland because of its strategic significance, both as a matter of geography and also a matter of resources. This is actually one of the most longstanding plays of the U.S. state Department. So on the contrary, it's not some crazy shoot from the hip kind of idea. This is a pretty mainstream idea. And to your point, Andy, with China and other adversaries moving in on our turf, it would seem to be actually incumbent upon us to protect our interests. So nuts and bolts. What are the odds that this happens? Some people will say the President can just try to acquire Greenland on his own. Why does he need the US Congress to authorize this sort of thing? And how, how likely is it that Greenland actually becomes a part of the.
- [21:17]
Andy Ogles
U.S. well, to be determined. What I will say that there's a poll out there and the majority of Greenlanders would prefer to be a territory of the United States versus attached to some, you know, woke state in Europe. That being said, you know, I think this is, this has got more momentum than I think people realize. Obviously we've got to get to the 20th and all that that is going to go on over the next few days. Very exciting time here in D.C. but that being said is there's interest in the Senate to, to actually push this thing through, to send a message to Europe, Denmark and to Greenland that we're serious about this. Like you said, this is a historical play. This has been going on. It's been in our best interest for a very long time. And now we have bad actors, Russia and China, who are literally, literally operating on our doorstep. And if we were to acquire Greenland, that gives us a 200 mile radius there, nautical miles that we would control and have sovereignty over. So that's a big deal. And what that does is that creates strategic buffer for the United States of America. When you look at any sorts of aggression from anyone. But, but again, look, the, there's three existential threats to the United States of America. Our southern border, our debt and China. And one of those is literally operating on our doorstep in the Arctic Circle. They want Greenland, they want to have a military presence up there. Why? It's not because they're, they're worried about Canada. It's because they're worried about the United States of America. They want to see us on our knees. We have an obligation to think forward and to. Again, this is, this is 4D chess, right? We've got to move and out move China as they look, look, they think in terms of dynasties. They're always thinking on 100 year plan. We think in the terms of Starbucks and the next drive through. We've got to get out of that mentality and understand our adversary, China, wants us subservient to them.
- [23:03]
Michael Knowles
That's absolutely right. And we have unified government right now. So some people, we don't have physics class anymore so much, but Congress has the purse strings. I think it is quite wise and prudent for Congress to say, all right, we're backing this play. Mr. President, if you want to engage in negotiations to acquire Greenland, we're with you. Hopefully we can get the Senate on board as well. And hopefully Republicans can actually use the power that the voters have given them in a unified way and protect the interests of the U.S. andy Ogles, one of the very best in Washington, D.C. thank you for coming on the show and I look forward to seeing you at inauguration later on this week and early next week.
- [23:38]
Andy Ogles
Absolutely, my friend.
- [23:39]
Michael Knowles
Thank you. Very exciting. Making Greenland great again. Making America big and arctic again. I am all about it. Now we turn from this very happy, exciting story to a more unsettling story, a really disgusting story, actually. But before we get to that, history is about to be made and the Daily Wire will be live from D.C. to bring you every moment as Donald John Trump is sworn in as the 47th president of the United States. This is not just an event, it's a movement. We're making sure that you are front and center for all of it. To celebrate, we're giving you 25% off new Daily Wire, plus annual memberships. With your membership, you will get exclusive access to our ad free uncensored shows. Plus a growing library of hit movies, original series, groundbreaking documentaries that are reshaping culture. Join the fight today. Use code Daily Wire. I'm Sorry, use code DW25@DailyWire.com subscribe for 25% off. Now, enough happy stuff. We gotta get to something that is truly revolting. But we'll get through it quickly and there will be a lot of political significance to it. Some horrifying succubus infected woman has claimed to have slept with 1000 men in 12 hours. I am not going to promote her or her video. I'm not gonna play the video of her bragging about this, though. Now, her video bragging about this has actually underscored a point that I made about how perverse our society has become. I made this point last week, which is that the most prominent pornographic moments of the last few months have involved women not even taking their clothes off. They involved that one gal who said she slept with 100 men in one night and she wanted to sleep with 1000 and she broke down crying. But the video that went viral wasn't some explicit video. It was her crying about it in a documentary. Then this gal, this horrifying woman also went viral earlier this month for walking into a Five Guys burger place and saying, hey, can I have the five guys? Where's the five guys on the menu? And propositioning some young man. Young man was great. He said, I'm Christian. I'm saving myself until marriage. And then the video basically cut out there. But even that she was totally clothed. This one here, she's just bragging about it. Totally clothed. She's not, you know, she's not shaking anything or stripping or anything like that. It is as though what really titillates today is not exactly sex. It's not even really. It's not even nudity. It's just women debasing themselves. That the thing that is most tantalizing and most pornographic to modern audiences is at this point, almost wholly divorced from sex and nudity. It's just personal debasement that is real. Depraved society has reached a new level of depravity. Nudity. Sexuality is ubiquitous. So now you need more. You know, it's like someone starts with marijuana, they move up to meth. People need the stronger stuff to titillate them. So this gal claims to have slept with 1,000 men in 12 hours. I did some rough math on this. I'm a little skeptical of her claims. I guess it depends on what the definition of slept is, you know, And I don't want to really think about it more than that. So who knows? I mean, it would not be surprising if this woman who's engaging in extremely gross and sinful behavior would also lie to people. So it could be that maybe she did. Maybe she's defining sex in a creative way. But in any case, it got me thinking about the ubiquity of this kind of behavior because there's a story at a Newsweek said, how many women are doing this? Newsweek published a piece in December of last year, just December 6th. Are 1.4 million American women using OnlyFans? Here's what we know. According to the Washington examiner, which is being cited here by Newsweek, there were 3 million women, or I guess some men, too, but mostly women prostituting themselves on OnlyFans. And 67% of the revenue goes to Americans. So this platform isn't releasing its exact user numbers, but the examiner found that 1.4 million American women are OnlyFans creators. The outlet went further, saying 2% of American women aged between 18 and 45 are. Are making pornography on that platform. So I don't know if those numbers are true. It's very difficult to arrive at those numbers. But let's say that that's right. Let's say the Washington examiner and Newsweek are correct. That means that 1 in 50American women between 18 and 45 are actively making pornography on OnlyFans. 1 in 50. Now add onto that the women who have made pornography on OnlyFans and have quit. Who knows what that takes? The number to then add on to that the number of women who have ever taken and sent a nude photograph to a boyfriend. What percentage of American women have made pornography? The number causes one to shudder. Just to even consider what that number might be causes one to shudder. And I know that people are gonna say, michael, you're making a false equivalency here between people who actively perform in pornography or take pornographic photos and women who just take nude photos and send them to a boyfriend. That's not really pornography, is it not? It fits the dictionary definition of pornography, which is to make an image or actually write a story, but let's just make an image that involves nudity and sexuality and appealing to the prurient interest. That's what that is. Now, some people will object and they'll say, well, no, Michael, that's a private photo. Private photo. You think anything is private that you do on your cell phone? It's a private photo between you, your boyfriend, and the nsa. That's a private photo between you, your boyfriend, and the Internet service provider. Furthermore, you might break up with your boyfriend, or you might have a dirtbag boyfriend who's showing that picture around to other people. How many women, how many court cases have there been of these photos leaking? The photos might leak even without the will of the boyfriend. That's not. Those pictures often don't remain private. But even if they did remain private, it's still pornography. And there are a lot of guys now who are thinking, well, I don't want to marry a woman who's involved in pornography. And I am fully of the Christian belief that people can repent. They can be forgiven their sins in the course of justice. None of us should see salvation. I consider myself reasonably good, and yet I could accuse myself of such things that were better my mother had never borne me. Okay, I all sin and fall short of the glory of God. We can repent. We can turn. It depends what direction you're moving in. However, that doesn't remove the real practical concern. A lot of people don't want to marry someone who has engaged in pornography. And yet, if these numbers are even close to being real, and then certainly when you add on sexting, you know, women who have sent nude photos to sometimes multiple men, that they're just out there in the ether, that is a major problem. I don't even bring it up to shame any individual women just to show how pervasive this issue is. I almost wonder at this point what percentage of women, at least of the Zoomer generation, have not engaged in some kind of pornography. Big, big social problem. And there are gonna be squishes who say, oh, well, who cares? It's no big deal. It's just a. You know, it's a matter of individual personal freedom or whatever. I think it's a big social problem. If this is going to discourage marriage, if this is going to pollute people's minds, if this is gonna. This is gonna lead some huge portion of American women to make themselves into a kind of prostitute, that seems like a social problem, that seems like a political problem that politicians need to address. My favorite comment yesterday is from Diana Laubenberg, 7532, who says, Imagine, you know, John Lennon, Imagine all the people Imagine is an evil song. It seeps in while the mind is unaware. Too many people love the music and never stop to think of what the words mean. That comment of the day could have been written by Plato and sort of was written by Plato in the Republic. This is the danger of music. Music, more than any other form of art, bypasses the reason, and it goes straight to the sensitive parts of the soul. It just bypasses the brain. Okay, and so you'll be listening to the song. The song sounds kind of dun dun dun dun dun, boom boom boom boom boom, ba da da dun. And then you realize the lyrics are just like, imagine God were dead and we were all communists then we could just take each other's stuff and turn to worm food. When we die, we would all take a dirt nap and life would be meaningless. That's a horrible song. But it sounds really pretty when you're listening to it. So pretty that Jimmy Carter, a supposed Christian, and plays it at his funeral in a cathedral. Totally nuts. You gotta watch out what you're listening to. It can bypass your reason and it can corrupt your reason. Plato had it right. He had a lot of things right, actually. Okay, now turning toward reasonable matters, trying to go directly to the reason. I want to answer your questions in the mailbag, but you gotta send them in to me. And you gotta do a few things to do that. You gotta go to dailywire.com you go to watch. You go to the Michael Knowles show page. Then you click Send in a mailbag question. You can send in a written mailbag question. That's easy enough. An email pops up, you just send it in. Or you can send in a voicemail back question, which are my favorites. To do that, you just record your voicemail question. Keep it to under a minute, please, so I can play it on the show. Some people want to send me their life story. Their audiobook of 6 hours, less than a minute, 30 seconds is even better. You record that. Just attach it to the email, send it in, and then I can hear your mellifluous tones and your beautiful questions on Friday and I can give you my answers. Now, happily turning to some good news again. At least one sexual norm is being restored, and that is at Facebook, and that is at the hands of Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg, who has announced with great courage that he will remove tampons from the men's bathroom at Facebook offices. We are so cooked. To use the language of the zoomers. We are cooked. We are boiled and brew and fried and sauteed, and we are cooked. That this is a great cause to celebrate that one of the biggest companies in the history of the world is finally taking tampons out of the men's bathroom. Woo hoo. We did it. Conservatives. Oh man. If these are the victories we have simply lost. But whatever, okay, I'll take the victory for what it's worth. In Silicon Valley, in Texas, and in New York, Zuckerberg is reminding people that men and women are different in at least a modest way. There's Criticism, though. Michael McConnell, who is the co chairman of the Meta Oversight Board overseeing what's going on at Facebook, says in an interview that Zuckerberg is, quote, buckling to political pressure. He says, I would have liked to have seen these reforms laid out in less contentious and partisan times so that they would be considered on the merits rather than, you know, Donald Trump is president and now they're caving in. Okay, so Zuckerberg is right to get the tampons out of the boys bathroom. Kamala Harris lost in part because her running mate put tampons in boys bathrooms. It's really ridiculous to put tampons in boys bathrooms. However, the chairman or the co chairman of the Meta Oversight board is right. Zuckerberg is obviously caving to political pressure. That's what this is about. Let me see, let me see what you think. There are two ways to read this. Either the multi billionaire genius who invented Facebook after dropping out of Harvard just yesterday discovered that boys and girls are different. He just figured it out. You know, it took him a little. He's a little thick in the head, but he finally figured out boys and girls are different. Or Zuckerberg is caving to political pressure because Trump is about to become president in a matter of days and Republicans are gonna have unified government. And Republicans have not yet forgotten how Facebook punished them for years. How Facebook censored conservatives, tried to limit our reach, went all in on booting Trump out of office in 2020. How Zuckerberg personally helped to rig that election to give Democrats an advantage in ballot drop boxes and in all of the rule changes that came into play because they used Covid as an excuse. Zuckerberg realizes he is on the wrong side of the new sheriffs in town. And he is doing everything he can to get ahead of the investigations, to plead and beg for mercy, and to suck up to the Republicans who are coming into power and to make these minor little gestures to suggest to the Republicans that he's really on their team. Okay, well, good. I'm glad you're doing that, buster. That's great. But I remember when your company nearly destroyed my company. And it's not just the Daily Wire, though. Daily Wire was probably the most prominent on the right. Really? Probably the most prominent in news on Facebook. And then one day, Facebook decided to limit our reach by, what was it, 90%? Wasn't just us, it was other right wingers as well. Certainly other people within the MAGA orbit. Was that because of a change in market dynamics? No, that was because censors at Facebook, radical leftists, decided to put their fingers on the scale and try to control our public square. And in a self governing republic, if you control the public square, you more or less control the political order. I remember that. So good. Get the tampons out of the men's bathroom. That's great. Good. Cave to political pressure. That's smart to do. You don't get off the hook that easily. That would be my message to members of Congress. I would not let Big Tech off the hook that easily. Because if Zuckerberg's gonna cave to political pressure with Trump coming into office, guess what he's gonna do when the Democrats win? It's gonna be the exact same thing. We're gonna be right back where we started. Now, speaking of Big Tech, Steve Bannon is going to war with Elon Musk. There is a fight within maga, within Trump world. Steve Bannon who was the chief strategist of the first Trump campaign, he was in the White House. As a strategist, Bannon has declared war on Elon Musk, who is now President Trump's right hand man, who dumped an absurd amount of money into the campaign, who really injected a lot of excitement into the 2024 campaign, who purchased Twitter to give right wingers at least a little bit of a foothold into big tech. So who's got a lot of goodwill in his own right? What does Bannon say? Bannon says, I will have Elon Musk run out of here by election Day. He said this in an interview with the Corriere della Serra, which is an Italian newspaper. He is a truly evil guy, a very bad guy. I made it my personal thing to take this guy down, Bannon says of Elon, because before, because he put money in. I was prepared to tolerate it. I'm not prepared to tolerate it anymore. Then he went on, this was really over the H1B division. Steve Bannon says, we need less migration. We don't want these H1Bs. And Elon Musk says we need more H1Bs. We want more Indians coming in and doing American jobs. Elon goes on. He says, peter Thiel, David Sachs, Elon Musk are all white South Africans. He should go back to South Africa. Why do we have South Africans? The most racist people on earth, White South Africans. We have them making any comments at all on what goes on in the United States. Now, this is really shocking because the second part here is an attack from the left. It's Bannon attacking Musk from the left. He's saying, Thiel, who's been a big supporter of conservative causes, big supporter of our Vice President, soon to be Vice President, J.D. vance, David Sacks, big supporter. And Elon Musk. They're white South Africans and white South Africans are racist. Hold on, wait. Am I hearing a radical leftist from the 1980s? Hold on. Where is it? But what this tells you, Steve Bannon is not a leftist by any stretch of the imagination. What this tells you is Steve Bannon is willing to fight. As dirty as it's going to take to go after Elon Musk, he's going to use any tool at his disposal. And in modern America, at least until recently, the accusation of racism was a very powerful tool. I'm not sure it's as powerful as it used to be, but he's gonna use any attack from the right, from the left, from anything. So what team are you on? Are you on Team Bannon? Or are you on Team Musk? I suspect there's gonna be a divide with the audience here. I think there's gonna be a divide within MAGA and among Trump supporters because this is a natural fault line within the American right that has existed for over 70 years now. This is the fault line between the conservatives and the libertarians. This is the fault line between the traditionalists and the more classical liberals. This is the fault line between the Paleo conservatives and the neoconservatives. This has existed for a long time. On the one side, you have the conservatives saying that America is more than an economy. We're a country and we have an economy. But we want the economy to serve the society, the common good of the people. Want the tail to wag the dog. So, yeah, it's true. Indians who take low wages, who are well educated, they can help our economy. And there's nothing against Indians. We like some Indians, but we gotta make sure that we keep social cohesion, that we defend American families, that we defend American workers, that we look after Americans first before we look to other people around the world. And that we're not just merely cogs in a machine trying to tick the GDP number up a little bit. But we are American citizens who are trying to have a good, strong, thriving country for good, strong, thriving people. A country that is made up of people, that's not just full of interchangeable parts that can be traded out willy nilly because America's an idea floating in outer space. That's the conservative argument. Now, the libertarians and the neocons and the liberals and that side of the conservative movement of the American right, they're gonna say, look, we want efficiency, we want creative destruction. We wanna be really strong economically. That's what really matters. That's how we have a great country. And we believe in America. We believe in the principles of America. And some of those people out there in Uttar Pradesh, those guys are actually more American than the people who go back 10 generations in West Virginia. Because those people believe in the ideas of America. They're gonna work hard. And these Americans have gotten lazy and stupid. That's an argument that explicitly some people on that side have made. And that's gonna resonate for a lot of people, too. But I guess my only observation on this battle is to point out this is a perennial battle on the American right. This is not going to be resolved in a week or two. This did not come out of nowhere. It's not because Steve Bannon woke up on the wrong side of the bed one morning. It's not because Elon Musk decided to become an interloper in American politics in some unprecedented way. This is a fault line that has existed for the entire history of the American right, certainly since the Second World War. And those fissures could create a real political problem for Trump because he has to keep that coalition together. Which is why my resolution to this, withholding my personal views on particular aspects of this question of migration and the economy is we need unity, we need Republican unity for like 100 days. And we're probably gonna not get much more after that. But we've been given unified government. We have this major mandate for President Trump, elected to a non consecutive second term, wins the popular vote as a Republican for the first time in 20 years. Just like, keep it together, guys. That's my whole argument. Just keep it together for maybe 100 days and then we can go back to our typical division and dissension and trying to kill each other, but just, just give us a shot. Give President Trump a shot to do what he wants to do for 100 days. Then we can all go back to fighting. Now, speaking of the Trump team, the confirmation hearings begin today. And this is really, really interesting. In the last 60 seconds I have here, the Senate starts the confirmation hearings today. They're gonna get Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense, Doug Collins, former congressman from Virginia, or I'm sorry, former congressman, who is up to run the va. Doug Burgum, who's former governor, ran for president, he's up for Secretary of the Interior. Then tomorrow you get Rubio for Secretary of State, Pam Bondi for Attorney General, Kristi Noem at dhs, the former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe for CIA, the former OMB director Russell Vaught to go back and take his job again at omb. Sean Duffy, former congressman for Transportation Secretary, and the oil executive, Chris Wright for Energy Secretary. Then Thursday you're gonna get Lee Zeldin, former congressman, ran for governor of New York. He's gonna be up for epa, hedge fund executive Scott Besant for Treasury Secretary and the former NFL player Scott Turner for hud. Who else aren't there? Where are the big guys? I mean, it's interesting to talk about Scott Turner, but what about Tulsi? What about Bobby Kennedy? What about Kash Patel? When are their confirmation hearings? We don't know yet. They're not scheduled. Maybe next week, maybe the week after that. Now, Elise Stefanik, who's also a shoo in at the un, she also hasn't been scheduled But I can't help but notice here there is only one controversial confirmation hearing scheduled this week, and it's the very first day, and that's Pete Hegseth. The libs really want to take down Pete. I think Pete will be an excellent Secretary of Defense. I think he's going to get through, but the Democrats are going to throw everything they can at him. So you get Pete, then you get a bunch of people who are shoo ins, and then later on you get the other controversial ones. Tulsi Gabbard, Bobby Kennedy Jr. Cash Patel. What this tells me is Pete is the canary in the coal mine. Pete is going to go in there to see how tough the Senate is gonna fight to block Trump's nominees. If he gets through, it's gonna be a little bloody. But if he gets through, expect Tulsi, Bobby Kennedy, Cash Patel to have their hearings lined up ready to go. We're gonna have smooth sailing into January 20th. But if they really hold up Pete, there's going to be some rethinking about how to move forward with Tulsi, with Kennedy, with Kash Patel. This is the test. And let's wish Pete the best of luck. Maybe we say a prayer for the success of this administration. We'll know a lot more tomorrow. Today is te hee Tuesday. The rest of the show continues now. You don't want to miss it. Become a member. Use code Knowles Canada wles at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. I've often said that gender affirming care is health care. It is mental health care, and it can actually be suicide prevention care. I think I'm gonna take some medicine so I can kind of like transform into a boy, get surgery. After the surgery, I didn't really feel any better when it stopped being a thing for adults and it started to be a let's teach this to kids. Total lie manipulation. It's gaslighting. Please stop. He's a boy, not a girl. How could she do this to my son?
- [48:18]
Andy Ogles
What they're talking about is, is hormonal.
- [48:20]
Michael Knowles
Therapy or sex reassignment surgery on children. I thought fixing me externally would fix me internally, but of course I was wrong. The fact that the state thinks that they're more important and have a better say in what happens to your child over the actual parents opinion is egregious. Puberty blockers, surgeries, big money makers for hospitals, for physicians. All I want to do is hold my son. Are you out asking me to lie to parents? And he said yes, this is a weaponized use of a parent's sympathy and caring and concern by the left to destroy your child. Let's tell kids that maybe they can be the opposite sex. Maybe they actually are the opposite sex. It is an evil thing to tell children that happiness lies on the other side of puberty blockers or double mastectomies. The left so badly wants to blur these lines. That's a five alarm fire. It's criminal.