Charlie Kirk (3:41)

Would you say no men in female sports?

Gavin Newsom (3:43)

Well, it's, I think it's an issue of fairness. I completely agree with you on that. It is an issue of fairness. So it's deeply.

Charlie Kirk (3:48)

Would you speak. A Democrat strategist would say, oh, Charlie, you're weaponizing stuff. Not you, but like that's a typical, typical thing. But the most effective ad of this election cycle. The most effective ad. You know what it is?

Gavin Newsom (3:58)

Yeah. And devastating. Trump's for you. She's for they, them.

Charlie Kirk (4:02)

And devastating again. Devastating.

Michael Knowles (4:05)

Devastating.

Gavin Newsom (4:05)

And she didn't even react to it. Which was even more.

Charlie Kirk (4:08)

And let's talk about why it was devastating. Number one, it was the trans issue that was just.

Michael Knowles (4:12)

Yeah.

Charlie Kirk (4:12)

You know, monopolizing.

Gavin Newsom (4:14)

And this was, this was even more challenging because there's issues of people that are incarcerated and illegal. And illegal incarcerated individuals getting taxpayer funding.

Charlie Kirk (4:23)

Yes.

Gavin Newsom (4:23)

And gender reassignment. That is a 9010, not an 80.

Charlie Kirk (4:27)

And then she's like enthusiastically defending it, bragging, being like, I'm all for this, I'm all for this.

Gavin Newsom (4:33)

And then you had the video that it was a validator.

Michael Knowles (4:35)

Brutal.

Charlie Kirk (4:36)

Yeah.

Gavin Newsom (4:36)

And so tens of millions of brutal. The targeted focus from the, from the Trump campaign.

Michael Knowles (4:44)

It was brutal. It was devastating. I think it's an issue of fairness. I agree with you. It's deeply unfair to have men in women's sports. Who is this guy? This is Gavin Newsom. Right. Gavin Newsom is not a moderate. He sometimes pretends to be a moderate cuz he looks like Patrick Bateman and he looks like every other normal looking white guy that's ever been in political office in America. But he's not He's a radical, including and especially on sexual issues. When he was mayor of San Francisco in 2004, Gavin Newsom defied federal law to redefine marriage and create these ceremonies where two fellas or two ladies could pretend that they were being married. This was long before Barack Obama ever came around on gay marriage. This was long before the Obergefell decision. 2004, Barack Obama would campaign four years later. Hillary Clinton would campaign four years after that, saying marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. Obama wouldn't change his view until 2011. 2012, Obergefell didn't come down redefining marriage until 2015. Gavin Newsom was one of the earliest figures in the country advocating for weird sex stuff at our national scene. Now all of a sudden, he's the voice of reason on transgenderism. By the way, you heard that voice, that other voice in the conversation, that was Charlie Kirk. But they were not on Charlie Kirk's podcast. That was Gavin Newsom's podcast. Gavin Newsom launches a show and the first person he invites on is a Republican activist so that he could agree with the Republican activist on an issue that has been defining for Democrats and what's going on here. Newsom realizes that the Democrats are currently on a path to oblivion. If they keep down this road, they're gonna lose more black male voters, they're gonna lose more Hispanic voters, they're gonna lose more female voters. They're, they're going to get destroyed. I think Gavin Newsom recognizes, and the show comes out after that debacle for the Democrats at Trump's joint session address. I think Newsom realizes that even if he were the nominee in 2028, if he kept to the current Democrat policies on immigration, on maybe even foreign policy, certainly on gender, that he would go down in flames. Now, the one reason that Newsom might not be the nominee, and if he were the nominee, the reason he might not win is because one of his major cities went down in flames. Cuz he was a totally incompetent governor. And in 2018, President Trump warned him, said, hey, you're not dealing with your forests, you're not cleaning up the brush. Your state is gonna catch on fire because of those Santa Ana winds. And Newsom said, ah, anyway, yeah, never mind, I gotta get back to the French Laundry. Have a little come on, man, you know, it's hip to be square. Do you like Huey Lewis in the news? And so he totally ignored that. Let the city burn to the ground looks terrible. Probably his chances went down with Him. Except for this. Except for this, who else is it going to be? He's one of the few prominent Democrats to say, all right, the party has gone a little crazy. Now Newsom is going to have one other problem. And this is a word to the wise for any Democrats who realize that this trans issue is killing them and they have to change course. You can't just oppose transgenderism in sports. That doesn't make any sense. There is no middle ground position. This was the thesis of my CPAC speech that went viral a couple years ago. Certain issues, you can have a middle ground, like taxes or immigration or whatever. Human nature, you can't have a middle ground. Either our bodies have something to do with who we are or they don't. So if you say, look, I accept transgenderism, I accept transing the kids, even. I accept men in women's bathrooms. I accept dudes walking around wearing dresses doing Drag Queen story hour, but I draw the line at volleyball. Why? You just told him. You've accepted the anthropology that says that a man can be a woman. So then if a man can be a woman, why wouldn't you let that true woman, you know, that true woman with his big broad shoulders and his big Adam's apple and his hairy chest, why won't you let that true woman play volleyball with the other gals? It's not gonna hold. So Newsom, he's testing the waters here, trans and women's sports. But I think he's smart enough to realize that he's gonna have to go further for that position to be at all coherent. Will the Democrat base let him go further? Not clear. Does the Democrat base want to win elections? Again, not clear. It's not just Newsom, though. Ten Democrats in Congress just joined with Republicans to censure one of their fellow Democrats, Al Green. He's that lunatic. Not the singer. The singer is great. Talking about Al Green, the congressman. He's tried to impeach Trump like 150 times already. He interrupted the State of the Union. Sorry, the joint Session address. And he was screaming and carrying on. He was brandishing his cane. He had to be dragged out by the sergeant of arms. Ten Democrats want to give them credit here. Ami Berra of California, Ed Case of Hawaii, Jim Costa of California, Laura Gillen of New York, Jim Himes of Connecticut, Chrissy Houlihan of Pennsylvania, Marcy Kaptor of Ohio, Jared Moskowitz of Florida, Marie Gluzenkamp Perez of Washington, and Tom Swozzi of New York all voted against their fellow Democrat Why? Because they're reasonable? I don't know. Probably not because they're coming over to Common Sense. No, probably not. I think it's because they realized Democrats just looked absolutely horrible the other night. It was so embarrassing. Just for an ordinary citizen, not an elected official, just an ordinary citizen. If you're watching that humiliating display by the Democrats, especially by Al Green, you're not gonna want to admit that you're a Democrat, okay? You're gonna be much more inclined to say, oh no, I'm an Independent. Or who knows, maybe, you know, actually I'm kind of with Trump. Pull a Bobby Kennedy, pull a Joe Rogan, pull a Tulsi Gabbard. I don't know, I'm out. Whatever they're selling, I don't want it. They're starting to realize on the night of that speech when they all showed up with their stupid signs and screaming and yelling and not standing for American citizens being returned from prison in Russia, not standing for cute little 13 year old kids getting nominated or actually being certified as honorary Secret Service agents, not standing for their own policies. No tax on tips. I thought, man, these people haven't learned anything, anything since the election. And that was true at the time. I think they might have hit rock bottom. I think we might be at rock bottom, Lib. And some of them are recognizing. Man, I gotta get to rehab. I gotta. Alright, I'm done with trans. One more hit of trans. Just one. Oh, all right, let's ride that, let's ride that abolished police and open borders dragon. Just one more time. All right now I'm done. I'm done. I need help. There's so much more to say first though. Go to showallegiance.com we won a huge victory in November getting America back on the right track. It's been winning, winning, winning ever since then. The best way to celebrate that victory is by flying your American flag that is made right here in America, not somewhere overseas. If there is one thing, one thing that you should own that is made in America, it is your American flag. Let that banner wave loud and proud outside your home. Your go to American flag should be an allegiance flag hand sewn in Charleston, South Carolina, a town that I'm visiting very soon by dedicated craftsmen and women who put care into every stitch. I'm kind of an American flag aficionado. The first song I ever learned as a kid was It's a grand Old Flag and I fly a flag in the back of my car. I have for 10, 15 years now. So I know a Good flag. This is very high quality. These are very, very high quality flags. The flag that I have for my home is an Allegiance FL and my kids play with a little allegiance flag keychain. It's really, really good stuff. So right now go to showallegiance.com save $35 on your complete flag set. Get one for you, get one for your family, get one for Father's Day. Get a lot of these are really great. Showallegiance.com for American flags made by Americans for Americans. I love New York for all of its problems and all the terrible government and all the bums. Now I'm two blocks away from one of the main hotels where they house the illegal aliens that Biden invited into the country. So New York's got but I still love it. I like the town come in and out every so often. One thing though, I will admit about New York, it doesn't always smell great. Okay, One thing that could really help this city getting rid of all the illegals. President Trump already fixed the congestion tax, cleaning up the bombs and all the rest. But the smells and bells candles that would help if the city invested in smells and bells candles from thecandleclub.com Michael I think that would really help New York. If the city is considering doing that. I want you to go get your candle first because that would probably sell out. If you wanted to clean up the smells in New York, that would sell out very quickly. So go head on over to thecandleclub.com Michael all right, I'm going to say nice things about Democrats for approximately five more seconds. Then we'll get back to just pummeling them into the dirt. But some of them are getting it. And it's not even just the moderate ones. As I mentioned, Gavin Newsom is not a moderate. Just cuz he's a white guy with gray hair doesn't mean he's a moderate. Okay? Just cuz he doesn't have a bunch of piercings and face tattoos. He's not. But he realizes the Democrats have to moderate. Same can be said of Simone Sanders. Simone Sanders was an advisor to Bernie Sanders, then an advisor to the Biden campaign, then an advisor to Kamala Harris. She's a true blue left winger. She's worked at very high levels of Democrat politics. She goes on MSNBC with Michael Steele who was the head of the Republican National Committee. But he's a huge lib and Simone and Steele agree. The Democrats just looked like absolute gutter bums in the Capitol chambers. I don't know who thought up the bingo signs, but they should be fired.

Michael Steele (14:59)

Michael, this is an indictment, in my opinion, on the Democratic leadership. I talked to a lot of members during the. They was texting, the staff were on my phones and they were calling. And I think the best way to describe it is the Democratic leadership said they didn't want disruptions and they wanted people to attend and bring a guest and they wanted, you know, little business as usual. And we're fighting back in other ways. There is a palpable disgust, as Claire said, from not just the members but their constituents. And it's like a pot, as someone described it to me, that's boiling and it's about to bubble over. If you do not allow the members a space to release, valve is gonna bubble over. And this was a. The members didn't. The visuals are not taken back to House in 2026.

Michael Knowles (15:45)

There you have it. Okay, you heard it. Michael Steele, I know he's sort of a Republican, but he's really a huge lib. And Simone Sanders, big Republican operative, is saying, dems, you are not taking back the House if you keep this up. Those stupid little signs that are now just memed all over Rashida Tlaib, saying all sorts of crazy things because they set themselves up to become a meme, just a farce. You got Trump coming out, resolving multiple world conflicts, renaming, whether you agree with it or not, renaming bodies of water, making moves to retake the Panama Canal, add new territories to the United States, like Greenland, which the US State Department has been trying to acquire for 150 years, changing the economic order in line with his campaign promises, in line with what people want. He's doing stuff. And these feckless, ridiculous Democrats are sitting with their little sourpuss on their face, holding up bingo signs. It doesn't look good. It was so fine by me. Again, I'm not upset about it. Keep it coming, guys. The Republican reign will last a thousand years if you guys keep it up. But some people, some Dems, I think, are realizing something has to change now. Speaking of learning, President Trump, it was reported yesterday as I was flying up to New York, that Trump already had a draft of an executive order to abolish the Department of Education, which is fabulous news. Republicans have been campaigning on abolishing the Department of Education since the Reagan administration. Don't forget, the Department of Education was only founded at the end of the Carter administration. I think it was 1979. So it was a very live issue in 1980 and again in 1984 and then all these Republicans are campaigning on abolishing the Department of Education and none of them do it. And then Trump decides he's actually going to do it and everyone loses their minds. Some have pointed out that if you really want to abolish it for good, probably you have to get Congress involved in that. The legislature has to make it more permanent. But Trump could do a lot to bring it to the brink of extinction. So Wall Street Journal first reports this, CBS News confirms it. This has been in the works for a little while. What, what does the Department of Education do? Because you know what the libs are going to say? The Republicans are attacking education and they're attacking public education and they're going to destroy the ability of young Americans to learn and to better themselves. So what does it do? I think people, they just hear Department of Education, they think it educates people. It does not do that. Department of Education does three things. Basically the Department of Education supports college loans and financial aid. In other words, the Department of Education encourages this blank check system to American universities that has caused the cost of tuition to soar from single digit thousands of dollars to now 60, 70, $80,000 a year, miring students in hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt that they probably won't be able to rep. The quality of the education has become so bad and because certain universities without any scruples whatsoever will just admit basically anyone, even if those students have no business being at a university and then they lower the standards and then the certificate, the diploma means nothing. So that's one thing they do that's bad. Okay, it's good for some people to go to some colleges in some circumstances. I'm not an anti university conservative, far from it. I'm a great defender of the true mission of real universities. But I think even people who are pretty liberal would recognize the current American university system is completely insane. And a lot of it is driven by the Department of Education. So right there as one red flag. Next, the Department of Education collects data and disseminates data that pertain to schools. Okay? We have plenty of think tanks and institutions that can do that. And many of the data that have been collected over the years, in fact all the data consistently have shown that since the founding of the Department of Education, American test scores have declined. You'd think the one thing that the Department of Education would be doing is improving test scores. Actually the opposite has occurred. So there you go. Second red flag. Third thing the Department of Education does, it enforces non discrimination policies. And what do we mean by non discrimination policies. Are we talking about Klansmen burning a cross at your local high school? No, I don't think that really happens. That's not what the Department of Education deals with. When they say non discrimination policy, they mean they force schools through Dear Colleague letters, force schools through all sorts of regulations to promote radical leftist ideology. They're talking about LGBTQ being taught in schools K through 12 and beyond, the kind of policies that were roundly rejected toward the very, very top of people's minds at the ballot box in November. The Department of Education does very, very little good, if any good at all. Do you know how many people work for the Department of Education? 4,400. 4,400 people. $268 billion budget. That's actually a significant chunk of the U.S. federal budget. It's not just a little nothing department where if you eliminate it, you don't save any money. That's a lot of money. You could fund Ukraine for another five years, 10 years with that kind of money. No, that's pretty serious. The case for dramatically reducing or just outright abolishing the Department of Ed seems pretty much watertight. Can you make me an argument other than you're a leftist and you want to promote transgenderism in kindergarten or whatever, but can you give me a common sense argument that would actually appeal to people for keeping the Department of Education around or keeping it as it is? I can't think of one. People are learning. They're learning despite the Department of Education. And Europe is learning too. Major, major news out of Europe and Ukraine and Russia. Before we get to Romania with the Tate brothers, there's so much more to say. First, though, go to donewithdebt.com do you wish 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. But here's some good news. Done with Debt has your back. With a fresh approach to tackling those money headaches, their team of negotiators and legal experts go to bat for you, working directly with credit card companies and lenders to slash those 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 you've been dreaming about. Think about it. Instead of watching your hard earned cash disappear into minimum payments, you can finally start to grow your wealth. Bottom line, Done with debt helps turn crushing debt into financial freedom. Some of their strategies are time sensitive. So do not wait. Start building the life you deserve. Go to donewithdb.com, come talk with one of their strategists. It's free. I know the phone calls and the debt can really hang over you. Don't let it ruin your Life. Go to donewithdebt.com donewithdebt.com the Europeans are learning a little bit. After President Trump's joint session address, Emmanuel Macron, the leader of France, he came out and he said, europe cannot remain spectators. Now, before I get into this story, I'm going to be a spectator of my favorite comment of the day from yesterday. That is from grahamsmith7892 who says, I love how tempted I was to be anxious when I heard that China had threatened us with war. But once I heard the Michael Knowles theme song, all those thoughts went away. I'm so glad to hear that. So glad to hear that I could assuage your fears. I try to. Padre Pio said, pray, hope and don't worry. Macron Speaking of war global affairs, Macron said Europe cannot remain spectators to the war in Ukraine, that Europe needs drastic rearmament. He said he wants to believe that the United States will stay by our side, but we have to be ready. If that is not the case, he said the future of Europe does not have to be decided in Washington or Moscow. The threat is returning to the east and the innocence of the last 30 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall is now over. So he's saying, look, Trump might not be all in on Ukraine and so we need to protect ourselves. We need to pay more for our own security. We're not just going to rely on Daddy America. That's what Trump has been asking for for eight years. So Macron saying, okay, Trump, I'll give you exactly what you want. Now what is Russia saying? Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov is so furious at Europe potentially rearming, rearming, paying more for their security, getting more involved in Ukraine. Russia just came out and said that Macron was extremely confrontational, looking for the continuation of war. It can hardly be perceived as a speech by a peace minded head of state. France is already ready to use its nuclear weapons for security and so on. This is already such nuclear rhetoric. This is a claim to nuclear leadership in China, Europe. So it is very, very confrontational. Suck your blood. Russia furious. Well, hold on, hold on. I was told that Europe was not going to do what Trump said couldn't do what Trump said was going to be furious. We were Abandoning our ally. And Russia loved the notion that Europe was going to rearm. Russia loved that America wasn't going to be the daddy to Europe anymore. But that's not actually what we're seeing is the opposite. Trump says, europe, help to defend yourselves. Macron says, okay, Trump will do that. Russia says, ugh, that's not what we want. Stop that. This is terrible rhetoric. This is nuclear rhetoric. The chairman of the International Affairs Committee in the lower house of the Russian Parliament, Leonidasky, said that Macron is trying new Napoleonic armor on Versailles. Comparing Macron to Napoleon. They're both somewhat petite, so I guess there's that. Well, actually Napoleon isn't French. He was Corsican. But in any case, Foreign Minister of Russia Sergei Lavrov said, unlike his predecessors who also sought to fight with Russia, Napoleon, Hitler. Lavrov, the Russian Foreign minister, is comparing Macron to Hitler. Mr. Macron does not act very diplomatically. He's saying that Hitler and Napoleon were more diplomatic than Macron. Russia's furious over this. Trump gets exactly what he wants. Russia making quite clear this is not what Russia wants. The democrats who accuse Trump of being a Russian stooge look like even bigger fools than they did before. What is this? What you're going to hear from the foreign policy genius experts is the sober minded ones, the stupid ones, are going to say Trump's a stooge for Russia. Again, I don't see how you read these comments and come to that conclusion. But the sober minded ones are going to say, well, this is the dismantling of the American Empire. Since World War II, we've been the hegemon in the world. But certainly even during the Cold War, we were the leader of the West. And so the European nations were really just US Vassal states. And it's good that we paid for their defense. We don't want them having their own militaries because we get to call the shots now. Okay, I get it. But I don't know that this is really the dismantling of the American Empire. I think the American empire was headed for a crash. If we tried to keep things up, if we tried to remain overextended, if we wanted to continue on our course of debt. Now it's what, 125% debt to GDP? If we wanted to continue to import the entire third world, if we wanted to continue to send our manufacturing even over to our enemies, yeah, then I think empires fall. That is a persistent rule of history. I think what you're seeing here, what Trump is doing is not a Dismantling of the American empire. I don't think it's that. I also don't think it's business as usual. I think it actually is. I think it's business. I think that's the best way to understand this. If you have a business, if you've ever worked in a business, if you've ever owned a small business, you know, sometimes you have really high times, boom times, and sometimes the business starts to fail. And if you can see the business starting to fail, if you can see that you're gonna have a cash problem, say in six months or 12 months, then you need to start making decisions now that will allow you to get by those really bad times. You need to plan ahead. You need to sometimes pull in some of your resources, battle down the hatches, prepare for difficult times so that you can maintain your strength into the future. Because if you don't do anything until the very end, until the moment that you have to, the whole thing is going to come crumbling down. And I think it's no coincidence that Donald Trump is a businessman. And I think he is looking at the American empire like a failing business, because it is like a failing business. And he's saying, okay, look, I think America's greatest days are ahead. I think we're headed for a golden age. I don't want to disassemble this American empire, but we need to restructure this thing, okay? And if we're really, we gotta really restructure it. We need to get another genius businessman in and start restructuring how the government works and some domestic policy. And then we got to look overseas at our commitments. We're going to maintain our leadership. We're even going to talk about expanding. We're going to talk about taking back the Panama Canal and taking on Canada, America's evil top hat, and Greenland. We're going to project strength and we're going to plan for growth, but we are going to get our resources in line. And we're going to recognize that if we put all of our chips on, say, Ukraine or something like that, we might not be prepared for other conflicts that could be more significant, say with China or someone else. Just a little bit of prudence, little bit of that business acumen, when you actually have to deal with the bottom line. 125% debt to GDP. Our politicians haven't thought about serious bottom lines or consequences in a while. Okay? Speaking of international controversies, the Tate brothers. I talked about this yesterday a little bit, but I was cut off. The Tate brothers, who are the Tate Brothers, Just a quick little whirlwind. They're these guys, Andrew and Tristan. They're very famous. They became famous because they give young men advice on the Internet and they work out and smoke cigars. I like smoking cigars. They get some things right, but they also say things that are very offensive about women. And they don't promote. They're not leftists. They promote a kind of right wing view, but they're not conservative really in any way. They're not married. They have been pimps. They're accused in Romania of sex trafficking, of pimping underage girls and running a criminal organization. And they've admitted on camera to pimping to. I think Andrew was filmed or filmed himself beating a young woman, maybe even underage, on camera. Now, the defense was, well, it was consensual, but for a conservative, I don't care if it's consensual. You don't beat a woman, especially not a really young one. Good grief. That's completely indefensible. And so anyway, there are all these cases in Romania. Then they go to Florida. Ron DeSantis and the attorney general in Florida say, we're going to open an investigation into the Tates for sex trafficking, for pimping, for whatever they've been doing. Okay, so the Tates previously said, we're going to stay in America for a long time. It was a big coup when they were able to leave Romania, come to the States. Then they just announced yesterday, actually, we're going back to Romania. This is just a little vacation. We're going back to Romania before Desantis tries to lock us up. The Tates are arguing, and the Tate's defenders are arguing that people are only trying to prosecute them because of the right wing things they say or because they have unfashionable international views. For instance, they're opposed to the state of Israel. So maybe that's it. Maybe it's just a political lobby that's trying to get them. Okay, whatever. I haven't followed them all that closely. However, I guess even beyond the legal questions, I guess that'll all be sorted out. They'll be prosecuted in Romania or the UK or Florida. But my question is this. For the people who are defending the Tates and for the Tates themselves, putting aside the criminal questions, and if they committed crimes, they'll serve their time, one hopes. Have they ever expressed remorse and repentance for those things that they've done? Crimes according to statutes or just immoral actions? I don't know. I'M asking this sincerely. I don't know. I don't follow their content. Have they ever. I know Andrew Tate identifies as a Muslim now, okay, have they expressed remorse for womanizing, for promoting pornography, for beating women on camera, for. I'm not even saying what they've done is a crime necessarily. Prosecutors are saying. I'm not saying that. I don't know, but just those are very bad things. Now, I'm all for people repenting, turning their lives around. I'm really for it. I don't think anyone is too far gone. But I guess my question for them and for anyone defending them is have they repented? Even if they have, they might still have to pay their debt to society in a criminal context. But I just need to know, from a cultural perspective, have they expressed regret and remorse and repentance? Have they said that's bad? Actually, it's good to get married and to have children within wedlock, as is knowable from the natural law. And it's good to engage in virtue, not just physical virtue, which they obviously have some physical virtues and excellence and athleticism, but moral virtues. And have they done any of that? That's what I want to know. And I can't get a straight answer from people. I haven't seen evidence that they have. But if they have, great, show me the evidence. Because if not, then what are people defending? I don't get it.

PDS Debt Representative (33:53)

Are high interest debt on credit cards, personal loans, collections, or medical bills keeping you up at night? PDS Debt can help start saving you money immediately. PDS Debt's platform can analyze your unique situation and create the perfect personalized plan to get you out of debt. There's no minimum credit score required and it takes just 30 seconds to get your results. With PDS debt, you'll save more, pay off your debt faster, and take back control of your finances. Learn more and get a free debt analysis in just 30 seconds at pdsdebt.com.

Michael Knowles (34:21)

Wire the Daily Wire, you know, continues to fight. The time is now to take on one of the woke left's biggest accomplishments. That is Derek Chauvin. The cop in Minneapolis was railroaded. The evidence is clear. His trial was a sham, driven by media pressure, political threats and mob justice. Derek's federal conviction was a disgrace, a political sacrifice to appease the mob. If you are serious about undoing the damage of the last four years, this fight has to be fought. And so the Daily Wire is advocating for a pardon for Derek Chauvin if he hears from enough of us. If the president hears from enough of us, he might just do it. We're leading the charge again, launching a full scale push for justice. Go to pardonderek.com right now. Sign the petition. We have delivered major victories, but the fight's not over. So with your support, we can do it again. Finally. Finally, we have arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag. Our mailbag is sponsored by PureTalk. Go to peertalk.comknowles to claim your new iPhone or Galaxy with a qualifying purchase. Take it away.

Listener (35:29)

Hey, Michael, Slap my bass here. Been a hot minute, but I have some good news. No, I am not signing a record deal and becoming a famous bassist like I always wanted. But for the first time in 10 years, I have worked up the confidence to start dating and found a potential girlfriend. Now, I say potential because even though we have been going out for three months, she has said to me that she does not find me attractive, but enjoys my company and wants to continue to see me. This was the result of my last relationship and the girl who friend zoned me ended up getting married to somebody else. My question to you is, how does one get out of the friend zone and convince the other person to see someone as a potential life partner? Considering my options are very limited and my responses on dating sites are about as scarce as reasons to vote for Democrat. Also a best selling book by Michael Knowles. Pick up a copy today. I want to do everything in my power to ensure I am not waiting around another 10 years for a candidate to come. Nor do I want to break up with this girl with no other options readily available. Thanks.

Michael Knowles (36:32)

Well, I think you gotta start pimpin'you, know, and take pickup artist classes and. No, I'm joking. You shouldn't. You shouldn't do that. I don't know. Maybe I should try out. I should become the new Andrew Tate. Could I do that? I don't know. I don't know if I could pull it off. It's a little unclear from your question. Are you saying that your current girlfriend says that she's not attracted to you but she wants to keep seeing you, or are you saying that you had this girlfriend and she wasn't attracted to you and you broke up? It's a little bit unclear. So maybe I'll have to go back and listen to the tape if it's the former. If the girl says, look, I'm not really that attracted to you, but I'd like the idea of dating you. I don't know. It's a little Blunt. It probably would be difficult for my ego to take it, but she is expressing a kind of attraction to you. She's saying, look, it's not like I'm getting the vapors because you're so physically hot. But she is attracted to you, obviously. Now, if it's. That was an ex girlfriend who said that to you. Okay. Or a friend who said that to you. How do you get out of the friend zone? You gotta meet new girls, I guess, is the thing. You're not gonna probably. You're not gonna convince a girl who has friend zoned you to un friend zone you. It has happened. Stranger things have happened. But it might be tough. And if she said, look, I'm really not. It's really not gonna happen, probably I would move on. So you say dating sites aren't great, you know, but so where. What would I do if it were me? I guess I would just think of it very clinically. Where do you meet anyone? You meet people at parties, at the gatherings of your friends and family. Don't date your family, but you could date your friends and family members, your friends of friends. You meet people at work, you meet people at social activities, whether you're in a cigar club, probably not going to meet too many women there, or if you're in a political club or wherever, meet people there. And then let's say that that brings you to 10 people. You then have to remember those 10 people also have social circles. And so I would enlist them, just as you're enlisting me right now to give you advice. I would enlist them to introduce you to a woman. Because I think real flesh and blood meetings and experiences and relationships are more conducive to results, in my experience. So that's what I would do. You're not going to do it on your own. You know, we're a political animal, so pray about it. Of course, that's the first resort. But then I would pray your friends and say, hey, friends, family, co workers, whoever. Hey, someone needs to set me up. Might work. Next question.

Listener (39:14)

Hi, Michael. When Saint Athanasius discusses the Pope's defection from orthodoxy during the Arian crisis, he's completely unbothered by it. There's no hand wringing over infallibility, over obedience, over primacy. It's worth a paragraph of his time and his history on the Arian crisis, and then he moves on. Today, such a defection by the Pope would cause Catholics to freak out over any number of doctrines. How do we as a church get back to the point where we can be as unbothered by papal shortcomings as Saint Athanasius was.

Michael Knowles (40:03)

You have to return either to your physical origins or at least your spiritual origins in the Mediterranean. That's what you have to do. And I'm only being a little bit cute about it. I once. It's funny, Charlie Kirk asked me this one time, and I was. People were upset because I gave him kind of a cute answer on it. But there's actually a lot of truth to that cute answer where Charlie said, you know, the Pope is terrible, and he said all these terrible things, and he couldn't name any of the terrible things. And most people who really freak out about what any Pope, this Pope, or any other says, they often can't point to exactly what he said. But there's this sense that, oh, no, the Pope's saying terrible things, and this is a huge problem. You say, look, not saying it's not a problem. Even when the Pope says genuinely terrible things, like during the Arian crisis, people denying the divinity of Christ. But, you know, he's not a totalitarian dictator, the Pope. Okay. And so, you know, the Anglos are very, you know, they take things very, very seriously, but the Mediterranean approach is, oh, what did the papa say? Oh, okay. Well, is it a B? He just kind of said it to, like, a journalist. Okay, well, all right. Maybe I got a little wax into my ears. I don't know. Maybe I didn't quite hear that so much. I don't mean to down. It matters if the Pope were to say something that's genuinely contrary to the faith and really to hammer it home. And the Pope does have a lot of power, but the Church measures her life in centuries and millennia, not in tweets and errant phrases to liberal journalists. It's okay. Take a deep breath. It's going to be okay. Next question.

Listener (41:42)

Good morning, Michael. I am one of those all too rare Southern Baptist women who is opposed to birth control, both for health reasons and theological ones. Recently, I have striven to engage in casual conversation with my friends about it, to provoke thought about the theological aspects of it that I had never considered until relatively recently. In doing so, I have observed an interesting phenomenon. The men I know are willing to have a thoughtful conversation about the theological ramifications of birth control, but virtually none of the women are even willing to talk about it. These are pro life Christian women who love children. But if I even mention that I have been rethinking this issue, they get visibly uncomfortable and very quickly change the subject. Seeing as how this is a topic that you speak about fairly frequently. I was curious if you have experienced the same phenomenon and would love to hear both insight into why you think this may be as well as any advice for approaching the topic in a winsome manner. Thank you so much.

Michael Knowles (42:40)

Yes, well, to quote Jack Nicholson in as Good As It Gets, a man is, or a woman rather, is a man if you take away reason and accountability. But I didn't say that. That's what Jack Nicholson said. I didn't say that. Women have a rational nature too. I'm not denying that fact. But I'm not surprised actually that your female friends don't want to talk about this. Not because they're not rational, but women generally don't like confrontation, especially with friends. You know, they want to get along with their friends. Sometimes men, look, we get along with our friends too. But sometimes men, we like it when we really disagree with our friends and we go at it and we get in each other's face. We say, you're totally wrong. You're out of the. You're nuts, you're stupid. What are you talking about? Women are nicer than that. I guess so they don't like that as much. So I think that's probably why, because your friends are thinking, well, hold on, I agree with this person on everything. But wait, are you challenging not only a view that I hold, but a behavior that I engage in, a really personal behavior that is really convenient to me because I don't want to have to be pregnant every 12 months? Oh, hey, let's just change the subject. I think that's a big reason why also because in fairness to the women, the women do bear most of the physical discomfort and suffering that goes along with carrying a child. So I would say just keep hitting it head on because, you know, you say you're one of the few Baptists who takes this seriously. And maybe that's true for now. But you know, I told you the Southern Baptists issued this beautiful statement on IVF and said people aren't going to come around to it just yet, but really it's bioethically pretty much indefensible. And so don't undersell the Southern Baptists. You know, they get quite a lot. Okay, there's so much more to get to. There's another voice mailbag question I want to get to. There's written mailbag questions I want to get to. I want. But I gotta let the hoi polloi go because today is fake headline Friday. The rest of the show continues. Now, you don't want to miss it. Become a member. Use code knowlesknowles at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.