Michael Knowles (3:51)

That's right. Part of the problem here has been leadership. And I don't want to throw all the blame on Zelensky. He doesn't deserve all the blame. In fact, I'm much more inclined to blame Joe Biden because the war broke out on his watch. And frankly, Joe Biden invited the war. He literally invited the war. People forget this. He said, if it's only a minor incursion by Russia into Ukraine, it's no big deal. But we have a leadership problem, okay? And it is not irrational for the Ukrainians to want to pick a new leader. At the very least, they should have that right, shouldn't they? Isn't that what this fight over democracy is all about? Now, Trump went a little further on truth, social. He said, a dictator without elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he's not gonna have a country left. In the meantime, we are successfully negotiating an end to the war with Russia, something all admit only Trump and the Trump administration can do. So the left is gonna twist this. But what is he saying here? He says if Zelenskyy doesn't move fast, he's not gonna have a country left. That's not a threat from Trump. Trump isn't saying, I'm gonna give your country away. That's an observation of what this war is doing to Ukraine. If Zelenskyy does not resolve this war, there is not going to be much of Ukraine left to defend. Because the US grand strategy here, pushed by the liberal elites all the way up to Joe Biden, has been to keep the Ukraine war going as long as possible in order to degrade the Russian military. Degrade the Russian military is a euphemism for killing as many Russians as possible. And in fairness, from the foreign policy grand strategy standpoint, the way that all the elite geniuses in Washington, D.C. are looking at it is they're saying, look, we can kill a lot, hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers. Russia has military weapons pointed at us, has ICBMs pointed at us. So they're an adversary for many decades now. We can kill a ton of Russians, and we don't even need to risk our lives for it, because the Ukrainians are gonna do it for us. So the cost of degrading the Russian military, slaughtering all the Russians is gonna be an entire generation of Ukrainians. But the small price for us to pay, we don't really care that much. So we're gonna keep this war going as long as possible. It's not gonna help Ukraine, really in the long run, but at the very least, it's gonna hurt Russia, and indirectly, that's gonna help the United States. That is the grand strategy. That is the philosophy on the war in Ukraine. Some people are gonna say, yeah, heck, yeah, that's right. Let's go for it. Some people are gonna say, that's kind of ghastly and that might not actually fulfill the criteria requisite for a just war. And actually, maybe blessed are the peacemakers, and actually, maybe President Trump should wind this thing down now. But the one thing I can tell you, whatever you want to say about elections during wartime, whatever you want to say about this potential peace deal as it's shaping up, Zelensky, in my view, has just proven that he deserves to be voted out of office, because he just did one of the stupidest things a leader of Ukraine could do, namely pick a fight with Donald Trump in public. The only reason that this war is still going on is because the US has been bankrolling it. This war would have been over about two weeks had the US not backed Ukraine. And this guy is going to now turn to the leader of the free world, to the guy leading the country. That is the whole reason that Zelenskyy is still in power. And he's gonna call him a dummy Donald Trump who has been known to hold a grudge or two for that political incompetence alone. Zelenskyy probably should not be running Ukraine anymore, but he is blowing it. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to donewithdebt.com do you wish that you could have jumped into last year's stock market boom? I get it. When credit card bills and debt are piling up, investing feels impossible. Here's some good news. Done with debt. Done with debt. Has your back. With a fresh approach to tackling these money headaches, their team of Negotiators and legal experts will go to bat for you, working directly with credit card companies and lenders to slash your bills, wipe out interest charges and get rid of those pesky late fees and penalties. They've got a proven track record of putting more money back in people's pockets. Money you could use to start building that investment portfolio that you've been dreaming about. Think about it. Instead of watching your hard earned cash disappear into minimum payments, you you could finally start growing your wealth. Go to DoneWithDebt. They help turn that crushing debt into financial freedom. Some of their strategies are time sensitive. Do not wait right now. Get the life you deserve. DoneWithDebt.com talk to one of their strategists. It is free. DoneWithDebt.com last bit on Zelensky. This is crazy to me. Zelenskyy comes out and he says that he will not accept a peace proposal that is negotiated between the United States and Russia thing that President Trump said this week. He did not say yes when he was asked if he sees Ukraine as an equal member in the peace process. He did say later that Ukraine would have a seat at the table. Have you been given any assurances that Ukraine will have an equal seat at the negotiating table?

Volodymyr Zelenskyy (9:03)

So I will never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine. Never. And our people. Never. And our adults and children and everybody. It can't be so. This is the war in Ukraine against us and it's our human losses. We are thankful for all the support. Unity between USA in USA around Ukraine. Support bipartisan unity, bipartisan support. We're thankful for all of this. But there is no any leader in the world who can really make a deal with Putin without us about us.

Michael Knowles (9:40)

That isn't true. I have sympathy for the Ukrainians. I don't have any soft spot for Putin invading another country. But this peace will be negotiated by the United States. In fact, I go further. The United States is the only country that can negotiate this peace. Ukraine has very little to do with it at the level of diplomacy and peace because the the war in Ukraine is a proxy war between the United States and Russia, full stop. He who pays the piper calls the tune. That's that. That's politics. Okay? Now this doesn't mean the US Is going to roll over here. You saw just last week JD Vance came out and he said, you know what? We might send US Troops to Ukraine setting up the stage for negotiation with Putin. Yeah, maybe Ukraine will join NATO. Okay, so we've got competent people in charge but this is a decision that is going to be made between the United States and Russia. It's just realpolitik. There is no President Zelensky. There is no sovereign Ukraine nation without the United States right now. So, sorry, buddy, we're calling the shots, okay? That's just how it goes. Now, speaking of foreign affairs and death, by the way, we talked about South Africa. President Trump has called attention to the hideous, degrading situation in South Africa, where you have major South African political leaders singing along, leading thousands of people, and chants to kill the whites, kill the farmers, kill the Boer. And now you've got a black South African podcaster going viral claiming that white people are not human.

Unnamed South African Activist (11:10)

The problem that South Africans have right now is that we don't understand white people. White people are inferior species to us. We are Homo sapiens. They've got Neanderthal blood in them. This is the science, and this is not science. That was done by black people. It was done by them, you understand? Abut life. Dobby Lewis. They were eugenicists. They studied this, and they realized that they're inferior to blacks. The white population is shrinking and shrinking and shrinking and shrinking. For us, it makes no sense to descend into the savagery that they have, whatever land that they're holding on to, either way, their numbers are dwindling. Whatever leadership that they had is dying out as well. And you know about wealth disappearing after the third generation that it's passed down to, you know, so we are. They're on the last generation. We're dealing with the weakest whites that the world has ever seen. So we expect to have Ubuntu humanity. Unfortunately, by the strictest definition of what a human being is, white people are just below human beings. You are negotiating with an animal, a wild dog that you're trying to train to be tamed, to be upo, who guards your house. You can never do.

Michael Knowles (12:19)

Okay, so he's got some antipathy toward white people, I'm sensing. He does say one thing that is true. He points out that the genome of white people does include DNA, apparently from Neanderthals. And this is different from sub Saharan blacks. So there are pretty marked genetic differences between sub Saharan black people and all sorts of other people, specifically with regard to the Neanderthals. Now, he says this means that white people are subhuman. I don't know. I mean, white people, they've done a good job throughout history. I'm pretty impressed with the kind of civilization that white people have built. So I don't. I think we should not be so quick to knock the Neanderthals. If there really is Neanderthal DNA in white people, then I don't know, maybe the Neanderthals might have had something to go for them if there's some kind of genetic basis for that civilization. But all of that is beside the point. He says that the basic definition of what it means to human being to be a human being is genetics. And he goes further. He says not only is it genetics, but it's actually in the absence of any remnant of Neanderthal DNA. And that, to me, seems without basis, though that is the claim of many racial biological essentialists these days. What actually makes us human, the fundamental aspect of what it means to be a human person is that we have a rational nature. That's what it is. And this is a difficult point for people on the left and the right and all sorts of people these days to understand people, because while we flatter ourselves in thinking that we're scientifically very advanced, we've become philosophically and theologically and anthropologically stupid. We've just. We've lost our ability to think in ways that people would have taken to be second nature in classical antiquity, in the Middle Ages, and even in the early modern era. But that's what makes us human. This guy has different genetics than I do. Take his word for it. He's got different genetics. I got some Neanderthal all around there. Maybe it's in my brow ridges, I don't know. But we are both recognizably human, and that is because we both have a rational nature. I can speak to him. We could. Well, we can't get married because he's a fella, but I could marry his sister. It would be possible. We could have children. We could have a human life. It doesn't just boil down to genetics. Boils down to a rational nature. Now, you might say that guy doesn't sound very rational, but he is rational in the sense that he can have conversations about abstract topics. He can contemplate abstract concepts such as justice, such as human nature, such as freedom and equality and politics. He does actually check those boxes. But he's undermining his own point, I think, because white people are obviously human beings, Asian people are human. We know what a human being is. Okay? So there has to be something deeper than hair or skin or genetics. I'm not even denying that race is a serious part of human life. It is. Of course it is. Those distinctions are real. But there is something deeper. There is something that unites us, there is something called human nature. And what that is, what separates us from monkeys and the delta smelt and rocks and trees is our rational nature. You don't put a pit bull on trial for biting someone. The pit bull can't help himself. He doesn't have a rational nature. Unintentionally, perhaps this South African anti white activist in a collapsing country might actually be telling us, reminding us of something about human nature that even we in the west are forgetting. Now, speaking of what makes a human. Big breaking news. That porn gal who says that she slept with 1000 guys is reportedly pregnant. Not gonna say her. And I don't even know what her real name is, but I'm not even gonna say her stage name because she's probably just doing all of this for attention anyway and I don't wanna promote her platform. But she says that she's pregnant, you know, a thousand guys. Statistically, I guess that makes sense. Even contraception is not 100% effective. So at a certain point of the numbers game, I guess you're gonna get pregnant. But then no sooner does the thousand guys in a day porn gal say that she's pregnant than the other one, the gal who says she slept with 100 guys in a day, she is now also saying that she's pregnant. And I don't know if I believe either of them because they are prostitutes who are selling fantasies to men. That's their whole career. So I don't know, I'm not convinced that they're totally above board here. But in any case, one of them, the one named Lily, says it's official, the secret is out. And it's a little unclear because she showed she's got this big baby bump. But then the test she showed suggests she's just one to two weeks pregnant. So that might be fake news. And then the other gal, this is what her evidence was, that she's having cravings for weird food, so she wants to take another pregnancy test. So tomorrow I'm gonna go take another pregnancy test because, well, I want to know how far along. Okay, so who knows? Maybe they're pregnant, maybe they're lying. Who knows if it is true that these two are pregnant? And you might be able to hear outside of my home studio right now that there are babies and toddlers crying because I got three of them for age four and under. And the Daily Wire decided to shut down the studio today because there are three snowflakes on the ground and they're afraid of their employees driving and actually knowing how Professor Jacob drives. They probably should be afraid of them driving, even on a perfectly sunny day in the summer. Regardless, I digress. Let's say that soon these two porn gals will have little kids crying around their homes as well. It is possible to celebrate children without affirming all means of producing children. Children are always a good. I was talking about this yesterday when we were bringing up IVF and the in vitro fertilization executive order. Children are always good, but that doesn't mean that all ways of producing children are good. IVF is not morally defensible. Rape. You can produce a child through rape. No one's going to be defending rape. Going further, producing a child out of wedlock, that's not good. That's not good for the child. You should not endeavor to do that. It is better to have a child out of wedlock than to murder the child through abortion. But that doesn't mean that it's good to have a child out of wedlock. Doesn't mean that it's good to sleep with 1,000 people in a day or 100 people in a day, or really anyone outside of marriage. And we can be very clear about that. Okay? Kids are good, but not all the means of procuring children are good. Going to the IVF store if you're a single person and creating a child intentionally to deprive that child of a mother or father. Not good. A homosexual couple going and channeling their natural desire for a child into this deeply immoral practice of intentionally creating a child to deprive him of his mother or father. Not good. Not good. And we need to speak very, very clearly about that because we have this tendency in modern life to just be really nice to everyone and affirm anyone's choices, no matter how deviant or disordered. But that ain't good. Who knows, these two gals might be lying anyway. But if they are pregnant, good. Don't kill the babies. Do what you can. Make the best of a bad situation. But let's not kid ourselves here, okay? There is a better way, and we need to affirm that for everyone else. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to PureTalk.comKnowles this country was founded on freedom. Freedom from a country that forced us to buy overpriced tea, then tried blockading us when we dumped their tea into the ocean. How'd that work out? Not very well. Well, it's time to throw your overpriced big wireless contract overboard, too. You do not need to pay $100 a month just to get a free phone. PureTalk, my cell phone company, says no to inflated prices. With a qualifying plan, you can choose an iPhone 14 or a Samsung Galaxy for $0. This is for premium service on America's most dependable 5G network. I have been spreading the excellent news of PureTalk for years now, and people ask me the same thing. They say, yeah, it's good service, but is it really good service? And I say, it is America's most dependable 5G network. Same towers, same service. And they say, yeah, yeah, but is it like, is it as good as XYZ company? I say, you're not hearing. You're not listening. You're not listening to me. It is the best service that you can get. It's just cheaper because they cut out all the bloat and the overhead and the nonsense. Get your iPhone 14 or Samsung Galaxy for $0 with a qualifying plan by going to PureTalk.com knowles K N A W L E S you can make the switch in as little as 10 minutes. No hassle, no gimmicks, just honest to goodness Wireless priced right. PureTalk.comKnowles to claim your iPhone or Galaxy from PureTalk, America's wireless company, go to PureTalk.comKnowles for details. Not to belabor the point on IVF, but remember yesterday I said, look, this Trump executive order, in many ways, it doesn't really matter because while the order is being promoted as this great expansion of ivf, if you actually read the executive order, Trump had a press conference. He called on a staff member to come up and mention this executive order. Trump didn't even do it himself. He mentioned it in a series of two other executive orders. And all it really does is task the policy council, the Domestic Policy Council of the White House, with writing up a paper figuring out ways that you might be able to lower the cost of IVF or expand access. But it's not just like, hey, do a homework assignment. There's not necessarily teeth to it. So I'm hoping that this is just pushed to the side and slow walked to the point of being irrelevant. It checks a box for pr, but that's it. Because it's. This is. It's a relatively novel technology, but growing public opinion is turning against it as people come to understand what this really is. One of the downsides of IVF that keeps popping up and this news story just popped up yesterday, is that people keep giving birth to the wrong babies. The scientists in the lab coats at the IVF shops keep cooking up the wrong baby in the petri dishes and giving it to the wrong mothers.

Unnamed IVF Patient (22:58)

It was an error that Christina Murray calls unimaginable and every IVF patient's worst nightmare.

Michael Knowles (23:04)

This was never ever a thought in my mind until it happened.

Unnamed IVF Patient (23:08)

Murray is suing low country based Coastal Fertility specialists, claiming the clinic transferred her the wrong embryo. The 41 page lawsuit says when she gave birth in December 2023 after undergoing IVF at Coastal Fertility, the child was African American, while Murray and the sperm donor she picked were both white. I would have strangers approach us in.

Michael Knowles (23:32)

Public and ask whose child I had. I kept his life as concealed as I could out of protection for him.

Unnamed IVF Patient (23:39)

After a five month custody battle, Murray says she was forced to give the baby to his biological parents. At a news conference, her lawyer says they're still trying to figure out how this happened and pointed to what he calls a lack of regulation. Until IVF clinics are subject to real.

Michael Knowles (23:54)

Regulations, reporting requirements and mandatory certification programs for lab staff, these types of errors will continue to occur. I'll tell you how it happened, okay? I don't have a ton of sympathy for this woman because she engaged in acts that are pretty clearly immoral. You know, going and purchasing sperm or even just acquiring sperm with a donated sperm from someone who is willing to sell or otherwise donate his future children in order to deprive that child of a father. To fulfill the selfish desire to have a child as one has a handbag or a purse is not as bad. You know, I understand the natural longing for a kid, but you have to respect the legitimate rights of children. And you can't prioritize your own disordered and selfish desires over the legitimate rights of children. Cause children are not just objects to be bought and sold, commodities to be traded. They're subjects. They're human persons with rights for themselves. That's the first part. And the second part, I don't know, maybe she just got the wrong sperm. That can happen. When you industrialize procreation. That can happen. And when you're talking about industrial products like automobiles or briefcases or computers or something, when a product comes out defective or contrary to the way that it was designed, you say, okay, no big deal, I'm gonna throw it out and get a new one. But when you treat the human person as one of those commodities, you don't just throw out the human. Well, actually you do in the IVF industry, unfortunately, most of the people who are created as products are just thrown out. They're killed and then thrown in the trash. But that's not what you're supposed to do. That's deeply, deeply wrong. And then now you have this situation where this woman's been raising this kid for months, then has to give the kid up. It's very hard on her. It's very, very hard on the kid. Just absolutely horrifying to do to the kid. For what? This is a lot more common than people think. This story just broke yesterday. There have been many other such cases that are currently being litigated. Okay. No bueno. No good. Okay. Speaking of children, I have to wade in on a hot cultural debate. Do children belong at weddings? Every conservative I've seen, especially including my friend Mr. Walsh, who's wading into this debate all the way in. He's got his boots pulled up. He is going into the deep end of this debate. He says it is insane to think that women. That children, rather, should not be present at weddings. This all started because a woman went viral for giving the side eye to a little kid who was crying during her wedding ceremony at a ceremony that was supposed to exclude children over the last few weeks. But I'm the only one that knows them. And one of the questions I asked was, when did you know you were in love and wanted to spend the rest of your life together as husband and wife? Okay. Now this was during the wedding ceremony, so it's even more nuanced. Okay. One, do children belong at wedding ceremonies? Two, do children belong at wedding receptions which usually follow the ceremonies? Three, is it ever acceptable to exclude children from weddings? The answer is yes. It is perfectly acceptable to exclude children from weddings. You shouldn't be a jerk about it. You shouldn't give the side eye. You shouldn't shame people for having children. I'm not saying you can't invite children to weddings. I've been to plenty of weddings that had little kids invited, and it was a ton of fun. I've had a great time. You can do that. It can be a blast. But it is perfectly acceptable to exclude children from wedding receptions. It's fine. Okay. How dare. How could you? Here, I'll prove it to you. Here's how I'll prove it. Do you think it's okay to have black tie weddings? Do you think it is? Okay, I'm not saying you have to do it, but is it all right for a wedding to be black tie? Expect the guests to come in tuxedos and ball gowns. It's probably say yes. It's pretty common. Okay. Do children wear black tie? No, they don't. Little kids should not be wearing tuxedos. That's crazy. Should a little toddler girl wear a ball gown? No, that'd be ridiculous. So there you go. Just there alone. One simple little syllogism. That is okay to have a black tie wedding, but it would be inappropriate for children to wear black tie. Therefore, we can conclude that certain wedding receptions can exclude children. It's okay. And it can be nice, actually. It's all right to do. What this debate is really about is what it means to be conservative, what it means to be traditional. It's not really about the wedding. It's not really about the kids. We love kids. They're welcome in many circumstances. You can have a good time with them at weddings, but I don't think you need to, because there are two kinds of traditional that we're talking about here. There's the Waltons traditional and the Windsor traditional. This is it. And I think both sides of this debate are just talking past each other here. Walton's traditional, that's the homestead with the overalls and the flannel and the cows, and the whole family comes around to dinner. That's good old salt of the earth kind of traditionalism, and that's great. I love that I don't look good in overalls, but I like that culture a lot. It's fun. Got a lot of friends in that culture. It's cool, man. It's great. But there is another kind of tradition. There's the Windsor traditionalism, the traditionalism of the tuxedo and the brandy snifter and the library built with rich mahogany, and that's okay, too. It's all right to have order and hierarchy, and it's okay to insist upon differing levels of sophistication. Even you wouldn't bring a three year old to a state dinner at the White House. It's okay to exclude children in certain cases, but it's the clash of those kinds of tradition. I think they're both good. I think there's a role for both of those. But that's really what this is about. Okay? It's the Waltons traditionalism versus the Windsor traditionalism. That's okay. If you want to have a fancy wedding, have your fancy wedding. It's all right. You'll see the kids tomorrow, take them to brunch the next day. It's all right. That's very traditional, too, actually. I know this is going to be very unpopular, but it's the truth. I got to tell you the truth. I got to tell you what I'm seeing, folks. Now, speaking of upending Traditional. The libs just can't give it a rest. There's a new star of a revival of Jesus Christ Superstar. Do you know who's playing the role of our Lord? We'll get to it in a moment. If you are with us for election night or for the inauguration, you know that the Daily Wire doesn't just show up, we take over. And now we're headed back to DC today to do just that at cpac. Join me along with Ben, Matt, Drew, Jeremy live tonight, February 20th. No scripted talking points, no corporate approved narratives, just real conversations that actually matter. Streaming live on Dailywire. Plus, we are taking your questions. Do not just watch CPAC be a part of it. Live Thursday night, tonight, February 20th on Dailywire. My favorite comment yesterday is from Henry Bjrman 8431 who says the fact that Michael didn't use his Fauci voice in this video is the real tragedy here. That is a tragedy. I should have my deepest apologies. I also would like to apologize to all of you for poisoning you with that clot chat that Fauci ouchie. And also sorry for spending $241 million of your taxpayer money transing monkeys. Oopsie daisy. Please forgive your benevolent leader, Dak Devochi. Jesus Christ Superstar, a Broadway musical from the 70s, has a new lead. Gonna play the title role of our Lord at the Hollywood Bowl. Who is it? Is it Jim Caviezel? No. Is it Jonathan Roumie? No. It is Cynthia Erivo. A black lady is going to play our Lord. And I know they're going to. I'm already hearing it from the liberal Christians. They're going to say, well, it doesn't matter. Actually. The appearance of the person doesn't have even the sex of the person. You know, our Lord is everything. No, actually. Oh, hold on. God, of course, is not bound by all of our little human categories, but our Lord, who is God, but who has both a divine nature and a human nature, actually enters into history in time and space with a body and a sex and a skin color and real physical. He's a real person in. In time and space. So it does matter. I'm waiting. I think there's going to be a revival of Spike Lee's Malcolm X and they're going to star Jim Gaffigan. Can you wait for that? That's going to be so great. Don't you think audiences are going to line up? I don't think they wouldn't do that. In fact, the libs in Hollywood in recent years have Increasingly insisted that you cannot play any character that you do not personally identify with. That does not check off all of the criteria on your personal identity. In my youth, I was an actor. I've played all sorts of roles, all sorts of roles that are totally foreign to me. I played the devil once. I played football players. I've played US Soldiers, played guys who are a little light in the loafers. I've played Hispanics. I've played all sorts of things. That's not me. I haven't just played Italian. Half Italian, half wasp, Irish from New York, millennial. That would be crazy. But the libs say now, these days, if you want to play a gay guy in a movie, you have to be a gay guy. What happened to pretending? What happened to acting? No, out the window. If you want to play a trans identifying person, you need to identify as trans. But if you want to play our Lord, you can be a black lady. It's totally fine. Hmm. Doesn't make a lot of sense. So there's no consistent principle here. For the left, it's just anything that would upend tradition, that would irritate normal people. They're for that. But otherwise, no rules. No rules. We play by whatever capricious rules they come up with. This does, though, speak to a deeper debate within the theater that's gone on for a long time. It was Brustein who formerly ran the Yale Repertory Theater. Then he went up to the art, the American Repertory Theater up by Harvard, and he got into a big fight with the guy who wrote Fences. What is his name? He's probably the founder of the modern black theater in America. Oh. Anyway, his name escapes me, but he was a Black playwright from St. Paul, Minnesota area. And they had this big debate over colorblind casting. Should you cast acknowledging race or not? August Wilson was the black playwright. And Brustein, this white liberal guy, said, yeah, colorblind casting is great. You can have colorblind casting. And, you know, you could have black people play white characters and white people play black characters, and that's all great. And it was the black guy, it was August Wilson who said, no, you can't. You know, it's ridiculous. But I guess maybe sometimes there can be exceptions. Denzel Washington did a great Macbeth. But, you know, no, generally you can't have a black lady playing our Lord and you can't have Jim Gaffigan playing Malcolm X. And it doesn't make sense. You know, we have to. There have to be certain limits here within the theater. But for the left, they don't care. They're really just poking buttons. That's all this is about. This is not because Cynthia Erivo went in and did a great version of an Andrew Lloyd Webber song. It's because they knew this would grab headlines and get people like me to complain about it. And I guess they succeeded. Now, speaking of Hollywood entertainers, this was really fitting. This was great. Mark Hamill, whose only notable film role ever began in the 1970s, and he hasn't shut up about it since. Mark Hamill was just presenting at the BAFTA Awards, the British Theater Awards, and as he was presenting, his pants fell down. Hat tip to Colin Rugg for this little clip. So what makes us love cinema so much that we're all gathered here to celebrate tonight? For me, it's that films create worlds so vivid and stories so powerful that we lose ourselves in them completely. They create immersive cinematic landscapes that feel alive whether they're set here in London or anywhere. This is like a Saturday Night Live sketch. If you're just listening to it right now, halfway through, you can hear his voice start to crack. His pants just fall down and you can't really see on camera. Though according to reports, this is according to the Sun, Mark started speaking, then his suit trousers just dropped to his knees. It was like they were too big for him. All the big stars such as Timothee Chalamet, Ariana Grande, Adrien Brody would have seen it from their angle. Most guests looked horrified, but said nothing. They were turning to each other wide eyed as if to say, did that just happen? So his pants drop to the ground and then he starts trying to pull them up and his jacket gets all discombobulated. And it's really symbolic, really fitting, because Hollywood, the liberal entertainment, they've been caught with their pants down and their ratings have collapsed and their cultural influence has collapsed and they all hated Trump. And yet Trump won the popular vote. And I just, it's really fitting. I don't have much more to say about it. It is very funny to see this guy who really comes off as one of the biggest left wing jerks in all of Hollywood actually be pantsed on international television. Now, speaking of the libs being caught with their pants down, Louisiana Mayor Karen Bass was just interviewed about what happened on her watch. Her city burned to the ground. Technically, it wasn't even on her watch because she wasn't looking, she was negligent. She wasn't in town, she wasn't in the country, she wasn't on the continent. She was in Africa on some Kind of public funded vacation while her city was burning to the ground. And Alex Michelson, an excellent interviewer in la, asked her, he said, hey, you had warning that this kind of thing could happen. What happened? We know that there was warnings about the weather before you went and you still went. What was the thought process behind going to Ghana?

Karen Bass (38:41)

So let me just tell you a couple of things. First of all, when the White House called and asked me if I would represent the President, I said yes. It was going to be a very, very short trip over a weekend and two business days. We need to look at everything about the preparation and all of that for the fires because I think when we evaluate that, we will find that although there were warnings that I frankly wasn't aware of, although there were warnings, I think our preparation, it wasn't what it typically is. Meaning that before there's a major weather event, for example, last week when we knew we were going to get into the rains, you saw us come together and us talk about, you know, get your sandbags, bring the k rails out. That type of preparation didn't happen. If that had, I will tell you, Alex, I wouldn't have even gone to San Diego, let alone leave the country.

Michael Knowles (39:38)

But what do you mean there were warnings you weren't aware of? Because I know we were talking about it on the news, a lot of people were talking about the problems. Devastating. Devastating. Follow up from Alex Michaelson. Ola, what do you mean that you weren't aware of? Like we were aware of it. We in the news, in the local news were aware of it. You're the mayor of la. What do you mean you're not aware? Watch the news. I guess you should watch the news and then you'd find out about it. Everybody knew about this. After LA burned to the ground, the libs tried to blame climate change or just some total fluke of nature unexpected. These Santa Ana winds come in every year. This is not unprecedented in any way. I lived in LA for six, seven years. I could have easily predicted this or something like this. There was no preparation. That reservoir of water in the Palisades that was empty right before these really dangerous winds were coming in. They had not cleared the brush. There was no serious forest management going on. They were redirecting 95% of rainwater into the Pacific Ocean to protect some stupid delta smelt. I mean, crazy stuff. President Trump was warning about this in 2018. Not good. Doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I wasn't aware is never a good excuse for a politician, but totally insane. In this case. And you've even got liberals turning on Karen Bass. Does that mean that even La Gomorrah by the Sea might see a rightward lurch in the next election? We'll find out. Now, here's a little teaser to leave you on. Transgender vegan cult members have just been arrested and charged with murder in Maryland. It's always the ones you most expect. They won't eat fish, but they will murder people. We will get to that story. I guess we gotta get to that tomorrow. Cause I need to catch a flight. There won't be any member block today. Not just because I'm stuck here with three snowflakes, but even if the Daily Wire studios are closed, I need to go get to my flight because I'm going to CPAC and I'm giving my speech at cpac. We will see what kinds of bad ideas we eradicate this year. And then all of us together are doing a backstage live from cpac. So see you there. I'll see you tomorrow on Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show.