Michael Knowles (17:01)
So Bondi is such a good pick that even the top Democrats are not going to say that she's unqualified. They used that attack against Pete Hegseth, but they're not going to use it against Bondi. They're just going to worry out loud that Bondi might use the Office of the Attorney General to target President Trump's political opponents. Why might they be worried about that? Where does that grave concern come from? The guilty flee when none pursue it. I remember reading we're going to be speaking to Father Mike Schmitz from Bible any year later. I remember that line from the Bible, the guilty flee when none pursue it. Democrats are real concerned about the AG's office wielding the power of the state to persecute political enemies. Might that be because that is exactly what Merrick Garland did for Joe Biden? Might that be because the Attorney General has, in an unprecedented way, sought to prosecute the former president, chief political rival to the sitting president? Might that be even beyond persecuting Trump, because the Attorney General's office has ignored legitimate terrorist threats in America and instead categorized parents and Catholics and pro lifers as potential extremists and radicals, spied on them in their churches, shown up to their home in front of all their kids, arrested them for peaceably demonstrating in front of abortion centers? Might that have something to do with it? Might this fear be a projection and a confession from Democrats who realize, shoot, we have been behaving in a very naughty and maybe illegal way, certainly unprecedented way, for four years, and we thought we were always gonna be in power, and we thought we had our permanent electoral majority, and, oh, not only did the Republicans win, but they won in a total landslide and they got unified government and Trump even won the popular vote. And yikes. What's good for the goose might be good for the gander. I think that's what's going on here. I think it's the telltale heart. I think it's a little bit of a guilty conscience. Far more than anything Pam Bondi has said or done. That's what has Democrats worried about her. Now, some good news just before, even more good news, I guess I should say, just before the inauguration. The FDA has just announced that it will ban red dye number three. The crunchy moms, the right wing hippies everywhere are gonna be thrilled about that. My wife, my wife is gonna be thrilled about this. Many women we know this is unusual because 10, 15 years ago, the left was the political faction that cared about organic food and worried about Monsanto or whatever and thought that all sorts of things in our water and food supply were gonna poison us. And now that's totally flipped. And it's flipped because the Democrats have become the party of corporations and Republicans have been the party of independence and dissidents and small businesses and local government. That's what started to flip here. Used to be when I was a kid, Republicans were the party of rich uncle pennybags and corporate America, and the Democrats were the party of the little guy and the independent, the weirdo and the hippie. And that's totally flipped now. So you gotta ask yourself this question. Why is the FDA banning red dye? Now? The FDA has known since 1990 that RED3 was linked to cancer. They've known that for 30 years at this point, 35 years, red dye is linked to. Well, it's found in candies, snacks, fruit products. We're one of the last major countries to allow this stuff into our food. The EU stopped its use in 94 Japan, China, the UK, Australia, New Zealand. Why? Why is this happening now? Because Trump is about to be inaugurated and this is a Trump issue. It's kind of like the ceasefire deal in the Middle East. If this had happened six months ago, a year ago, you'd say, okay, it's because of Biden and his political program here. This is the FDA trying to get ahead of something. This is the FDA getting ready for Bobby Kennedy to come into office. This is good regulation. And this can happen now in part because of another major political shift, which is that conservatives are warming up to some regulation. When I was a kid, Republicans hated regulation. They wanted to deregulate everything. If they could shrink the government down into nothing, that would be better. Some Republicans spoke as though they were anarchists, for goodness sakes. The Democrats were the party of regulation in the popular consciousness. But of course, neither party is really Totally for regulation or totally against regulation? Democrats are pro regulation when it comes to killing businesses. They're pro regulation when it comes to taking your money. They're pro regulation when it comes to taking children away from their parents and exposing children to radical gender ideology. They're very much in favor of regulation there. They're against regulation when it comes to allowing people to do really weird freaky stuff. They're against regulation when it comes to drugs. They're against regulation when it comes to sex. They're against regulation personal sexual behaviors. They're against regulation when it comes to all sorts of derelict things. And same goes for Republicans. We like some regulations. We don't like other regulations. The question is not the procedural norm of do you regulate or not? Now, we recognize that the real debate is just over what kind of regulations are we gonna have. We're gonna have a government. We're gonna pass laws. We're gonna do good and avoid evil. I hope so. What? So what's good? What are we gonna do? What's bad? Seems to me that red dyes that give you cancer so that the twizzlers look a certain color. That's probably bad. I don't wanna besmirch twizzlers. I don't know for a fact they use red dye number three. I'm just taking a guess here. Red dye is used in a lot of stuff that's bad. Okay, that's good regulation. I'll take it. I'll take this new, mature, robust Republican Party that is willing to get down and govern. And we have a reminder here. The Daily Wire will be Live in Washington, D.C. for the inauguration of Donald J. Trump as he has sworn in as the 47th president of the United States. We are not just watching the story. We are bringing it to you live and uncensored. To celebrate the 47th president, we are giving you 47% off new Daily Wire plus memberships. Plus, we're including a free $20 gift as a thank you for joining the fight. Remember, Daily Wire plus is the only place where you get our daily shows ad. Free, uncensored. Plus unlimited access to premium entertainment. Hit movies, groundbreaking documentaries. Join the celebration. Use code 47dailywire.com subscribe you will get 47% off your membership today. Speaking of other major changes and regulations, TikTok is planning to shut its app for us users on Sunday, just as I was about to become a TikTok star. Federal ban going into effect unless the Supreme Court blocks it. So the Supreme Court could block this law from going into effect and save TikTok. And I'm sure many zoomers would like that to occur. Now, China, which created TikTok, is trying to get around this. There's a new app that many, many millions of Americans are downloading to try to evade the ban. But right now it looks as though TikTok could be killed. And this also would seem to be because President Trump's about to take office. And Republicans have been really vocal about the ban on TikTok. They've been very supportive of it. In principle, I'm supportive of it. I don't think anyone has a right, a natural right, a human right, a constitutional right to this app. I think the app is probably bad for you. So I think social media in general, people should try to minimize their use of it. I'm not. In principle, I'm all for a TikTok fan, especially because you have an adversarial nation that could easily use TikTok and probably is using TikTok to spread propaganda to our nation. However, I gotta ask myself, who is most in favor of the TikTok ban? It's not Republican congressmen, it's not Republican senators. The people who are most in support of the TikTok ban are Facebook and YouTube and Google. The people who are the most supportive people. That's gonna be Mark Zuckerberg. That's gonna be Sundar Pichai. That's gonna be the big tech bros in America. And why? Well, because if you kill TikTok, you're killing off major competition for Instagram reels and Google Shorts, YouTube Shorts. That's why. And then I think, all right, well, let me think about those corporations for a second. So I don't love TikTok. I don't love China. But I do know that Facebook and Instagram have been censoring me for years. That's all come out. Zuckerberg's admitted that. He said, hey, now that Trump's coming into office, don't worry, we're gonna fire the fact checkers and we're gonna, you know, it'll be cool. We're cool, right, Republicans, you definitely don't wanna regulate me or wield antitrust against me or anything, right? Huh? Too little too late if you ask me. So I know that Facebook has been trying to kill me for years, kill my political voice. And I know that Google and YouTube have been a little rough on conservatives too, haven't they? They've censored a lot of things that conservatives wanna say, a lot of true things, especially most obviously during COVID especially during the contentious 2020 election. But they've censored all sorts of other things. So I think. Hold on. I don't necessarily need to conclude that the enemy of my enemy is my friend to recognize that TikTok is a good counterbalance to Facebook and YouTube and maybe Republicans shouldn't be so fast to celebrate its shutting down. My ideal world is Facebook and Google and YouTube. Get in line and then we can turn off the Chinese app and we can just have good, normal public square in America. If Facebook and YouTube are not willing to play ball, throw a little TikTok in there, make them play ball. Speaking of digital media, Sam Alito, the great Supreme Court justice, has asked a wonderful question about pornography. People are making fun of him for it, but it's actually a really, really good question that gets to an issue far beyond pornography, actually gets to questions of free speech in the public square. Sam alito asked if Pornhub.com has essays in it by Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley, Jr. He said, this is while they are considering HB 1181. This is a Texas law requiring porn sites to verify the age of users. Very simple stuff. Pornhub repeatedly has demonstrated that it would rather totally cease to do business in a state rather than comply with a simple law that says you gotta make sure that kids aren't looking at your product. That's it. To me, that says a lot about a company. But pornhub is challenging this, of course, and they don't want to, quote, use reasonable age verification messages to limit the distribution of their product. So the Free Speech Coalition, which is a porn association, they call it Free Speech Coalition, but it's just pro obscenity, it's pro licentiousness. They're trying to block this law. And Alito says one of the parties here is the owner of pornhub. Is it like the old Playboy magazine? You have essays there by the modern day equivalent of Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley, Jr. Everyone's making fun of him, saying, you old boomer, you don't know what pornhub.com is. You know, I think he does. I think Sam Alito, one of the most intelligent men in the country, one of the greatest jurists in the country, I think he knows the answer to his question. And I think most good lawyers know you never ask a question to which you don't know the answer. What he's pointing out is the kind of free speech arguments that were made in defense of Playboy half a century ago do not hold for these digital media Porn companies, In this case pornhub, the biggest porn company in the world. Back in the day, people could say, oh, I read Playboy for the articles, and they were probably being disingenuous. But the pro porn faction pointed to the essays, pointed to the articles, and said, no, see, this has redeeming artistic merit. And so you can't call it obscenity and you can't ban it as porn. Do you know anyone who watches pornhub for the articles? Do you? I don't want to ask. Look, who knows? I don't want to log in and check to see if they've got articles on the website, but something tells me they don't. What is the significance of essays? Well, it gets to the Miller test. The Miller test is the court's test to figure out what is obscene. Obscene content is not protected by the First Amendment. There's no right to go strip naked and perform a lewd act in the middle of the street. That's not free speech. So the Miller test says that a work, in order to be considered obscenity, has to appeal to the prurient interest according to contemporary community standards. So it's got to appeal to lust. It's got to depict, in a patently offensive way, sexual content. And it has to lack serious artistic, political or scientific value. Beautiful question from Alito. I think it should be absolutely deadly to pornhub's case here. No one's watching pornhub for the articles. So they can either institute reasonable age verification measures to make sure that little kids aren't using their product, or. It seems they really don't want to do that. They're just terrified of having to do that to make sure that kids aren't looking at their product. So then they're going to have to stop doing business in places like Texas. Okay. Works for me. Speaking of artistic merit, you're gonna wanna sit down for this one, folks. Pull out a hankie if you have it. Maybe pull out the world's smallest violin. Over 200 Hunter Biden paintings have been lost in the LA fires. You know, Hunter has been hiding out in. I think in Malibu. And he's been doing his little doodles, his little bubble paintings, and he's been selling them for a lot of money. Well over 200 of his paintings, reportedly worth millions of dollars, have been destroyed in the fires. Okay, I am not doubting that the Hunter Biden paintings have at some point been priced at a value worth millions of dollars. I think that's true. But if it makes Hunter Biden Feel better? In four days, those paintings were going to be worthless because the price of the paintings never had anything to do with the artistic quality of the paintings. The price of the paintings was always just a way to launder money to the Biden family. It was always a way to bribe the Biden family and to purchase political influence. That's all it ever was. I don't know if Hunter started to believe his own press releases, but his paintings are very, very bad. It was just a way to buy off his father. So, okay, it's sad he loses four days of opportunity to enrich himself even further. But even then, Joe Biden's not running the country. No one thinks Biden is responsible for anything going on in the country right now. So I guess they were already worthless. Now, speaking of the Bidens, you know, this is totally unsurprising. Biden is trying to take credit for that ceasefire deal. We'll see if his argument holds up. First, I want to tell you about my favorite comment yesterday. It's from Gina, who said, michael, when you made the comment today about Tim Kaine being almost one heartbeat away from the presidency, I thought you said harpy away from the presidency, which is still fitting. Love your show. Good point, good point. I could have said either. It would not have changed my meaning. Joe Biden's trying to take credit for the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas. Statement from President Biden. Does anyone think he's even read this? Today, after many months of intensive diplomacy by the United States, along with Egypt and Qatar, Israel and Hamas have reached a ceasefire and hostage deal. I laid out the precise contours of this plan on May 31, after which it was endorsed by the UN Security Council. So he's saying, I did this, I did that, this is my plan, even though it's happening right before Trump gets inaugurated. It's me, actually. Seriously, guys, we welcome the news. I will speak about this soon. I am thrilled for all the stuff that I did. This reminds me of Jimmy Carter and Iran. Some of you are old enough to remember that just as President Reagan was being sworn into office, the Iranians released American hostages. The American hostages had been held for a very long time, and the Carter administration totally failed to get them out. And just as Reagan is being inaugurated, the hostages are released. And the Carter administration tried to take credit for it. So we're the ones doing the negotiations, we're the ones doing the diplomacy. Yeah, maybe. But had Reagan not been inaugurated that day, do you really think that the hostages would have been released? No, it Was so clear, couldn't have been clearer. The Iranians released the hostages because Reagan was coming into office. And the same thing here. This ceasefire is happening. You want to talk about Joe Biden predicting things and offering specific solutions? Donald Trump, after he gets elected, he goes, hey, you're going to wrap up that war. Figure it out. You Hamas, you're in trouble for the next few months. And you, Bibi, like you and I support Israel and it's great and everything, but wrap it up. I am not going to deal with this when I'm president. Figure it out. And guess what happened? We have a ceasefire deal now. There's some question over whether or not the sides are going to honor the peace fire deal. I am fairly optimistic, at least over the next month or so, because I don't think Trump's going to put up with this. Trump, ironically, is much, much, much more pro Israel than Joe Biden. And yet, perhaps even because of that, he might be able to wield a little power to say, all right, Bibi, do what you gotta do, whatever you want. We're gonna look the other way for a few minutes here and then it's over. Okay? And that's not gonna be thanks to the diplomacy of Joe Biden, certainly. Now, speaking of Bidens, I've said for months now, you cannot convince me that Jill Biden and Joe Biden voted for Kamala. In fact, increasingly, I would say, you can't convince me they didn't vote for Trump. Jill shows up on Election Day to vote, cameras all over, wearing a red dress after Kamala lost. Joe Biden is making remarks at the White House, and she says, aren't we all just feeling joy this season? Aren't we all feeling so much joy in this Christmas season? Because joy was the pathetic attempt at a campaign slogan, sort of like fetch in mean girls, that Kamala never made it happen, but she really tried. Seemed clear as day to me. Jill, I think, voted for Trump. Joe, I don't know. Maybe Joe wrote in his own name, maybe Joe wrote in Mickey Mouse. Did Joe even vote? I don't know. But now we got proof. Joe Biden is on the record. She was talking the Washington Post. She was asked about her reaction to the Democrat Party pushing her husband out. And she says, let's just say I was disappointed with how it unfolded. I learned a lot about human nature. She was asked about Nancy Pelosi in particular. And Jill said, I've been thinking. I've been thinking a lot about relationships. It's been on my mind a lot Lately. And we were friends for 50 years. It was disappointing. 50 years, that's right. These people have been around for a long time. Joe Biden got elected to the Senate, what, 1972. Nancy Pelosi's been in the federal government since, I think, 1861. So it was somewhere around there. Right. It's been a long time with these people. And Nancy shoved her good friends, the Bidens, right under the bus the moment it became convenient. And Joe Biden didn't like that. There's a lot of infighting. We always focus on the infighting on the Republican side because there is a lot of infighting. But there is a different kind of infighting on the Republican side versus the Democrat side. The Republican infighting, I think, is primarily ideological because there is no homogeneity to the Republican coalition. You have libertarians, you have neocons, you have traditionalists, you have social conservatives, you have the religious right, you have this, you have that, you have the other. On the Democrat side, you just have progressives. Now you have infighting on both. But on the Republican side, it is ideological. On the Democrat side, I think it is personal. I think it is opportunistic. I think it is cynical. And that's what you saw here. Nancy Pelosi, to this day, by the way, still defends pushing Biden out, says if Biden had gotten out sooner, maybe we could have gotten a good candidate in, unlike Kamala Harris, and then maybe we would have beaten Trump. I think Biden would have done better against Trump than Kamala Harris did. I don't even think that should be particularly controversial. I still think Trump would have beaten Biden, but I think Biden's right to think he would have done better than Kamala. In any case, the Democrats are all fighting each other. It's not about ideas. It's not about the common good. It's not about what they think is best for America. They're just fighting petty personal grudges, and I am totally here for it. Okay, Speaking of bitterness, there's a story I meant to get to yesterday. A priest in Spain has been accused of a hate crime after a homosexual, a practicing homosexual socialist mayor, was not permitted to receive Holy Communion. Now, for those of you who are not Catholic, I'll give you a little primer here. To receive Holy Communion, one must be in a state of grace. That means one must have confessed one's sins and have avoided mortal sin, at least since that time. Just getting to socialism, putting homosexuality aside for a second, just socialism. The popes have Been very clear. A Catholic cannot be a socialist. Pope John XXIII said it well. He said, a Catholic cannot subscribe even to a moderate form of socialism. Pope Leo XIII writes about this in Rerum Navarum. This is reaffirmed by Pope John Paul II in Chintesimus Annu. You have a number of the Piuses, Pius, I think, Pius X, the 11th, the 12th, talking about, maybe Pius IX, talking about how Catholics can't be socialists. So that alone would be a big problem for this mayor. Add on to that that he's a practicing homosexual. This is one of the sins that historically, one of the four sins that historically has been understood to cry out to God for vengeance. This is a grave, mortal sin that is disordered and requires confession and absolution. And the guy who knows about the other problems. But anyway, if he's very public, and he's a public figure about these sins, makes perfect sense for the priest to say, hey, you need to go confess. You need to do what the Catholics do in order to receive Holy Communion. And the mayor says no. He wants to accuse him of a hate crime here. The reason that a priest would withhold Holy Communion from this mayor is for the mayor's own Good, because St. Paul says that if you receive our Lord in the Holy Communion and you are not in a state of grace, you are eating your own damnation. So it is actually an act of charity to withhold the Holy Communion from such a person until they get their life back in order. The mayor says, no, you have to give it to me. Why? Why does the mayor want Holy Communion so badly? He doesn't want to follow the faith. He doesn't want to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church. He clearly doesn't believe the Holy Communion is what Catholics believe the Holy Communion is. So why does he care so much? Because this is radicalism. This is what radicalism always does. It seeks to make reality bend to its own fantasies. This is what it does. This is just like same sex marriage. I have no particular issue with people who have certain afflictions and inclinations like that, but you can't tell me that marriage is other than it is. When an LGBT activist says, we demand same sex marriage, we demand marriage equality. I say, well, I can't give that to you because marriage just is what it is. And it's like you're asking for wet fire. There's just no such thing as wet fire. It's not within the nature of fire to be wet. I demand a dark sun. Well, I can't give you a dark sun. It is not within the nature of the sun to be dark. Why demand Catholic Holy communion but I'm not going to practice the Catholic faith. Well, I can't. I'm sorry, the priest says I can't give you that. When they are demanding these so called rites. What they are really demanding is a redefinition of reality and I can't give them that and a politician can't give them that and even a priest can't give them that. Their issue is not with any of us. Their issue is with reality. Now speaking of priests, we have a marvelous priest and a famous priest, a celebrated priest coming on the show that would be one of the top podcasters in America, Father Mike Schmitz. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member. Use code Noel Sknwlas at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.
