← The Michael Knowles Show
Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
Yesterday we read through the text messages of Jay Jones, the Democrat nominee for attorney general, Virginia, who wished murder upon a Republican opponent and the opponent's children. Today we learn that he has also wished for cops to be killed so that the cops stop enforcing the law. This is the Democrats candidate for attorney general, by the way, the top law enforcement official in Virginia. We'll get into all of that, but I think most illuminating of all, we learn that Jay Jones still has not lost a single Democrat endorsement. Cuz all those Democrats who are endorsing Jay Jones want to murder you and your kids too. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show. Stephen Miller, Deputy White House chief of staff, just destroyed CNN with facts and logic. It was beautiful to see this as President Trump considers invoking the Insurrection act against increasingly violent and lawless Democrats. We'll get to all of it. First though, I want to tell you about Good Ranchers. Go to goodranchers.com use promo code knowles. I love good Ranchers, as you well know. And I had a delicious Good Ranchers New York strip steak just the other night and it was very, very tasty. Well, this fall I'm doubling down on my Good Ranchers consumption because I'm joining Good Ranchers in getting back to the table at least once a week between now and Thanksgiving, my family and I will be turning off the news and gathering around our table. I don't care what the breaking story is. I love it. In fact, I try to do it more than once a week. Believe it or not, I try to do it most days if I'm not traveling. And I especially like to do it when there's good Ranchers on the table. It's very important. You know, I think a lot of us grew up, we'd eat on the snack trays. But it's very, very important to sit down all as a family talk, get disconnected from all of the craziness. Unless you have the Michael Noel show on, that's totally fine. And to enjoy good food, it actually matters. The food that you're eating really, really matters. And when you can eat food that is from America that is really, really good, that's at an unbelievable price, that's put out there by a company that supports what you support. And all the better when you get 40 bucks off plus free meat for life, then you're having a good time. The way you do that is you go to goodranchers.com, use code knowles that is k n o w l e s for 40 bucks off free meat for life. Goodranchers.com let's get back to the table. This guy, man, the more you learn about him, the worse and worse he looks. Jay Jones. Jay Jones was a state legislator and then he's running for Attorney General of Virginia, that is to say the top law enforcement official in Virginia. And one of Jay Jones former colleagues has come out with text messages in which Jones says he wants to murder the then Republican speaker of the House, one of his Republican opponents. And he wants to see the Republicans children murdered, dying in their mother's arms. And he says that the kids are little fascists, that the Republican and his wife are breeding little fascists. So real upstanding guy. J. Jones then issues a non apology in which he doesn't use the word sorry, doesn't use the word apology, doesn't use the word apologize, he uses the word regret generally and in the context of everyone regretting certain text messages, and then he blames it all on Trump. So a non apology apology. And now we find out it wasn't just a one off. Because I think this is the way that the Democrats have been able to firmly stand behind Jay Jones, the Virginia Beach Democratic Committee, people like Cory Booker, the gubernatorial candidate, Abigail Spanberger, all of these people have continued to endorse Jay Jones, which is to say they are endorsing murdering you and your kids too. I don't see how else you can read it. Well, the way that they're gonna get away with it goes back to J. Jones's fake apology when he says, look, we've all sent texts we regret. So what they're trying to say is, look, okay, yeah, one time, okay, one time, I wished that my political opponents would be murdered along with their children dying in their mother's arms. Okay, like one time, who hasn't, right? It's like, come on, you know, you're a little tired, maybe you had a few drinks and you wish death upon your enemies and their children. You know, it's just like, come on, who hasn't let him who is without sin cast the first stone? And I guess that's working on some people. Maybe the problem now is this is a pattern. This wasn't just a one off wishing of death on Republicans and their kids. Also, it seems Jay Jones wants cops to die. J. Jones, running for the top law enforcement office in the state in the Commonwealth, is fantasizing about cops being killed because then the cops won't enforce the law. Not only is this sick, vile, psycho stuff that Cory Booker apparently endorses that Abigail Spanberger apparently endorses, that the Democratic Party endorses. Not only is it sick, vile, psycho stuff, it also runs contrary to the job that he is seeking. The only thing you're supposed to do as Attorney General is enforce the law, advance the law, advance justice. And this guy, well, I'll just read his words. So according to the person who first released the text messages, the person who received those text messages because Jay Jones meant to text someone else, accidentally texted this person and then just kept it up and doubled down and tripled down. This person said, quote, we had a pretty heated conversation about public policy and pain involving qualified immunity. That is the immunity that police officers receive while doing their jobs. So that they can do their jobs. I served on the Courts Committee for a short period of time. A bill to remove qualified immunity for police officers, which protects police officers from personal liability in their line of duty and their line of work. And he believed that they should not have qualified immunity and he was trying to convince me to agree with that. So this guy, Jay Jones, does not want police officers to be protected from personal liability while they're carrying out their jobs, which is to say the would be top law enforcement official in Virginia doesn't want there to be cops. He doesn't want police officers to be able to enforce the law because without qualified immunity, cops just simply can't enforce the law today. That's just how it works. So they go on. I said, no, police officers have to make a split second decision about whether or not to shoot a gun to protect themselves or protect others. And if they're gonna have to think about it, will this strip my whole family of everything? Are they going to be able to make that split second decision? And I said, I believe that people will get killed, police officers will get killed. And. And he said, J. Jones, well, maybe if a few of them died, that they would move on. Not shooting people, not killing people. And I said, that's insane. Okay, how is this being reported? AG candidate wants to murder Republicans, wants to murder their kids. Accuses the kids of Republicans of being little fascists and wants cops to die so that they stop enforcing the law. How is the AP reporting on this? But, you know, I bet you could write the headline without my even reading it to you. Trump's GOP seizes on violent rhetoric from Virginia Attorney General candidate as high stakes elections loom. They seize, we're seizing, we're having seizures. That's it. If you want the latest updates, the really important breaking news about Republicans seizing make sure. That you open up the Associated Press. It's not. The violent rhetoric is not. And by the way, violent rhetoric is pretty vague. Virginia Attorney general candidate fantasizes about murdering Republicans and their kids and killing cops. Not the story. Me seizing on that. That. You seizing on that. That's the story. That's what's newsworthy. That's man bites dog. Wouldn't you say so? They know it's bad. They do this all the time. This is a species of Republicans pounce, which is a tried and true genre of left wing dishonest journalism at this point. I think the AP is conscious of it, probably. They say, tee hee hee. This will get under Republican skin. Okay, we won't do pounce. We'll do seize. Okay, so they're seizing. They're all seizing. But it's not going away. Even Morning Joe Joe Scarborough, former Republican congressman, who's a. He's a liberal host on msnbc, married to Mika Dzyski. Even he came out no fan of Trump, no fan of Republicans anymore. Even he said Jones has to drop out. Coming up, an attorney general candidate in Virginia is apologizing for his texts about a state lawmaker. We'll go through what the messages said. Probably be forced to withdraw from the race, and probably is doing a lot there. All right, Morning Joe. We'll be right back. Whoa. Two takeaways here. One, when you've lost Morning Joe as a liberal, as a Democrat, you're in trouble. This attorney general candidate, I think is done. Whether he loses the support of Democrats or not, I think he's done. The only question now is will his collapse affect the rest of the race? Abigail Spanberger, for instance, the gubernatorial candidate, the Democrat. Because right now, polling, I think, as of yesterday, shows she's up 10 points over winsome Sears, who's the Republican candidate. So Abigail Spanberger at this point can probably say, all right, I'm gonna continue to endorse this AG who wants to murder Republicans and their kids and cops because it's not affecting my poll numbers. He, I think, is done, but she's gonna continue to defend that for anyone with even a modicum of moderation, reasonability, morality, even a slight to even the simulacrum of such for political gain. They have to drop Jay Jones at this point. So that's what Joe Scarborough's doing. He's still somewhere back there. He remembers what it was like to be at least a moderate Republican. And he says, hold on. We can't be murdered. He wants to murder me and my kids. We can't have that. Right. Okay, I think he needs to drop out. But then what's most telling is what does Mika Brzezinski say? Well, hold on. She interrupts him. She seems to disagree. They're going to break. So she doesn't quite get the thought out. He says, I think he's got to drop out of the race. But I mean, they're married. She's married to a guy who at least at one point was Republican. She's a mainstream media host for many years. Her father was a major figure of Democrat politics in the 20th century. And she says, ah, I mean, I don't know what's a little murderer of Republicans between friends? I don't know. He only wanted. How many kids does he have? He has two kids that he wants to murder. I don't, eh. If he had three or four kids, I mean, that'd be one thing. But even she. Even she. Not one. Not one Democrat endorsement missing. I know many of you called Senator Booker's office yesterday. I don't have the phone number on my desk right now. But if you didn't call Senator Booker's office, or if you didn't call Abigail Spanberger's office, or if you didn't call any of the many people, the unions, the nonprofits that are endorsing Jay Jones, I would consider calling them, asking why they support this. The fact that I still think we're not so far gone as a country that Jay Jones is gonna become the ag. I think he's done. And I think he should be happily shown the exit from public life and he should go work some private job where no one has to hear from him or his disgusting thoughts anym. But the fact that this is not going to drag down the gubernatorial candidate, potentially other Democrats, shows you we're in a very different stage than we were six years ago. We might even, to use a popular word, we might even be on the brink of insurrection. We'll get to that momentarily. First, I want to tell you about Hillsdale. Go to Hillsdale. Edu Knowles. Time is our most precious commodity. So how can we spend it wisely to improve ourselves and the people around us? One way we can do it is by learning and expanding our network of knowledge. That is why I'm so excited that Hillsdale College is offering more than 40 free online courses in the most important and enduring subject. You can learn about Western philosophy, the great works of literature, economics, the meaning of U.S. history and the U.S. constitution, and the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, all available for free. That's right. For free. But I personally would recommend that you sign up for introduction to Aristotle's how to Lead a Good Life. Have you ever wondered, what is the good life and how can I live it? I hope you've wondered that. Many people haven't even wondered that. Well, the first step to getting it is to thinking about it. In this course, Hillsdale College president Larry Arne leads you through the most important lessons of Aristotle's ethics, including Aristotle's teachings about human nature, the meaning of the good life, and the virtues necessary for happiness. Really, really important. He is called the philosopher for a reason, not Larry. Larry Arne could be called the philosopher too, or at least a great philosopher. But Aristotle is the philosopher. So head on over. Go to Hillsdale. Edu Knowles right now. No cost. It's easy to get started. Hillsdale. Edu Knowles to enroll for free. Hillsdale Edu Knowles. Republicans are gonna be smearing. I don't mean to belabor the point on this AG candidate, but it's just. It's after Charlie's assassination, after the BLM riots, after the attacks on ice, after the insurrections by Democrat politicians in the cities, which we'll get to momentarily after. After. After the fact that one of these Democrats running for a law enforcement office is saying, yeah, I wanna murder all of you. I wanna murder you and your kids and cops. I don't wanna murder y'. All. I want you to die in your mother's arms. The fact that he's saying this and all the Democrats, every single one of them, is just, oh, great. Yup. He didn't lose a single vote. He didn't lose a single endorsement is so horrifying. It reveals to you the fetid, rotten core of the Democrat Party and the American left. And it's going to be run on TV screens and computer screens and phone screens for months. We start with breaking news from the campaign trail. Jay Jones is under fire. Jay Jones is under fire. Jay Jones is under fire after messages he sent in 2022 saying former Virginia House Speaker Todd Gilbert should be shot. I'm excited about this ticket. It's been great to be out on the Campaign channel with J. Jones. You said Gilbert's wife could watch her own child die in her arms so that Gilbert might reconsider his political views. We deserve an attorney general who will stand up for the people of Virginia. Jones said, quote, gilbert Hitler and Pol Pot. Gilbert gets two bullets to the head. Let your rage fuel you. Jones doubled down saying, quote, do I think Todd and Jennifer are evil and that they're breeding little fascists. Yes. How can Virginians trust a man who said something so horrific, so callously? Only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy. Good ad. Really good ad from Winsome Sears. And fair is the other thing. Look, there are plenty of attacks in political campaigns that are cheap, that are unfair, that are October surprises. This one's fair because it's not just one little word he said. It's repeated statements. Only when people feel the pain will that change their policy. It's Abigail Spanberger running for governor. Let your rage fuel you. It's this guy. Time and again in multiple conversations, apparently after the Democrats were found in polling to be much more likely to endorse political violence as people who are very liberal or eight times as likely to defend political violence as people who are very conservative. As young liberals, upwards of 30% of them support political violence, whereas many, many fewer conservatives do. Something like 7% or something of young conservatives time and time and time again after the hideous reaction to the murder of Charlie Kirk, which on the left varied at all levels from shrugging their shoulders to excusing it to celebrating it. So it's a fair ad. And I think this guy, Jay Jones, has to be the face of the Democrat Party because he is. Because he is. He actually represents them. And many top Democrats, notably Cory Booker, Abigail Spanberger, Planned Parenthood. I guess that makes sense. Lots of unions all continue to endorse him today, and they need to be held to account for that. Okay, speaking of law enforcement, Stephen Miller just destroyed CNN with facts and logic. Here's the setup. Stephen Miller was asked if ICE is racially profiling. Here's the answer. Is it the case that, as Pritzker frames it, you are profiling brown people? That. That this immigration crackdown is designed to go after people of color? That is the. It's such a. Oh, what a dumb question. The illegal aliens who are here are taking jobs away from blacks, they're taking jobs away from whites, they're taking jobs away from Latinos, they're taking their health benefits away. They're taking their school slots away. And of course, in many cases, they're committing heinous crimes. We cannot have a system of law in this country that privileges illegal aliens over American citizens. And that's what they're doing. You know it and I know. So. So that's not exactly a no. Stephen, can you just unequivocally just say it's a dumb question? Okay, I appreciate. So. So no. This policy Is not designed. When I said it's a dumb question, it meant no. Well, I just want to be clear and precise. I appreciate you trying to qualify my questions, but nevertheless, I think it's a fair one that a lot of people have. So my full answer is no, that is lie and it's a dumb question. I love him. I just love Stephen Miller, man. I love him. As I've said Repeatedly, repeal the 22nd Amendment. Reagan wanted to do it. Repeal the 22nd, repeal term limits. We need to keep this going for a long time. What is the question? Is ICE targeting brown people? HE LAUGHS what a dumb question. No, well, are you? I mean, but are you sure? Yeah, I'm sure. No, yeah, but like, are you double triple sure? Yeah. So yes, you are. No, I said yeah to the I'm double, triple sure. No, I'm not. Hey, it was a dumb question because Miller explains how it's not just that he denies it, he gives the goods. He says one of the issues with illegal immigration is that they are taking jobs from black people. Right? They're competing with black people for certain jobs. So why would. This is why Trump was winning an historic percentage of the black male vote in 2024. And by the way, why he won 46% of Hispanic voters. Also, if you're trying to get Venezuelan illegals, you know, trend Aragua members out of the country, are you going to target Arabians? Are you going to target, I don't know, southern Italians who are a little bit dusky. Are you going to target Eritreans or Ethiopians? No, you're not targeting brown people. However. However, in fairness to the question, you do have to profile. You have to profile. You don't have to profile brown people, you don't have to merely racially profile or something, but you do have to profile. This is one of those words, the P word, one of the P words that has been unfairly maligned. You have to profile to enforce the law. You have to profile really to make any judgments throughout the day, but certainly to enforce the law because the cops job, we have to explain it these days because the would be top law enforcement official in Virginia wants to kill cops and Republicans and their children. So we gotta explain basic things. When you are enforcing a law, you have to distinguish between the innocent and the guilty, the good guys and the bad guys, the victims and the perpetrators. In order to do that, you need to be able to distinguish between them in some cases very quickly because they're not gonna hold signs up saying, I'm the guilty one. Come arrest me. So you have to be able to distinguish between them using powers of inference. How are you going to be able to distinguish between an American citizen or a lawful immigrant and an illegal alien? Well, you're gonna recognize that the vast majority of illegal aliens don't come from Norway. Right. They come from Latin America. And you're going to have to recognize that the vast majority of illegal aliens don't speak the Queen's English. With received pronunciation, they speak versions of Spanish. You will have to recognize that they generally don't wear three piece J press suits. Sometimes they wear clothing more fitting their communities. You'll have to notice that they don't always have the perfect coif. Sometimes they have face tattoos and gang symbols. So you are profiling. You're not profiling merely on one criterion. You're not profiling merely on skin color or something like that, but you are profiling. Profiling is good. It's good when it's not unjust. Prejudice is good when it's not unjust. We have to operate on pre judgments because we are not sufficiently rational or our minds are not sufficiently efficient, our brains are not sufficiently efficient to reason through everything all the time. Sometimes you gotta go on your gut. That's okay. Don't concede that point to the libs that you're not allowed to profile. Yeah, we know what we know that ms.13 gangsters don't speak with a cockney accent. Okay? We know that. We don't need to pretend otherwise. We generally know what they look like. We generally know what they sound like. Generally speaking, it's always the ones you most expect. Okay? Now, speaking of law enforcement, President Trump might invoke the Insurrection act. We'll get to that momentarily. First, I want to tell you about lean. Go to takelean.com use promo code knowles. By the time the average person reaches 60, they've likely cycled through numerous fad diets and juice cleanses and the cabbage soup diet and the raw food regimens, collectively losing and regaining several hundred pounds over the years. You've probably done it without knowing there's a name for it. It's called weight cycling. You lose 10 pounds, you feel great, then you watch them creep back on. Plus a few extra half of Americans are stuck in this frustrating cycle. And doctors are now seeing it's not just disappointing, it's actually dangerous. All that yo yo dieting increases your risk of diabetes, liver problems and heart issues. Truth is, most of us need more than willpower to break free from this pattern. That's where Lean comes in. Unlike those expensive GLP1 injections, Lean is a non prescription supplement created by doctors specifically for this problem. And the science behind it is solid. Lean tackles weight loss. Three ways that help you keep it off. Keeps your blood sugar steady. No more energy crashes that send you back to the snack cabinet. It controls cravings and that constant hungry feeling. And it helps your body convert fat into energy instead of storing it. When your body gets better at burning fat for fuel, that is when you see lasting results instead of temporary losses. Do you want to be a skinny mini like me? Multiple producers and employees at the Daily Wire have tried Lean, and they've been so impressed with how effective Lean has been in such a short period of time. If you want to lose meaningful weight at a healthy pace and keep it off, add lean to your diet and exercise lifestyle. Get 20% off when you enter michaelakelean.com that is code Michael takelean.com Folks, I have this new show out. We put the first episode out. I really, I love it. I want to do more of them. It's called Bar Fight. Check it out. Trump is Putin's. You are anti American. No, no, no, no, no, no. Let me talk. Most of the illegals are asylum seekers or are they economic? Wait, no, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Listen, I want to help you get late. Not me. Like, are you pro incel. No. Well, welcome to Bar Fight. I'm Michael Knowles. I'm joined tonight by two guests. Wow. Real sophisticated answer. I know you would know him from CNN if anyone ever watched Adam Mochler. Well, dude, you gotta answer my questions a little better. Just because you're wrong about something doesn't mean it's not. That's convenient. You know, you should get out of my country. They want more deportation. I'm also joined one of the most reasonable people ever to appear on Jubilee. That would be Cecilia Ray. Go check it out. You can watch it now on the Michael Knowles YouTube channel and on Dailywire. President Trump might invoke the Insurrection act, which is a very, very old law in America, been on the books for many, many years. And it's been invoked many times. Not just in the 19th century, say, but more recently. Why will he do that? Because left wing cities are spiraling out of control. There is crime, there is drug use, there are violations of federal law. There are violations of the civil rights of citizens. And the mayors and the governors in these blue cities and blue states won't do anything about it. And so Trump says, I'm gonna step in. We will not Allow these cities to spiral out of control. The left might want that. They might want their autonomous zones, they might want their weird drugs and sex stuff and crime and murder. But Trump is saying, we're not gonna allow that to happen. This is contrary to the previous weak, squishy, quasi libertarian Republican stance, which was, you know, if the residents of those blue cities wanna let their cities turn to hellholes, let them have it. I don't care. I'll be in my gated community state. Forget about them. Ha, ha, ha. Individualism or whatever. But Trump is saying, no, no, I'm on the side of the little guy and I'm on the side of American unity, and I want to make our country great again. And making our country great again means not allowing our cities to go to hell. We're one country and we have an interest in those cities. And those citizens of those cities, they have the right to be protected. And they can call on their federal government and we'll help them out. We're not just gonna abandon them. First of all, there are many conservatives in these cities. There are many Republicans, even if they don't form a majority. So we're not gonna just abandon them. And we're not gonna abandon the city. We're not even gonna abandon the Democrats. You don't get to let your cities turn to hell. It's kinda like when you have little kids and they don't wanna clean their room. The squishy, libertarian, individualist answer is, well, kids, it's your room. You know, it's your room. If you want to have maggots everywhere, clothes and toys strewn about, and blood on the walls, that's fine. That's your room. It's your right to your room. But that's not how I run my house. I would say, hey, actually, it's my house and I have a responsibility. I'm put in a position of authority to make sure not only that your rights are protected, but that you are living in conditions that are conducive to your flourishing. And so it's not just your. It's your room. You have substantial control over your room. You get to put your stuffed animals where you want. You get to, I don't know, turn the lights on or the fan on as you want, but you don't get to burn your room down because it's my house. I'm the dad, okay? It's my house. That's what Trump is saying. That is the conservative point of view. That's certainly the traditional point of view. I think it's the only defensible point of view. So the little kids are throwing their temper tantrums in Portland and Chicago. In Chicago, the mayor of Chicago wants to establish ice Free zones. What's an ice Free zone? According to this order, in Chicago, city property can ban ice. Now, does that sound right to you? That a city can ban federal law enforcement from enforcing federal law? Wouldn't that seem to violate the Supremacy Clause? The nature of federalism? That's a little strange, wouldn't you say? But it goes further. It says that private businesses can choose to display a sign indicating that ICE cannot enter without a warrant. This reminds me of when, like, liberal Facebook boomers would post some random, you know, chain mail slop that says, like, this is just to say that Facebook has no right to my pictures. Do you remember this was going on? This happens every so often, but it started a few years ago. See, I'm. This is a privacy notice that I'm asserting my rights, that Facebook doesn't get to use my pictures. But that's not. That doesn't do anything. That has no effect. That's just nonsense. They have a right to your pictures the minute you upload them. Well, it's the same thing here. I am just saying that federal law enforcement has no right to enforce federal law in my marijuana shop. Like, oh, yeah, that's a nice sign you have there. I'm taking all your drugs now. I'm taking all your illegal aliens now. But I have a sign in my window. Oh, that's great. Good for you. That's good. Look at that. Look at your sign. You colored inside the lines on your sign. Good. That's. Good job, Chicago. I'm enforcing federal law now. Get out of the way. I'm going to. You don't actually have the right to do that. You don't know, but you don't. Maybe we've failed as parents because we have given you unreasonable expectations, but you don't get to violate federal law because you put a sign in your window. You don't get to abolish federalism and our constitutional order because you doodled a sign. Sorry, not gonna happen. Trump was asked how far he's gonna take this. Would he go so far if the cities in the states push back enough? The liberal cities in the states. Would he go so far as to invoke the Insurrection Act? Here's what he says over a weekend. The Insurrection act, under what conditions or terms would you. Well, I'd do it if it was necessary. So far it hasn't been necessary. But we have an Insurrection act for a reason. If I had to enact, I'd do that. If people were being killed and courts were holding us up, or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure, I'd do that. I mean, I want to make sure that people aren't killed. We have to make sure that our cities are safe. I love this one line. I love the whole answer, but the one line, he says, we have an Insurrection act for a reason. What does the Insurrection act do? It empowers the President to deploy the US Military and to federalize the National Guard within the United States. That's what it does. Been on the books for a very, very long time. It's not even just one of those long time ago laws that we used to enforce in the 1850s, but we don't enforce them anymore. We've enforced them pretty recently. Well, actually, even more recently than the two examples I'm going to cite. But the two examples from the 20th century that are most notable are Eisenhower and Kennedy invoking the Insurrection act to desegregate schools and communities at gunpoint, forcing racial integration at gunpoint, that merited invoking the Insurrection Act. But cities burning to the ground, invasions. I don't want to be hyperbolic. Parts of cities burning to the ground around the country. Not the whole cities, but parts of them. An invasion of illegal aliens, all of whom in some way have a connection to criminal cartels across the southern border, some members of whom are actual cartel members themselves. Foreign terrorist organizations. Murder, theft, rape, criminals getting out of prison. How does the social engineering of racial integration merit the Insurrection Act? But cities becoming Third World hellholes with a foreign invasion of particularly criminal people, some of whom are designated as foreign terrorists, how does that not. I'm not saying that racial integration didn't merit invoking the Insurrection Act. I'm saying if you think that merited invoking the Insurrection act, how could you not say that? The city's falling into disrepair. To explicitly rebuffing federal law enforcement to enforce the most basic federal laws would not. It's crazy, because the way the lib media are gonna play this is they're gonna say, trump's invoking the Insurrection Act. He's a tyrant. Was Kennedy a tyrant? Was Eisenhower a tyrant? Were any of the other presidents who have invoked the Insurrection act from the 19th century, the 20th century, and so on, were they all tyrants? No. And if any of those instances could qualify as tyranny, would you really say that preventing cities from falling into murderous cesspools filled with foreign terrorists would qualify? I don't think so. I don't think so. We need order so that we can have a functioning country, so that we can be strong. We'll get to that in one second because there was an excellent observation from the Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth. This month, Daily Wire. Plus members are getting more than ever before. From USS Cole, Al Qaeda's strike before 9 11, to the 1916 project, the Halloween thriller Nefarious and hiding in plain sight. October is packed with must see premieres. Plus on Thursday, October 16, the debut of our new live show, Friendly Fire. Join me Venture bureau, Matt Walsh, Andrew Clavin and special guest Isabel Brown for live debates, uncensored disagreements and unfiltered discussions on the headlines that matter most. And Jeremy stops by for your long awaited first look at the Pendragon cycle. Do not miss a moment. Join now. Get 40% off new annual memberships with code fall40@dailywire.com My favorite comment yesterday, it's from TheViking8513 who says they don't kill you because you're fascist. They call you fascist so they can kill you. That's true. The semantic value of calling someone fascist Nazi, all the rest is to justify violence against you. That's what it means. It doesn't mean when the left calls someone a Nazi, they don't really know what that means. They don't know much about fascism. I don't think they've read Giovanni Gentile's essay. I don't think they're familiar with the intricacies of National Socialism. They're saying that because in our popular understanding, Hitler is the devil. Literally. He's not even just Hitler, he's the devil. He's an embodiment of evil, a personification of evil, and therefore can be resisted at all costs. And anything would be justified in rebuffing a Nazi. And so that's how they justify killing you. Okay, what is our strength? What constitutes our strength? For many decades now, we've been told that diversity is our strength. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, speaking to the United States Navy, says otherwise. Your diversity is not your strength. Your strength is your unity of purpose, your shared mission, your love of country. Simple and yet provocative and contrary to the Zeitgeist. Diversity is not your strength. Do you know where that phrase comes from? Diversity is your strength. It comes from Dan Quayle. Dan Quayle, the who I kind of like, but Dan Quayle, the largely forgotten vice president, to George H.W. bush. He used that phrase in late 80s, early 90s. That's it. It doesn't go back to the Constitution, doesn't go back to the Declaration of Independence, doesn't go back to the mid-80s, goes back to Dan Quayle. It is a dubious proposition. There is no evidence that diversity is ever strength. Unity is strength. When you have a, I don't know, a metal bar or a bar, not even a metal bar, a bar made of composite materials, you know, some metals, some precious metals, some steel, some sand, some clay, some Elmer's glue, some paper mache. It's diverse. It's really diverse. This bar, is that bar stronger than a bar just made of steel, or a bar just made of gold? Or for that matter, a bar just made of paper mache. At least the bar made of paper mache is not going to have these heavy points that kind of pull and fall and tear. Unity is strength. It's not to say that people who are diverse in certain ways cannot be strong together. But what makes them strong is not their diversity, it's their unity. It's not to say that people who are from different racial or ethnic backgrounds can't be strong together. But if they are to be strong together, it's because of something they share. A unity of purpose, a unity of belief, a unity of loyalty to a particular country or a cause. The diversity will make them weaker. In as much as you focus on the diversity, the only thing that will make them strong is the unity. This was common sense until, I Dunno, the early 90s or something. P Tech Seth restoring that. Bingo. Spot on the money. Now returning to normal. There is a case coming up to the Supreme Court and it's on another one of these slogans that no one thinks about. Diversity is our strength. We just kind of, it's just drilled into our heads. Well, here's another slogan. Conversion therapy. Have you heard of conversion therapy? Conversion therapy is, if you hear the liberals talk about it, it's when you hook the poor trans 5 year olds up to electrodes and torture them or, I don't know, that's the image they paint. That doesn't happen, of course, nothing even resembling that happens. But conversion therapy, so called, is when a person who is confused about his sex or has unwanted sexual urges or desires or behaviors goes to a therapist and says, hey, I have distress because of all these sexual behaviors and urges and desires. Can you help me? And the therapist says, yes, I can try to help you. That's conversion therapy. Because if the therapist says, hey, yes, you. Well, it's only conversion Therapy. I'm sorry. If the person wants to go from a deviant sexual behavior to a normal sexual behavior. If a person wants to go from a normal sexual behavior to a deviant sexual behavior, like a person comes to a therapist and says, hey, I'm married. I have a wife. I have a white picket fence and a dog and three kids. And I don't know, but I really want to be a woman Now. I'm a man, but I want to be a woman. Or I really want to go date three fellas in a billy goat, I want to do that. And the therapist says, oh, yeah, I'll help you think about that. I'll help you resolve that identity, that's totally fine. The law says, that's awesome. But if the guy who thinks he's a woman or the guy with three. Three guys, a new billy goat or whatever says, hey, I really. Actually, I think this is bad, and I'd rather have a more normal kind of sexual view and desires and behaviors. And the therapist says, okay, I'll try to help you do that. That's illegal. The therapist will lose his or her license over that. So there's a court case about this, because it's not that conversion therapy is illegal and other kinds of therapy are illegal. It's that some kinds of conversion therapy are illegal, but not the other kinds. The ones that say, hey, you should go be gay or trans, that's great, that's fine. It's only the other way. So at a deeper level, what this gets to is the fact that all therapy of all kinds, not just sex kinds, of all kinds, all therapy is conversion therapy because someone comes in and says, hey, I have a. A certain way of thinking that is causing me distress. And I want to think in another kind of way. I have a certain kind of behavior. I want to behave in another kind of way. I have a certain kind of identity. I want to have a different kind of identity. And the entire purpose of therapy, the raison debt of the entire industry, is to convert people from one set of ideas and behaviors to another. But some of them are illegal now. So this licensed therapist and Evangelical Protestant Kaylee Chiles, says that she wants to help religious teens who struggle with their sexual orientation and gender, and she wants to help them to live a life consistent with their faith. But she has to turn these teens away because it's illegal according to state law. So the teens who. She says she doesn't want to convert them in the sense she's not forcing anything on them. But for teens who Want to, quote, reduce or eliminate unwanted sexual attractions, change sexual behaviors, or grow in the experience of harmony with one's physical body. She's not allowed to do that. It's very strange. What if a teen comes and says, hey, I'm addicted to pornography and I don't want to look at pornography anymore? You would think this would be a pretty basic area for a psychologist to handle, right? That's sexual compulsion. That's clearly bad for you. That involves things that were illegal for most of American history. And surely that. And I think under the state law, if the teen said, I want to stop looking at straight porn, I think the therapist is allowed to do it. But if the same teen goes in and says, I want to stop looking at gay porn, I don't think the way the law is written, I don't think that the therapist is allowed to do it. Is that the craziest thing you've ever heard in your life? Or furthermore, if the person says, I don't want to have to, I want to kind of change the sexual fantasies that are bothering me? Well, that's really no different from porn. It's not all that different from a porn addiction there. I think it's pretty clear that the therapist is not allowed to intervene if they're straight fantasies. The therapist is allowed to intervene if they're not straight. If they're aberrant or deviant fantasies, the therapist does not. There is no way that that should be legal. That's obviously preposterous. The case is going up to the Supreme Court. I want to give due consideration to the other side here. The fear from a lot of people, the liberals and the people who bought into propaganda, but even moderate people, is that some hyper zealous parents of a kind of dubious religious view are going to seriously damage their children by forcing them into this therapy that's going to potentially make their psychiatric problems worse. And so it'd be much better for the teens. This is what the liberals would argue. It'd be much better for the teens to come out as gay or trans or pans or this or that or the other thing. And to make that argument, the liberals have to ignore all of the comorbidities that go along with those identities. The anxiety, the depression, the suicidality. They have to ignore all of that, not just with trans, but with the LGBT umbrella broadly. But let's go with it for a second. Let's ignore that for a second too. Let's be as generous to the liberals argument as we can be. The argument is that the government must intervene to overrule the parents in cases of sexual morality. Right. That is essentially what the liberals are saying. That's why we have to ban conversion therapy. And my question is, what is the evidence that the government is a better arbiter of sexual morality than the parents? I'm not saying parents can't be bad arbiters of sexual morality. I'm not saying the government can't be a good arbiter of sexual morality. I'm asking you right now, today, year of our Lord 2025, what is the argument that the government, which has in recent years vociferously embraced transgender ideology, transing the children, weird sex, pornography, self abuse, on and on and on and on. What is the argument that that entity is better at sexual morality than parents? There's no evidence for it, and there's a ton of evidence to the contrary. I'm not even asking you to come to some grand conclusion about government or parents in general. I'm just saying right now, the government that promotes freaky, creepy, weird sex stuff that is really bad for you and especially bad for children, that government is not a better arbiter of these questions than parents, even if parents might be a mixed bag. Okay, before we go, there's one last stray I have to get to, and it involves. Involves sex stuff because it involves marriage. Ayesha Curry. Ayesha Curry, I am told, is the wife of Steph Curry. Steph Curry, I am told, is a professional athlete. That's basically all I know about Steph Curry. So he's wealthy, he's famous, he's married. This woman, she's got everything, everything that most women want. She's got kids. She got it all, man. And she's still unhappy. As she explains to the Call Her Daddy podcast, I didn't want kids. I. I didn't want to get married. I thought I was going to be career girl, and that's it. And I had my eyes set on my goals, and I was never the little girl that, like, dreamt about the wedding dress and all of that. And then it happened so early in my life. Did you talk to Steph about it? He tries to resonate with me, but he just can't. And he also comes from a place of, like, it's effing stupid. Like, it's not true. So why are you. And I'm like, but wait, like, listen to how it makes me feel. And he's like, but why does it make you feel like that? It's not real. After we got married, we found out we were pregnant with our daughter so quickly, it. I didn't even have time to think about what I wanted anymore. It's so interesting. I spent my entire life, like, trying to work towards something, and then it kind of just disappeared, and I didn't think twice about it. Aisha Curry, the woman to whom everything happens, the woman with the least agency in the world. She didn't want to get married. She didn't want to have kids. I don't know. Steph Curry just came up one day with his. Does he plays basketball or football? Whatever ball game he plays, you know, came out, he took the baseball bat. I don't know, whatever sport it is. He just clubbed her on the head one day, dragged her back to his cave, and next thing she knows, she's married. And then, you know, what happened? She. I don't know. She must have. She dozed off one day. I don't know. Next thing you know, she wakes up, she's pregnant. Can you imagine? She didn't want to get married. She wanted to have kids. She had this other plan. Her life sucks, you know, doesn't it? She's got a. She's got to have a beautiful family and a supportive husband and a ton of material resources and public adulation, and she's got to have all that. She has to have that. But she wanted something else. She doesn't exactly know what, but it's like, ugh. It's like life, you know? A reminder, a takeaway. Here. I don't mean to beat up on Mrs. Curry all that much. Just a reminder. And it's not even just the women. It's more pronounced among women, but it's true of people in general. Being happy, being joyful, is kind of like a state of being. It's not really contingent on external circumstances. To some degree, it is. When your friend dies, you're gonna have a bad couple weeks. You're gonna have a tough couple weeks. I should say, you're gonna have a tough couple weeks. When you have material wants, you're gonna struggle a little bit. When you have longings that are unfulfilled, that can wear on you a little bit. But just broadly speaking, over the course of your life, your happiness and your misery have basically nothing to do with your external circumstances, because happiness is. Well, Aristotle defines it as excellent rational activity done in accordance with virtue. So it's kind of a movement of the soul. It's not really about how much money, you know, the ideal amount of money to have. Right. You know, the perfect amount of money is just a little bit more. That's how it is. I remember I have a friend once who said to me, I had been to a beautiful beach in the Caribbean. Beautiful beach in the ocean. I was just talking about how great it was, and my friend says, oh, Michael, you could be happy anywhere. If I can't be happy here, how can I be happy? What are you talking about? This is as good as it gets. But maybe there was some truth to that observation. Take the warning from Aisha Curry. If you're just walking around now, just a bad day. Tomorrow will be better, though. But I'm having a. Mm, mm, mm, mm, mm. And if only I. If only I had a different lunch. If only I had a different job. If only I had a different. If only I. If only. If only. You're gonna have a. You're gonna have a bad life with that attitude, man. Don't do it. Fix it now. Okay. Today is Teehee Tuesday. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member. Use code knowlescannawles at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.