Ep. 1660 - FAFO: Trump Destroys Colombia

Summary

The Michael Knowles Show - Episode 1660: FAFO: Trump Destroys Colombia

Release Date: January 27, 2025

---

1. Trump vs. Colombia: Deportation Flights Blocked

Timestamp: [00:00]

The episode opens with Michael Knowles addressing a significant international incident: the Colombian government, led by Socialist President Gustavo Petro, has blocked two U.S. deportation flights carrying individuals deemed illegal criminals. Knowles critiques Petro's decision, stating it "jeopardized the national security and public safety of the United States."

Key Points:

• Trump’s Retaliatory Measures:
  • Emergency Tariffs: An immediate 25% tariff on all Colombian goods entering the U.S., escalating to 50% in one week.
  • Travel and Visa Bans: Immediate revocation of visas for Colombian government officials and their allies.
  • Enhanced Inspections: Tighter Customs and Border Protection inspections on Colombian nationals and cargo based on national security concerns.
  • Financial Sanctions: Treasury, banking, and financial sanctions targeting Colombian elites' assets in the U.S.

Notable Quote:

"These measures are just the beginning. We will not allow the Colombian government to violate its legal obligations with regard to the acceptance and return of the criminals they forced into the United States."
— President Trump [00:30]

Outcome: Approximately one hour after Trump's announcement, Petro conceded, agreeing to comply by dispatching the presidential airplane to retrieve the deportees. Knowles interprets this capitulation as a victory, highlighting it as evidence of Trump's effective and decisive leadership.

Notable Quote:

"Doesn't it feel good to have a real competent president again?"
— Michael Knowles [05:00]

2. J.D. Vance Confronts Immigration Policies on CBS

Timestamp: [06:53]

J.D. Vance, President Trump's mentee, appears on CBS Face the Nation, engaging in a robust discussion on immigration with host Margaret Brennan. Vance challenges the characterization of America as "founded by immigrants," emphasizing the role of settlers instead.

Key Points:

• Vance’s Critique of Current Immigration Policies:
  • Argues against lenient immigration policies, citing national security risks.
  • Highlights cases where supposedly vetted immigrants posed terrorist threats.

Notable Quotes:

"This is a very unique country. And it was founded by some immigrants and some settlers. But just because we were founded by immigrants doesn't mean that 2,240 years later that we have to have the dumbest immigration policy in the world."
— J.D. Vance [07:11]

"I really don't care, Margaret."
— J.D. Vance [10:07]

Knowles praises Vance's performance, suggesting his articulate and precise responses position him as a pivotal figure in the potential second Trump administration.

Notable Quote:

"Make America great again is probably the greatest political slogan of our time. Just below that is 'I really don't care, Margaret.'"
— Michael Knowles [10:40]

3. Confirmation of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense

Timestamp: [35:00]

Pete Hegseth’s confirmation as Secretary of Defense is a focal point, with Knowles detailing the Senate vote dynamics. Despite opposition from Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Mitch McConnell, Hegseth secures the position through Vice President J.D. Vance’s decisive tie-breaking vote.

Key Points:

• Senate Vote Breakdown:

  • Support: Majority Republican senators.
  • Opposition: Collins, Murkowski, and McConnell expressed reservations, reflecting internal GOP divisions.

• Knowles’ Analysis:

  • Views the confirmation as a strategic win, underscoring the significance of unified government under Trump’s leadership.
  • Criticizes McConnell for his opposition, attributing it to strained relations with Trump.

Notable Quote:

"Winning is what matters, right? And it doesn't matter if you win by one vote or 100 votes. Pete won, Trump won."
— Michael Knowles [35:15]

4. Assault on DEI Initiatives and Educational Indoctrination

Timestamp: [25:00]

Knowles discusses the dismantling of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs following new executive orders. He highlights resistance from local governments and educational institutions, using the Durango School District in Colorado as a case study.

Key Points:

• Durango School District Incident:

  • Conflict over display of Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Pride Progress flags in classrooms.
  • School officials reclassify these symbols as government speech to prevent open forums for alternative views.

• Broader Implications:

  • Represents a national struggle against leftist indoctrination in educational settings.
  • Emphasizes the need for continued resistance to DEI mandates at all government levels.

Notable Quote:

"We cannot keep doing this without your support. Every dollar you spend helps fuel the battle for truth and sanity in our country."
— Michael Knowles [26:00]

5. COVID-19 Origins and the CIA’s Stance

Timestamp: [30:00]

Addressing the ongoing debate over COVID-19’s origins, Knowles critiques the New York Times for reporting that the CIA now favors the lab leak theory. He asserts that the intelligence community has long been aware of this possibility, framing it as a vindication for Trump’s skepticism towards Chinese intentions.

Key Points:

• Trump’s Perspective:

  • Suggests COVID-19 may have been a strategic move by China to derail his trade policies and political standing.

• Media and Intelligence Alignment:

  • Views the New York Times and CIA’s stance as a convergence of post-Trump leadership acknowledging previously dismissed theories.

Notable Quote:

"The CIA doesn’t now favor anything. That’s not true. Trump is now the president."
— Michael Knowles [33:00]

6. Commentary on Javier Milei and Global Liberalism

Timestamp: [20:00]

Knowles highlights Argentinian President Javier Milei’s outspoken criticism of liberal elites, labeling them as pedophiles and promoting harmful agendas. He connects Milei’s rhetoric to broader global struggles against progressive ideologies.

Key Points:

• Milei’s Statements at Davos:

  • Accused liberal elites of promoting the LGBTQ agenda and gender ideology, framing them as morally corrupt.

• Contrast with U.S. Policy:

  • Emphasizes the necessity of enforcing traditional values and laws against progressive overreach.

Notable Quote:

"At a certain point, if a group of people continues to condone abusive behaviors, just needlessly support ideologies that conduce toward child abuse... we just have to enforce the law."
— Michael Knowles [25:30]

7. Psychedelics and Religion: A Critique

Timestamp: [30:00]

In a brief segment, Knowles critiques a CBS article advocating for the use of psychedelics within Jewish religious practices. He challenges the integration of psychedelics into sacred traditions, questioning their alignment with established religious morals.

Key Points:

• CBS Article Summary:

  • Explores claims that psychedelics can enhance spiritual experiences and deepen religious connections.

• Knowles’ Opposition:

  • Expresses skepticism about psychedelics fostering genuine religious awareness.
  • Cites personal anecdotes of friends misinterpreting psychedelic experiences regarding sin and morality.

Notable Quote:

"The devil appears as an angel of light. Sometimes you kind of judge the tree by its fruit, don't you?"
— Michael Knowles [32:00]

---

Conclusion

Michael Knowles delivers a fervent critique of current political and cultural trends, championing President Trump’s policies and actions as decisive moves against perceived liberal overreach. From foreign policy maneuvers against Colombia to domestic battles over immigration and educational indoctrination, Knowles emphasizes the importance of maintaining traditional American values and enforcing the rule of law. His analysis is interwoven with notable quotes that underscore his unwavering support for Trump’s administration and its objectives.

For those seeking to delve deeper into these discussions, subscribing to The Daily Wire and accessing exclusive content is recommended.

Transcript

[Michael Knowles]

The Colombian government blocked two US Deportation flights on Sunday. Here is how President Trump responded. I was just informed that two repatriation flights from the United States with a large number of illegal criminals were not allowed to land in Colombia. This order was given by Colombia's Socialist president, Gustavo Petro, who is already very unpopular amongst his people. Petro's denial of these flights has jeopardized the national security and public safety of the United States. So I've directed my administration to immediately take the following urgent and decisive retaliatory measures. Emergency 25% tariffs on all goods coming into the United States. In one week, the 25% tariffs will be raised to 50%. A travel ban and immediate visa revocations on the Colombian government officials and all allies and supporters. Visa sanctions on all party members, family members and supporters of the Colombian government. Enhanced Customs and Border Protection inspections of all Colombian nationals and cargo on national security grounds. Ieepa, treasury, banking and financial sanctions to be fully imposed. This is going at the President's money. Just a little side note here. This is going at the President's money. Maybe some money the Colombian elites have stashed in the United States. Who knows? Goes right for the money, continues. These measures are just the beginning. We will not allow the Colombian government to violate its legal obligations with regard to the acceptance and return of the criminals they forced into the United States. So Trump sends that out. The libs start screeching and whining and crying. But then, what do you know? One hour later, one hour later, we get this note from el Senor Presidente de Colombia. Now, my Spanish is not very good, but I can see a really important phrase bolded here. Avion presidential. So from my pidgin Spanish ear, it would appear to me that the Colombian president totally caved immediately. Not only said that he would accept the illegals, but in fact, send his presidential airplane to go pick them up. This is pretty good stuff. This serves two purposes, really. This serves the purpose, the immediate objective of deporting criminals. This also, however, serves the broader strategic objective of telling the world we mean business. The new strategy has already proven a success. It turns out it really is that easy to deport illegal aliens. The Democrats just don't want to. I've got one question for everybody, one question I've been asking myself over the past week. Doesn't it feel good to have a real competent president again? I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show. Speaking of Latin American heads of state, Argentinian President Javier Milei Just traveled to Davos for the World Economic Forum where he called them all pedos. There's so much more to say. First though, go to livegood.com Michael, I am so excited to tell you about LiveGood. LiveGood is doing something revolutionary in the supplement industry by offering premium quality products without all the ridiculous markups. Now, what caught my attention, you know me, I'm a quality kind of guy. They have a major commitment to quality. They've got this incredible team of natural health experts creating these formulas. And the best part is by cutting out the middleman, they're able to offer them at the lowest prices you will find anywhere. I've sometimes been skeptical of health products in my earlier life, but this is the Maha age, baby. Okay? This is the age of Bobby Kennedy and crunchy trad moms and President Trump. And so I'm really, really excited. I really love livegood. I think they're terrific. They've got everything from organic super greens and multivitamins to collagen, weight loss products, even skincare. All top quality stuff at prices that will not break the bank. There is a reason that they are the fastest growing supplement brand out there with over 1.5 million satisfied customers. Are you ready to make the switch and start saving? We will make it even easier for you. Use our link. You can save an additional 10% off your first order on top of the already lowest prices. Go to livegood.com Michael M I C H A E L to save 10% on your first order, that is. Livegood.com Michael, do not miss out on this opportunity to invest in your health without overspending. You know, the Colombian president, he was trying to save face. I think his argument was, well, I'm gonna send the presidential jet because I just care about the dignity of these migrants. I don't want them flown here on military aircraft. It's about the dignity. I don't think so. That's not passing the BS test. I think that he called that he was bluffing, first of all when he said, we're not going to take these planes. He obviously doesn't want the Colombian criminals in his country, even though they're Colombian and they're not American and they need to go back to Colombia. He was bluffing and President Trump called his bluff. Now, the question always is, well, is Trump bluffing too? That was the question that Vladimir Putin had in Russia when Trump said allegedly that he would hit Moscow if Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine. Question is, is he bluffing? Well, maybe he is bluffing, but with Trump, can You take the chance. Now, in this case, Trump obviously was not bluffing. He already had the tariffs and the sanctions and the visa restrictions and all of it in the works. Once the Colombian president immediately caved and started following the law and allowing the United States to enforce its own law, then Trump said, okay, look, some of these measures have already gone into practice and we're going to lift them once we have confirmation that the illegals are on the ground in Colombia. Some of these, like the really heavy tariffs, we're just going to keep them in reserve until next time. You got that, Colombian president? Comprende, amigo? Yeah. Good. All right, good. I'm glad to hear it. Now, while President Trump was dog walking the Colombian president, Trump's mentee, J.D. vance, was proving that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. He was doing an interview on CBS Face the Nation in which he was grilled on immigration, notably the claim that America was founded by immigrants.

[Margaret Brennan]

Well, this is a country founded by immigrants.

[Michael Knowles]

Well, this is a country founded by.

[Margaret Brennan]

This is a unique country.

[J.D. Vance]

This is a very unique country. And it was founded by some immigrants and some settlers. But just because we were founded by immigrants doesn't mean that 2, 240 years later that we have to have the dumbest immigration policy in the world.

[Michael Knowles]

Really good response from JD Here. And I'm glad he got this settler word in because just at a very literal historical level, America was not founded by immigrants. That's just a lie. The libs say it all the time. They've been especially saying it since the middle of the 20th century onward. But that is just part of the liberal mythos that isn't real. America was founded by settlers. This isn't ambiguous. We have the records. We know the history. There's a cigar company named after the people who founded America called Mayflower Cigars. Great, great cigar company. We also have the Xicar lighter available right now. We have some in stock if you want it. Go get it now. If it sells out, I don't want to hear about it. It's a sidebar. The pilgrims on the Mayflower were not immigrants. They were settlers. Many of the other people who came were settlers. They came to a new land. They settled treaties with some of the people who were still there, even though it was a largely barren land. But there were still some people there. They established treaties. They had alliances, they fought wars. Sometimes wars were launched on them. And ultimately they conquered and won. And back in those days, we still had a notion of the right of conquest, the law of Conquest. And then now we have a country. There is very, very little similarity between the settlers who came on the Mayflower and some MS.13 gang member who hops the wall on the Rio Grande and comes into America to bring fentanyl. Very, very little in common. Some would say almost nothing in common. Okay, so JD Here, he's saying, look, we were founded by immigrants in part, but it's also settlers. So immigrants have played a big role in America. Half my family came over on the Mayflower. Half my family came over on a sardine boat from Italy. Okay? They were immigrants. I'm not knocking that immigrants have contributed to America. But please stop repeating this ridiculous canard that we were founded by immigrants. We were not. Even if we were, that wouldn't mean that we need to take 10 million of them all the time, coming over from dubious circumstances, working with dubious criminal organizations. Nobody needs that. But the interviewer here presses the point. And this is where JD Had. And I know this word is overused, but I think you need it here. He had an iconic response.

[J.D. Vance]

Well, Margaret, I don't agree that all these immigrants or all these refugees have been properly vetted. In fact, we know that there are cases of people who allegedly were properly vetted and then were literally planning terrorist attacks on our country that happened during the campaign, if you may remember so clearly, not all of these foreign nationals.

[Margaret Brennan]

But there are 30,000 people in the pipeline. Afghan refugees.

[J.D. Vance]

My primary concern as the Vice president, Margaret, is to look after the American people. And now that we know that we have vetting problems with a lot of these refugee programs, we absolutely cannot unleash thousands of unvetted people into our country.

[Margaret Brennan]

These people are good. These people are vetted.

[J.D. Vance]

Just like the guy who planned a terrorist attack in Oklahoma a few months ago. He was allegedly properly vetted. And many people in the media and the Democratic Party said that he was properly vetted. Clearly, he wasn't. I don't want my children to share a neighborhood with people who are not properly vetted. And because I don't want it for my kids, I'm not going to force any other American citizens kids to do that either.

[Margaret Brennan]

No. And that was a very particular case. It wasn't clear if he was radicalized when he got here or while he was living.

[J.D. Vance]

I don't really care, Margaret. I don't want that person in my country. And I think most Americans agree with me.

[Michael Knowles]

There it is. There's the mic drop. I really don't care, Margaret. So, first of all, JD Is so good at this. I Think this is going to be a big feature of the second Trump administration. Trump is going to send Vance out to do a lot of these shows because Vance is really, really good at sparring with the journalists. Trump is quite good at it in his own way. But Vance is really, really good at being precise. He knows the party line. He's obviously deeply educated and intelligent and he's articulate. He's just really good at this. Okay? I could see this being a huge part of the Vice President's role in the second Trump administration. And that's what he grills her on here. She says, well, actually there are vetted immigrants, okay? And they're all vetted. And he says, yeah, what about the guy who just performed a terrorist attack? That guy was supposedly vetted. Okay? That was a really particular case. And I don't actually, I don't think that really counts because he was wearing a blue T shirt and it wasn't like a beige T shirt and he just gotten a haircut. He was having a rough day. He woke up on the wrong side of the bed and he just cuts her off. He says, you know, I really don't care, Margaret. We're not gonna let him in. Okay? That's it. That is the response that needs to be the Republican response to all of these people. Make America great again is probably the greatest political slogan of our time. Just below that is I really don't care, Margaret. Yeah, I really. We're not gonna do it. The arguments I've just made are really good, Margaret. And you're being obtuse and you're keeping your head in the sand and that's fine, I guess that's your prerogative. But we just won unified government from the American people. And most people don't want some face tattooed criminal illegal alien in their neighborhood. And look, I don't have to deal with it, cuz I'm like a rich powerful guy, but I care about my country, unlike the rich powerful liberals. So if I don't want it for my kids, I, I'm not gonna force other Americans to have it for their kids. And you know, I just really don't care, Margaret. I love it so much. There was a clip years ago also on CBS actually, of Scalia talking to Lesley Stahl. And Leslie Stahl was asking Scalia to explain how torture was not cruel and unusual punishment. They said, well, it's cause it's not punishment. It's a tactic to get information, but it's not punishment. And she couldn't process this. She said no, but she. But no, you know, it's like you're trying to beat the you know what out of him. And she's just stamme over her words. And at a certain point he cuts her off and says, well, anyway, that's my opinion and it happens to be correct. And this is the new version of that. Well, anyway, I really don't care, Margaret. We're deporting them. I'm sorry that you're so upset that we deport face tattooed Mexican Satanists and Taliban members. Yeah, I know that upsets you, but I really don't care. Now, I do care what you have to say, which is why I want you to know how to submit voice mailbag questions. It's very simple. You go to DailyWire.com, you click the Watch page, you click the Michael Knowles show. It's all right there. It's all very easy. Then you click Submit a mailbag question. You can send your written mailbag question. Just opens up a little email box. You can send the written mailbag. Or if you want to send a voicemail back, here's what you do. You record it on your phone, however you record audio. But I am imploring you, I'm begging you on my knees, keep these voicemails to less than a minute. Some people wanna send me their life story and I don't have time for that on the show. Less than a minute. Ideally less than 30 seconds. Submit. If it's over a minute, it just will not be played on the show, so you have to limit it. Okay? So you record your voice message, add it to the email and then send it in. And then I will get to hear your beautiful dulcet tones, your mellifluous voice. Now, speaking of immigration policy, we have the numbers. President Trump's first week, he arrested 538 illegal aliens and he deported hundreds more. That's according to the White House. That's great. I'm not knocking it. This is a breath of fresh air. You're really not going to hear complaints out of me. However, we need to recognize what this is. And that is a good start. This is not the best it's going to be. I hope not. This is not a huge show of Force. No. 538 people, plus hundreds more. Let's be generous and say that hundreds more takes the total arrested and deported to 1,000. 1,000 per week comes out to 52,000 per year. 52,000 per year comes out to 208,000 per term. And President Trump's only getting one term unless Andy Ogles constitutional amendment goes through, which probably will not happen. You're talking about at this rate, deporting 208,000 people. Now, I think we should give President Trump a little break here, okay? He's been a little bit busy this week. He's accomplished an extraordinary amount in the first week. However, we need to dramatically ramp up the deportations. I'm not even saying by 20% or 50%. I'm talking about by orders of magnitude. You need to radically ramp up the deportations. The conservative estimates say that There are between 11 and 16.8 million illegal aliens in the United States. Some people think the number is much, much higher than that, but I'm using conservative estimates, 11 to 16.8 million. So that means that right now, if we just deport 208,000 illegals per year, that we will have deported 1.2% to a little under 2%. It's just not enough. That's not even close. So it has to ramp up dramatically. Now, the political problem is that illegal aliens have families here. So it's gonna create a big issue if you start deporting people's like Aunt Gertrude. I guess their names aren't Gertrude, but it'd be like aunt, you know, Maria or something. So I understand the political problem, but even if you are only deporting the really, really bad ones, you need to ramp that up dramatically, which I trust will be done. Again, you're not gonna hear complaints out of me. This is the first week of a presidential administration in my lifetime. It's all phenomenal. I'm all into it. But just keep these numbers in mind just to even have an appreciation for the scale of the problem that President Trump faces. Do you know how hard it is to deport 11 to 17 million people or more? It's really hard. Okay, so I give them a little grace, but means we gotta ramp things up a little bit. Now the libs are complaining because President Trump's first deportation flights were expensive according to them. This is the argument. According to the Mirror UK, Trump's first deportation flights, with average of just 80 migrants, cost up to 852,000 doll per trip. All right, that's expensive. I agree. Just 80 migrants on the flights and it cost $850,000 per trip. That's okay, so what, 10 grand per flight per seat, rather. Okay, but let's put this into perspective. How much does it cost just to have illegal aliens in the country? By the way, these are the very worst. So these are the Ones who are killing people and raping people and committing all sorts of particularly heinous crimes which you can't really put a dollar number on, but in as much as you can cost a lot of money. But I'm actually putting that aside. I'm saying your regular average illegal alien who does not go out and murder people and rob and commit all sorts of other crimes in the state of California, which is where I am right now, it costs $132,860 to keep a prisoner in California for a year. Okay, that's just what it costs. So if we're just going to arrest the illegal aliens and not deport them, that costs a lot of money. And Trump is only deporting criminal aliens right now. The Federation for American Immigration Reform Fair says that each illegal or US born child of an illegal alien costs $8776 annually. That is not people in prison. That is not people who are committing crimes. That's just your average old illegal alien. Heritage foundation in 2010 found that each unlawful immigrant household costs $14,387. That is cost for services offset by the taxes paid. So that's being as generous as we can to the illegal alien households still costs over 14 grand a year per household. That's an outdated number. That's 2010. The number is certainly much higher now. According to the center for Immigration Studies, the average household headed by an immigrant, legal or illegal, costs taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare benefits. It's not counting state benefits. That is 41% higher than the $4,431 received by the average native household. Native American. I'm not talking about the feathers and the tomahawks. I'm talking about regular old Americans. Okay? So even take out the $132,133,000 to keep a prisoner. And these guys are criminals. Just regular old illegal aliens cost a ton of money. This flight is a good deal. Even if you're gonna pay $850,000 for a flight of 80 people, which I assume the costs can come down a little bit, but even if you are, that's a good deal. The libs are walking into a little bit of a trap here from the immigration restrictionists, which is they're saying, look how expensive this is. And the immigration restrictionists, even just the people who want to enforce the law are saying, yeah, do you have any idea how expensive it is just to have illegal immigrants? Because the libs will say, well, no, but they pay taxes. And, you know, they don't even get Social Security or whatever. Yeah. Okay. Even the small amount of taxes that they do pay. And they do pay some taxes when you consider that with the welfare benefits that they receive, not even counting the crimes that they commit, it costs us money to have them. Okay. They're a drag on the economy. So you want to come here with numbers to me, you want to come here, talk about the cost of the planes? All right, let's talk about costs. President Trump once again, the art of the deal. Great negotiator getting us a really good price. We all know President Trump hit the ground this week running, delivering on key promises, many of which were battles initiated and amplified by the Daily Wire. I'm happy to say our hit comedy film Lady Ballers tackle the absurdity and dangers of men competing in women's sports. We'll get to a story on that momentarily. Conversation now at the forefront of national policy debates thanks to new executive orders. Am I racist? The number one documentary of the decade exposed the race hustlers driving DEI initiatives. Following recent executive orders, DEI programs have been significantly dismantled at the federal level and scaled back by major corporations. We'll get to the risks. Daily Wire does have some exclusive info. We got some risks on that coming up. But in the moment, we're winning. Okay. The fight is far from over. So here's the deal. We cannot keep doing this without your support. Every dollar you spend helps fuel the battle for truth and sanity in our country. Now is the time to join the fight. Watch the hit movies docs series shaping our culture. Get access to so much more. Go to dailywire.com subscribe today. Speaking of Latinos, one of my favorite Latinos, Javier Milei, the president of Argentina, just went to Davos to the World Economic Forum to call all of those liberal elites pedophiles, promotes the LGB agenda, says that women are men and men are women only if that is how they perceive themselves. They say nothing when a man disguises himself as a woman and kills his rival in a boxing ring. Or when a prisoner claims to be a woman and ends up raping any woman who crosses his path in prison without going any further. A few weeks ago, the case of two American homosexuals who flying the flag of sexual diversity and were sentenced to 100 years in prison for abusing and filming their adopted children for more than two years made headlines around the world. I want to be clear that when I say abuse, it's not a euphemism because in its most extreme versions, gender Ideology constitutes plain and simple child abuse. So true. They are pedophiles. Therefore, I want to know who endorses these behaviors. I want to know who endorses these behaviors. Cuz they're pedophiles too. Javier Milei coming out swinging, man. You know, I met him a week ago at the Trump inauguration and I just had to translate what he said because Javier Milei doesn't speak English. Which is why actually in our picture together, I couldn't. I was speaking to him in English, but his security guard was yelling at me because I was holding a martini. And I don't know, I'm sure that guy's under a ton of threats and he might have thought that I was going to throw martini on him or worse. But anyway, in the picture, because Melaye didn't understand a word I was saying, he's looking at me like I'm about to pounce on him or something. But that guy, he's got the right idea. Over at WEF, it's pretty simple. It's like Orrin McIntyre has that meme that he posts. He says, it's not so complicated. These people just want to diddle kids. It doesn't explain the whole ideology, but it does explain some of it. At a certain point, if a group of people continues to condone abusive behaviors, just needlessly support ideologies that conduce toward child abuse and that really damage the lives of children and that put vulnerable people in really bad situations, at a certain point, I'm going to stop defending you and saying, well, you might have the best of intentions. At a certain point, you're complicit. Okay, that's true. Not just of the gender ideology. That's true. On immigration, that's true. I understand why someone might want more immigration or even open borders. But at a certain point, when people are getting murdered and raped and face tattooed, Satanists are hopping the border, poisoning Americans, at a certain point, you lose my sympathy. Okay? At a certain point, we just have to enforce the law. Now there's a story that Dwell has got. We'll have a longer Twitter thread on this later today. But you know, Trump is succeeding at dismantling dei, which is really, really great. You're seeing these initiatives across the federal government. You're seeing downstream effects of that. However, we cannot get complacent because the libs in the federal government at the state level and at the local level are going to try to resist this and they're going to try really hard and they're going to Try immediately. There's one story which we have from a school district in Colorado, Durango. The school board received a complaint that one of the classrooms was flying a Black Lives Matter and a Pride Progress flag. Pride Progress is the Pride flag, but it's got the trans and the BLM and I don't know, it's like the terrorist Pride flag. So we're flying these flags and a mother said, I want these flags in the classroom. So there was a review by the chief academic officer, and the chief academic officer said, yeah, all right, well, if the teacher's going to fly that, then we need an open forum for all flags. You know, this could be a First Amendment issue. And the district's lawyers did not want this open forum because they feared, and we have documentation of this, that the apparatchiks and the school board and the school district feared that this could open the pathway to a Straight Lives Matter flag in the classroom. Could you imagine heaven for Fend? We can't have that. So the district, the Durango School district has decided that what they're going to do is they're going to redefine things like Black Lives Matter, Black power, pride as government speech. Not political speech, but government speech. Now, I don't know the local laws, I don't know exactly how these lawyers are, in a Jesuitical way, trying to parse the difference. Obviously, government speech is political speech. Political speech does pertain to government speech. But I guess this is a legal distinction that would allow them to create protections for radical leftist ideology in the classroom, radical leftist indoctrination, but not trigger an open forum for other people to express their far more normal political views. The board is furious about this. They're referring to parents, concerned parents, as outside adults, as adults important to the child. This is giving Biden vibes, you know, this is giving radical extremist parent sorts of connotations. So they're considering this resolution now. They still want to embrace trans in the classroom. They still want to embrace so called gender affirming care, which is child abuse, as Javier Millay rightly pointed out at Davos. This district, by the way, should probably be a little careful because one of their teachers was arrested for child pornography. It's allegedly one of the teachers who was flying the pride flag was arrested for possession of child pornography and attempting to entice a child. Okay, so if I were this school district, I would be pretty cautious with the old pride flag. They're not. They're trying to enshrine all of this radical leftism contrary to the national movement against dei, contrary to the national movement against gender ideology. I mean, President Trump won unified government in large part because of these issues. But you're seeing so much pushback. Ways to hide the programs, ways to legally protect them while not protecting conservative speech that's going on. So, you know, we like the wins. We're applauding President Trump. We're so happy. You need to dig in at the local level, at the state level, even at the federal level, we're going to have to dig in because the leftists are not going to go down without a fight. Now, speaking of elites, breaking news. Pull over your car. Sit down if you're standing up. The New York Times is reporting that the CIA now favors the lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins. That story is from what, January 25, 2025. You might recall, you might recall during COVID this New York Times headline, senator Tom Cotton repeats fringe theory of COVID origins. Scientists have demissed dismissed suggestions that the Chinese government was behind the outbreak. But it's the kind of tale that gains traction among those who see China as a threat. Fringe theory, totally crazy. Actually, the CIA agrees. So now we, the New York Times, are going to admit it five years later. Okay, well, congrats to the New York Times, the paper of record, for admitting an obvious fact five years after everyone with two brain cells to rub together knew it. But even this headline is not accurate. This headline is obviously dishonest because it says, CIA now favors lab leak theory. That's not true. The CIA doesn't now favor anything. Trump is now the president. That's what happens. You could change the headline to Trump is now the President. And so the CIA needs to get in line. Yeah, that Trump was the president back in 2020, when Trump was the president that time, that time around the first go round, the deep state was doing everything it could to cut down this guy's administration. Before he even became president, the FBI and the DOJ were trying to kill his administration. Then they continued that effort through the Mueller investigation. You had the intelligence agencies conspiring against him, lying about him. Chuck Schumer even joked about it. He said, don't make enemies of the intel agencies. They'll get you 20 ways from Sunday, Trump is out of office. Then they try to throw him in prison. They establish the justification to kill him, which almost happened twice. And he comes back in and they just lost. Okay. The libs seem really demoralized right now. The agencies grudgingly seem to be getting in line. Trump seems to be exerting more power over them. And coincidentally, right now, the CIA says, oh, yeah, actually, the Republicans might have been right. We've known this. We've known this for a long time. Okay? The New York Times, I think, knew this for a long time. The only question to me is not, did the virus originate in a lab leak? That was obvious. That has been for years. The question is, was it intentional or unintentional? That's what I want to know. And I don't know the answer to that. Did the Chinese government intentionally leak Covid? Because when I look at the ways that people were conspiring against Trump back in 2020, 20, 19, 2020, I can't help but notice that Trump was waging a successful trade war against China. And Trump was looking like he was going to sail to reelection victory. And Covid was the way to, first of all, for China to stop that trade war. And Covid was also the way to give Democrats justification to change all the election rules. So I don't know. I'm not saying that it was intentional. I don't have any evidence that it was intentional. It might not have been intentional, but I could see that as a possibility, the very least. That's the debate. But the New York Times and the CIA for that matter, I'm sick of it with the CIA and the administrative government. These guys are pretending that the real controversy is over a debate that was effectively resolved five years ago. No, let's go. Let's move on, buddy. It's the Trump era. I know you're trying to catch up, but you're going to have to move a little faster now. Also, very exciting news in the Trump era. Pete Hegseth has been confirmed by a skin of his teeth to be the Secretary of Defense. Collins, Murkowski and Good old Mitch McConnell. Three Republican senators voted against Pete Hegseth and nevertheless, he overcame. We will get to how that went down. We'll get to another shocking vote that might switch to get RFK through in a moment. First, I want to tell you about my favorite comment of the day. That was on Friday. Spiderman and Jenny says two terms for president, only two terms for Congress as well. No exceptions, because some people love Trump and seem sympofantic. It's either sympathetic or sycophantic. Maybe it's both. That's a nice new word. Nice neologism. Look, I get the point. However, I'll point out Ronald Reagan disagreed with you. Ronald Reagan wanted to repeal the 22nd Amendment. He thought that there are term Limits at the ballot box. We have a natural kind of term limit in our American republic, and that is the voters at the ballot box. Now, some people think that incumbency is too hard to overcome. Maybe. I do not favor term limits, certainly not for the House of Representatives, not really for the Senate. And I'm basically with Reagan even on the presidency. And, well, Trump actually says he doesn't want to serve a third term, but I'm with Reagan at least. I don't think there should really be term limits, because there will be power. This is the thing. People want term limits because they think that it's going to limit power, but the power just exists. There is just a certain amount of power that is to be wielded in the government. The question is, by whom? Is it going to be wielded by the elected representative? Is it going to be wielded by the staffers and the committee staffers in the House? Is it going to be wielded by lobbyists? Is it going to be wielded by bureaucrats in the administrative state? That's the only question. But there will not be a reduction in power. So when you limit the power of the elected representatives, it just goes to one of the other guys. It just goes to a staffer or a bureaucrat or a lobbyist. It just goes to one of them. So that's why I get it. You know, I understand the impulse to say, no, we need term limits everywhere. But I think term limits moves power from people who at least constitutionally ought to have the power to people who wield it in much worse ways. So I'm not. I get it, but I wouldn't be so quick about that. PDeGseth5150 confirmed as SecDef.

[J.D. Vance]

On this vote, the yeas are 50 and the nays are 50. The Senate being equally divided, the vice President votes in the affirmative and the nomination is confirmed.

[Michael Knowles]

Here we go. The hits keep coming for J.D. vance. He had to break the tie because he's the President of the Senate as Vice President of the United States. So he goes down there. He joked. He said, I thought I was done voting in the Senate. Okay, well, we'll vote. So Collins and Murkowski, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski squished senators from Maine and Alaska, respectively. We kind of expected them not to vote for Pete. They're the squishy ones. They're the moderate ones. That's just in part, that's how they got elected. Okay, Mitch McConnell. That was unfortunate. Mitch McConnell voted against Tegseth on the DGAF anymore. Principle, you know, he's not gonna run for reelection. He's 150 years old. He's no longer even the Senate Majority Leader. He's done. He doesn't care. He doesn't like Pete for whatever reason, he doesn't seem to like Trump very much. Okay, he voted against him. So, people, initially, when I saw Susan Collins and Lisa Murzikowski post these essays to X explaining why they were gonna vote against Pete, my first impulse was, you jerks, we're gonna primary you. How dare you. We're not gonna forget this. But then I thought, hold on, they're both posting this at the same time? Maybe because Pete has the votes. That sometimes happens. Sometimes they'll hold off. They'll say, I don't know who I'm going to vote for. I don't know how I'm going to vote on a certain bill until they know that the other side has the votes. And then they'll say, okay, now I have cover to vote against this person. Then I can get reelected and I don't need to worry about my constituents. In the case of McConnell, that wasn't a concern. I think McConnell just doesn't like Pete and doesn't like Trump that much. But when I saw those two pop up, my second thought was, oh, good, Pete's got it. And he did have it, And I don't care. I don't care if Pete gets confirmed 51 to 50. I don't care if he gets confirmed 99 to 1. Whatever. What matters is winning. And this is what President Trump said. President Trump was asked, are you disappointed that McConnell voted no? And he had a cold as ice answer. His answer was no. I didn't even know that. No, I don't know that. I just heard that we won. Winning is what matters, right? And this is a principle that I quote frequently from cocaine, Mitch McConnell. The winners go to Washington and the losers go home. And it doesn't matter if you win by one vote or 100 votes. Pete won, Trump won. Good start. Now, as I've said from the beginning, they put Pete up as the first confirmation hearing as the canary in the coal mine. Pete is one of the most controversial nominees, along with Bobby Kennedy Jr. Tulsi Gabbard, cash Patel. So they threw Pete up there for the first confirmation hearing just as a trial balloon. Then they had a bunch of boring confirmation hearings, people like Marco Rubio, where everyone knew he was going to sail through. It's no question whatsoever. John Ratcliffe. They all knew he was going to get it. And then they were saving Tulsi RFK junior Kash Patel for later on. The fact that Pete was able to get through is good news for Tulsi RFK and Kash Patel. But RFK has got some more good news, which is the Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, senator from Rhode island, reportedly might vote for Bobby Kennedy Jr. That's really weird. Why is that? Because they're college buddies, that's why. That's actually why. According to a Politico reporter, White House has not ruled out the possibility of voting for Kennedy. He says, I'm not gonna reveal how I'm voting on any nominee. He gave a similar answer to Slate. Said, there's a bunch of stuff I want from hhs. I'm gonna hold my fire on that. I'm gonna hold my fire on how I'm gonna vote. Turns out these guys have been buddies since law school and they used to go hiking together and hunting together and they've been friends for a real long time. And because of that, it is being reported by swampy Beltway Press. Sheldon Whitehouse might vote for Kennedy. And I think that's great. And this shows you yet again the strength of a non traditional political coalition. Okay. Trump has put together an eclectic political coalition and there are plenty of Republicans who don't like it. I really like Tulsi Gabbard. There are a lot of Republicans who don't like Tulsi Gabbard. Okay. I don't really know much about Bobby Kennedy, even though he actually lived in the town over from where I grew up. He lived in the town I was born in. Went to church at my grandmother's church for like 60 years. So I've been around him for a long time, but I don't really know much about him. He seems fine. I guess there are a lot of Republicans who have a much tougher view of Bobby Kennedy than I do. Okay. There are some who just wish we were back in the Mitt Romney era. And it was all the predictable Republicans wearing all the predictable Brooks Brothers suits, and they all said the predictable things. And that's not Trump. Okay? Trump put together a wacky coalition. But one of the benefits of the wacky coalition is one, if you as a Republican keep losing elections with the old the McCain coalition, the Romney coalition, if you keep losing elections, it means you've got to mix up your coalition a little bit, so at least it gives you a shot to win. But then, two, once you do win, it helps you get your guys across the line, because Kennedy is a Kennedy, okay? The Kennedys are the dominant living family in Democrat politics. At least they have been for most of our lifetime. I think they probably are. They're still a huge one. Okay? And he's on Trump's side. And they're gonna pull over some Democrats. Even Tulsi might be able to pull some Democrats. Now, speaking of Bobby Kennedy Jr. And health supplements, there is a really silly news story app that I have to pull. This was published in cbs though. I like CBS recently because CBS aired I felt a very fair piece on why men voted for Trump that I happened to be featured in. So I'm not knocking cbs, but I am knocking this ridiculous idea put forward by a rabbi that psychedelics are an elephant in the room when talking about a sacred Jewish text and that psychedelics are actually maybe really important to the Jewish religion. Now, I'm just going to do a quick fact check with my Jewish associate producer here, Professor Jacob. Are psychedelics a key part of the Jewish religion? I've never taken them. He hasn't taken them. That's good. Could you imagine, could you imagine how off the wall he'd be if he had taken them? But here's what the piece says. I'll just read a little bit of it. An existential question many people spend their lifetime seeking an answer to is where can God be found? Some in the Jewish faith believe they already know the answer to that question and say psychedelics helped them get there. Yes, God. This is a quote. Yes, God's in the trees and God's in the bush and God's in the plant, and God's also within us. And the breath leads us straight back to God within us, explains Meier K. The co founder and lead facilitator of Adama, an organization that it says cultivates safe and sacred containers for Jewish men to, quote, discover their true selves and connect in brotherhood, health, masculinity and divine connection. Now this strikes me not as some part of the traditional Jewish religion, but, well, to quote Norm MacDonald, this strikes me as a bunch of commie gobbledygook. Bunch of new age commie gobbledygook. The beast goes on and says, A 2023 peer reviewed study in psychopharmacology found that the percentage of participants who identified as believing in God or a higher power increased from 29% to 59% after psychedelic use. And I could believe that. Rabbi Harry Rosenberg advocates for the use of psychedelics for healing and connection. Rosenberg believes the Torah Judaism's most sacred Text may describe psychedelic experiences. He believes divinity lives in all of us and for some, psychedelics help access it. Okay, okay. The reason I bring this up is not just because it seems a little quirky from the Jewish perspective, but because I have friends who have told me this. I have multiple friends at this point, I might say many friends who have told me, you know, man, Michael, taking psychedelics really helped me understand man peace and, you know, that this world isn't all there is. I broke through the veil, man. It really brought me closer to the divine. You know what I mean, brother? They didn't all talk quite like that, but it was pretty close. I've heard this. However, I can't help but notice that people who take psychedelics never come out of their experiences more aware of their own deficiencies. I can't help but notice to really drive the point home for religion, people who take psychedelics never seem to come out of them more aware of their need for a savior. You notice that, in fact, one friend I was talking to, in fact, I've actually heard this from multiple friends, they say, yeah, man, you know, took some drugs. And then, you know, I just realized there's no sin. There's no sin, man. I don't need to be hung up all the time on sins and stuff. No, actually there is sin, and you do need to be hung up on it and you need to feel bad about it and you need to confess your sins and you need to stop doing them. That's at least what God says to do. I don't know, whatever drug cooked up in a Mexican bathtub you take does. But that's what God says to do. I'd be very wary, very wary of the psychedelic religion because they're being really mainstreamed right now. I don't know, man. The devil appears as an angel of light. Sometimes you kind of judge the tree by its fruit, don't you? Do you think burned out hippies have the clearest view of religion and morality? Probably not. Today is Music Monday. Okay? The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member. Use code Knowles K N W L E S at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.