The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1006 - Pronoun Lunatics Turn Students Into Sexual Harassment Criminals

Episode Date: May 16, 2022

The pro-abortion movement’s nationwide rallies in support of Roe v. Wade flop, a Wisconsin school district brings a Title IX sexual harassment suit against middle school students for not using a student’s preferred pronouns, and a racist kills 10 people at a supermarket in Buffalo. Join Michael and the Daily Wire for Backstage Live At The Ryman on June 29th. Get your tickets NOW: https://utm.io/uezFr  The Daily Wire will take a wrecking ball to all the lies the abortion industry is built upon. Become a member and tune in to our documentary on abortion “Choosing Death: The Legacy of Roe”: https://utm.io/uezgd  I’m exposing the most successful failure in government history. Stream Fauci Unmasked here: https://utm.io/ueogL. — Today’s Sponsors: 40 Days for Life is one of the largest pro-life grassroots organizations in the world. Get their book "What to Say When: The Complete New Guide to Discussing Abortion": https://utm.io/uex0P  Experience the best sheets you’ve ever felt at bollandbranch.com. Use promo code MICHAEL at bollandbranch.com for $50 off your first set of sheets plus FREE shipping. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Things are looking really bad for the left. We already knew that things were bad for the left. They are down in the midterm polls. They are down on pretty much every single issue in the country. They're down on job performance. But this weekend took things to a whole new level. There was supposed to be a major pro-abortion protest in New York City on Saturday. This was going to be the 2022 version of the women's march, all the more urgent because the Supreme Court just leaked the decision to overrule Roe versus Wade. This march was going to be historic. And here is what the local New York outlet, the Gothamist, had to say. Hundreds upon hundreds of abortion rights supporters marched from Brooklyn to Manhattan on Saturday.

in one of the several mass demonstrations around the country, protesting the presumed impending end to Roe v. Wade. Hundreds upon hundreds. The population of New York City is over 8 million, more than three quarters of New Yorkers vote Democrat. Even lots of New York Republicans support legal abortion. If abortion were as popular as the establishment propagandists claim, there should have been a million people in the streets. Conservatively, there should have been a million people.

people in the streets. If this were the fight for women's essential rights, as the libs are claiming, we should have expected to see, what, at the very least, a few hundred thousand people out there. But we didn't see millions. We didn't see hundreds of thousands. We didn't see tens of thousands. Apparently, we didn't even see thousands. Which would still have been pretty pathetic, by the way, if it were only thousands in a city of over eight million. According to New York local news, it was hundreds of people who showed up to rally for killing babies. Democrats are looking to the overrule of Roe v. Wade as the last best hope that they have to motivate voters for the midterms in an otherwise catastrophic year.

If this weekend's nationwide flop is any indication, they're going to have to hope for something else. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show. My favorite comment on Friday is from Christoph Rodriguez, who says, I wonder if Joe will help Hunter get some baby formula for the grandchild he refuses to acknowledge. That is a really harsh, tough, accurate thing to say. This should be a national scandal and it is probably the single most surprising, shocking aspect of the Biden administration to me is that Joe's whole image is he's just nice old Joe. He's just good old Grandpa Joe, just nice old guy. The man has a grandchild, a granddaughter whom he will not acknowledge. Could you imagine being that little granddaughter?

You know that your grandpa is the president of the United States. He's old nice guy, Joe, and he refuses to acknowledge you in any way. That is an actual scandal. But of course, you won't hear about it in the news, because the left is, especially right now, the left, is waging a war on babies in terms of feeding the babies, in terms of letting the babies live. It's why you've got to check out 40 days for life. With the court's potential overruling of Roe v. Wade, you might think the abortion fight is coming to an end, not even close. Abortion legislation returning to the states means the only real battle is just beginning. And that is why it's so important to check out 40 Days for Life, okay? There is no group in America better positioned

than 40 Days for Life to help fight this battle. Forty Days for Life has one million volunteers throughout the country, including peaceful vigils outside abortion facilities. You may be surprised to hear their largest presence is actually in the country's blue states, with California being the biggest state. Their vigils have closed. Many abortion facilities in America, nearly half of those facilities were in liberal states where abortion will continue to remain legal after the fall of row. From San Francisco to Chicago to Seattle, not exactly pro-life areas, volunteers have guided abortion workers to have a change of heart and to quit their jobs. As this issue gets out of D.C., finally, 40 Days for Life is effectively changing hearts and minds in the grassroots of

the post-abortion movement. Check out their locations, podcast, their new book, What to Say When, the Complete Guide to Discussing Abortion at 40 Days for Life.com. Speaking of all these important issues in the country, do not miss your chance to engage with us live on these issues. We've got Dailywire backstage live. Tickets are on sale now. Dailywire.com slash Ryman to get your tickets today. Do not wait. These tickets are selling very fast. DailyWire, backstage live, Ryman Auditorium in Nashville on June 29th. We will see you there. are completely losing the messaging war.

Usually, at least for probably most of my life, Democrats have won the messaging war because they control all of the media and Hollywood and the news and all of it and publishing. And so generally they've won the messaging war. They are totally losing it now. Here is the best line that the Democrats have come up with in the last two years, at least, to attack the Republicans, to aim all. all of the public vitriol at the conservatives. In a sense, I never expect it.

Let me say this carefully. I never expected the ultra-maga Republicans who seem to control the Republican Party now to have been able to control the Republican Party. I never anticipated that happening. The ultra-maga Republicans. A lot of people thought this was just a line that Joe Biden came up with on the spot. And it's not a great line. And it actually makes us seem kind of cool. That image is cool, right? Ultra MAGA. What does MAGA means make America great again? I'm ultra. I'm super MAGA. I'm, yes, I'm here to defend truth, justice and the American way. It seems like kind of a cool thing. But whatever, you know, Joe Biden, he's definitely lost a few steps. He just used this line. It's probably going to backfire. But, He came up with it on the spot, right? No, actually. It turns out, according to the Washington Post, that line was workshopped. That line was researched. A progressive group spent six months

researching the killer new line to use against the Republicans. They took a lot of money to do this, and the best thing that they could come up with was ultra-maga. This is like, out of a Saturday Night Live sketch. If Saturday Night Live were funny and even slightly right wing, this would be an S&L sketch where you say, you got all the genius consultants in the room, they say, all right, Mr. President, we're in the war room. We've got to come up with the soaring rhetoric, this high oratory, this killer political messaging to go after your opponents. Okay, what have you got, boys? Well, we've spent zillions of your dollars and focus groups and ultra maga. Wow, good job. Geniuses.

I'm glad all those Ivy League degrees are paying off. This is good. Please, use it. We're Ultra MAGA. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Ultra MAGA show. See how that turns out in November, folks. I don't think it's going to turn out very well.

The Libs, who had been so precise with language, and they still remain precise with language, but they had been so effective at manipulating language for a century. I wrote a whole book on this. My number one national bestseller, Speechless Controlling Words Controlling Minds, thanks to all of you, rose up the charts. The book is about how the left very effectively has wielded language to take over the whole culture. I think they've lost their gift, or they're at

at least in a rut right now. The pro-choice caucus of the Democrats, I mean, there used to be a little more of a distinction between left and right, Republican Democrat, pro-choice, pro-life. That's kind of gone away now. Left, Democrat, pro-abortion, it's all the same thing. So the The pro-choice caucus has sent out important abortion messaging dues and don'ts, reportedly. So what they're saying is there is harmful language and we've got to change it to make it more palatable to the public. The harmful language is choice. Previously, you'll remember, the word for abortion was abortion or infanticide or killing. Then they said, no, no, we've got to call it choice.

That's going to make it softer and better. But now choice has been poisoned. So now they're saying, instead of choice, you have to say decision. It's a woman's decision. That's what they're saying, the helpful language is. The harmful language is that we need to reduce abortion and make it safe, legal, and rare. That was the line that the Clintons came up with. The helpful language is safe, legal, and accessible. Forget about rare. It's the opposite of rare, actually. We need to make it easily accessed. Unwanted pregnancy, that's harmful. It makes it seem like we don't want babies. Unexpected pregnancy is better, and then we don't want the unexpected pregnancy, and we kill the baby. Harmful language. Conscience clause or preemptive. protections to get out of some of the radical abortion legislation. The helpful language, they say, refusal of care slash denial of care laws, because killing a baby is care, according to the pro-abortion left. Then finally, harmful language is back-alley abortions and coat hangers. They think this is probably harmful in that it paints a very ugly picture, but also it just didn't happen. It's not real. It's

describing an allegedly widespread problem that did not exist. The helpful language, they say, is criminalizing health care. You're criminalizing health care by not letting people kill their kids. Why do they have to do this? The reason they have to do this was explained by the Harvard psychologist Stephen Pinker in the phrase euphemism treadmill. I also talk about this in my book, Speechless, which is coming out in paperback next month, by the way, so it should be fun. That will give us another chance to jump up to the top of the charts and have the New York Times ignore us on their bestseller list. The euphemism treadmill refers to a problem that the left has to, in particular, which is, the left will use a euphemism to deceive people about their harmful policies.

So instead of saying killing babies, they'll say choice or women's health care. But eventually, that term, the new term, takes on the same negative color, the same negative characteristics and sense of the old term, because the reality of the situation has not changed. changed. Thanks, yours too. What does RAV stand for anyway? To me, it's the remarkably advanced vehicle. Really? To me, it's the runway approved vehicle for its amazing style. What about remarkably adaptable vehicle because of its versatile cargo space? Or really admired vehicle? Oh, or really awesome vehicle. It really is the recreational activity vehicle. The stylish 2026 Toyota RAP 4 Limited. What's your Rav 4? And so you end up in a situation where you just need to come up with a new, new euphemism.

You'll notice this with certain disabilities. Let's say someone is disabled. This is, a lot of people are disabled. There's nothing shameful in being disabled. But it's not a preferable condition. No one wants to be disabled. And so you have a word like cripple. Cripple then takes on a negative connotation because it's a condition that is undesirable.

No one wants to have that condition. And so then it becomes handicapped, but then handicapped takes that on. And then it becomes handicable, and then handicapped takes that on. And then it becomes differently able. And they have to change the euthamism every six months, it seems, because the condition that it describes is one that people still don't want to have for themselves. So that would be a kind of neutral description of that. What about in politics when the libs are trying to deceive everybody? Well, that's what you see with abortion, especially. It's a woman's right to choose. It's women's health care. It's it's reproductive freedom. It's choice. It's decision. It's this. It's that. No, well, the thing

you're describing is not only undesirable. The thing you're describing is shameful. The thing you're describing is sinful. The thing you're describing is deeply immoral. You're talking about killing a baby. There's no way that you can put lipstick on that pig and convince us all that it's Marilyn Monroe. It's a horrible thing. And so good job, Dems. Change the language all you want. Six months from now, you're going to be in the same situation. The more effective strategy would be to change your mind and stop embracing things that are obviously wrong. Don't do it. You'll sleep a lot easier at night, okay? You'll definitely sleep a lot easier if you sleep on Bowlin Branch sheets. Right now, go to bolandbranch.com, use promo code Michael. Bowling Branch not only helps me sleep better,

but it also teaches me things. Did you know, did you know that thread count is just a totally made-up number. It's not that it's a made-up number, but it's a made-up meaningful statement. You always hear sheet companies and say, we've got a seven gazillion thread count. It doesn't matter how many threads you've got if the threads are not of the highest quality. Okay, so a lot of sheet companies, they'll say, oh, we've got all this thread count, but their sheets aren't any good because the threads are, the threads aren't very high quality. Bowling Branch uses only the best 100% organic cotton threads on earth for a superior softness and a better at night's sleep. I love these guys. I've been sleeping on Bowling Branch for years.

They're like a drug dealer. They gave me the first batch for free, and now I've been buying them ever since. Three U.S. presidents sleep on Bowling Branch. Three U.S. presidents and one of your favorite podcast hosts. Check it out right now. You get 15% off your first set of sheets. When you visit Bolandbranch.com, use promo code Michael. That's B-O-L-L-A-N-D-B-Range.com. Use promo code Michael, M-C-H-A-E-L. Why now? Why are the Democrats trying to change all of their language and use these highly focused grouped phrases to communicate with the public? There need to do that right now because they are harming vulnerable members of our society

in a very visible way. Why is this abortion issue right now the big issue? Well, in part it's because of the Supreme Court decision. Why is the Supreme Court decision so prominent? Well, because we've got conservative judges on the court. We've got pro-life laws in Mississippi and pro-life laws in Florida. Why do we have these pro-life laws? Why are people focusing on this issue more than they have apparently in 50 years? They are because the libs are not as good at hiding their horrible agenda. They are harming kids, not just little tiny babies in the womb. It's easier to hide that, relatively easier to hide that, even with sonograms.

But now they're harming kids in kindergarten, first grade, second grade. That's why you see the parents, movement of Virginia. That's why you see the parents movement in Florida. The Illinois Department of Child and Family Services is sponsoring a kiddie corner at the Pride Parade. Chris Rufo just broke this. The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services is sponsoring a Pride Fest Kiddy Corner featuring drag queen story time drag kids, drag kids dress up. So you're dressing up little boys in stripper clothing and putting them in little stiletto heels and having them dance around for the sexual pleasure of perverts and deviance, that's just, that's wonderful, that's open-minded, that's tolerant. And if you oppose that, if you oppose putting kids in sexualized clothing of the

opposite sex, why you're just a closed-minded bigot, according to the government of Illinois, and they have a drag show for children as well. We all know that this is completely, completely disordered and wrong. And then the fight usually breaks down something like this. Conservatives will object to kids being sexualized and exposed to all this absolutely degenerate filth. And then the liberals will come in and they'll say, you're being open-minded. Stop forcing your religious views on it. It's fine if you think that this is immoral in your private life. But don't you force your religious views about why we shouldn't dress up little boys like their hookers and have them dance around on a stage for perverts?

Stop forcing your religious views on us. And the conservatives, we're often left speechless by the sheer audacity and mendacity of the claims of the left. But the way to try to shake them into some understanding of reality is to point out that the left is forcing their religious views on us. The clearest religious view they're forcing here is the religious view that the soul has nothing to do with the body. And so it is ontologically possible to be a man trapped in a woman's body or a woman trapped in a man's body and that the body has nothing to do with our true identity and that we have an obligation to affirm our own deeply felt sentiments that we might be the opposite sex and to reject our body or to mutilate our body or to dress up like the opposite sex and that this is a good thing.

Those are moral claims. Those are claims about human nature. Those are religious claims. And the left is not merely relegating their religion to the private sphere like they insist that Christians do and Jews do and Muslims do. They're making their religious views the public religion of the United States. We have a public religion because all states, at all times have some kind of public religion. Our public religion in this country, from its very earliest days in the early 17th century, up until about five minutes ago, was Christianity. That was the public religion with a broad range of tolerance because there were disagreements among the various Protestant Christian sects, and there were always Catholics here from almost the nation's earliest days. There was some Catholic presence in the new world. Well, that's now gone out the window,

and the public religion is transgenderism, and the public religion is LGBT, and the public religion is diversity, equity, and inclusion. The public religion is multiculturalism. And that public religion makes different claims about human nature and the relation of man to state and the relation of who we are to our creator, who we are to one another. And so they're going to force that out there. And the challenge for conservatives is that we have just spent half a century at least embracing the left's idea of a separation between church and state and embracing the left's idea of a of a radical kind of religious freedom that says that you have the right to believe whatever you want without any restrictions from the government. And that's not really a conservative argument.

And that's not really traditional in American history. And that's not really philosophically coherent. And it doesn't really make sense. Of course, there have to be limits on these things. We don't really believe that if you are a member of the religious group, Well, I don't even need to make up a crazy hypothetical example. We don't really believe that if you're a member of a pagan religious group that practices human sacrifice, that you have a right to do that. We don't actually think that. It might be your deeply held religious view, but you don't have a right to do it.

The Satanists right now are saying that part of their religious practice is abortion, which is true. That actually is part of the Satanist's religious practice. Nevertheless, we the people still have the right to prohibit that, and they have no right to pursue it. conservatives need to get a lot more comfortable talking about public religion. We need to get a lot more comfortable saying, yeah, we are going to legislate morality because all legislation legislates morality. And the libs have been legislating morality for the last 50, 60, 70 years. And it's been a complete

disaster for everybody. And so you know what? I think we're going to go back to legislating morality. And everybody's going to be better off for it. We got to get our confidence back. Got to get some of, I don't know, some of those anatomical features that everyone's focused on these days. I think we need to grow some of them again, too, because the prevailing sexual ethic that is reigning in the country and being enforced by the state is insane. In Wisconsin right now, it's a Wisconsin school district that just filed a Title IX sexual harassment complaint against middle school students. And they are filing this complaint against the students because the students, used the correct pronoun to refer to one of their classmates. An investigation into three Kiel middle school students has been launched.

The school district has filed a Title IX complaint accusing the students of using incorrect pronouns while addressing another student. Fonk's-leven's Monique Lopez spoke with the parent of one of the students in this project education report. I received a phone call from the principal over at the L.L.L. elementary school, forewarning me, letting me know that I was going to be receiving an email with sexual harassment allegations against my son. Rosemary Rabidoo's 13-year-old son, Braden, is one of the three eighth-grade Kiel

Middle School students accused of sexual harassment, something she disputes. He said he's being allegedly charged with sexual harassment for not using proper pronouns. Some might say or think that you or your son are against the LGBT. BTQ plus community. Not at all. Not at all. Now, there's so much here. You could write a doctoral dissertation about this whole interview because you saw right there at the end. The interviewer says, so your 13-year-old son is being charged with sexual harassment for using the correct pronouns to refer to a sexually confused classmate. Some people would say you're against the LGBTQ community. And you see what that

woman says. This totally normal mother who says, are you kidding? You're accusing my 13 year old son of sexual harassment for calling a her, a her, or a him, a hymn. And they said, but are you against the LGBT? She said, no, no, we're for it LGBT. We love, we're totally pro-LGBT. Oh yeah, man, absolutely. That's our, we worship at the altar of LGBT because this woman knows that that's part of the public religion. And she knows that if you contradict the public religion, you will be called a heretic, and you will be ostracized and you will be punished. And she knows that. So even this woman who's defending her kid and saying,

what you're telling me, my 13-year-old son has to use the wrong pronouns to, apparently one of the students wants the pronoun to be they or them, which makes me wonder if the student has multiple personality disorder, that they think that they have multiple people inside of them, that they and them, which is now being used as a singular pronoun by very confused people. And the students said, now I'm not going to do that. And now the students being punished. Are you against the LGBT?

No, no, never. No, please. Now, of course, if one is a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, an agnostic person who just sort of holds on to a traditional sexual ethic, they might have objections to some aspects of the LGBT LMNOP ideology and sexual ethic. for all of the history of civilization, pretty much, people would have had legitimate objections to some of that sexual ethic. You are not permitted to have those objections now. And we're being told this is in the name of neutrality and open-mindedness and

liberality. But of course it's not. Really, what the state has said here is, no, you do not have the right to your religion. You do not have the right to your sexual ethic. you do not have the right to think what you think. Actually, it's the most close-minded sort of regime that one could possibly imagine. And now it's being taken to the height of absurdity. Then, of course, they're going after the 13-year-old boys, which is preposterous on the

school yard. People say all sorts of mean things. But the kids aren't even saying a mean thing here. They're being punished, not for telling a lie, not for being insulting, not for being cruel. They're being punished for telling the truth. And people around the country are looking at this, and they're saying, hey, whatever it is, whatever the left is selling, we are not buying. If this is what leftism leads to, we're out. See you later, folks. Speaking of sexual issues, the women's march, you know, was this weekend, or it was supposed to be this weekend, and a lot didn't really happen.

This was all about, or the whole point of it was supposed to be about, defending abortion. Okay. Well, we've got a really important Daily Wire original documentary out, by yours truly called choosing death, the legacy of Roe. If you want to learn something about this issue, I would not recommend going out and shouting with the screaming pro-abortion people at the Women's March. I would recommend becoming a Daily Wire member, watch Choosing Death, the legacy of Roe, to hear the facts and to hear the real stories that the abortion regime has suppressed for generations. Here's the trailer. Many times when we did this, as we started, Patients would begin crying and protesting.

But once we had begun dilating the cervix and passing instruments into the uterus was too late to stop. I was handing hush money to women who we had left pieces of their baby. We had put these women's lives in jeopardy. We had put their lives at risk and we were literally giving them a check for $800.

and for a poor woman, $800 a lot of money. I mean, there have been so many moments in the last decade plus of going undercover in abortion clinics myself and seeing just heartbreaking things. Women vomiting in the hallway of an abortion clinic, crying out in pain, the late-term abortionist, talking casually about how they would literally leave a born-alive baby to die. Or if you deliver the baby in the toilet,

then you pick it up and stuff it in a plastic bag and bring it to us. babies are being born alive and the backs of their necks are being slid they are being drowned their necks are being snapped it's it's happening more often than people want to think about these abortion facilities these abortion providers these doctors they don't care about these women and you're just you're realizing you're watching in front of your own eyes play out America's greatest horror story, which is how we butcher children in the name of choice. The fight for life has all come down to this moment. Go to Dailywire.com slash choosing. Help us to expose abortions full gruesome truth. We'll be right back with a lot more.

The libs are losing right now. They're at least losing ground with the people because we can see what they're doing. We can see what they're doing in the schools. That was first open to us during COVID-19, during the lockdowns where parents could see on a screen. what their kids were being taught. That's because of social media, which though social media tries to suppress some awful clips of the Libs. They don't often totally succeed at that. It is because we're seeing what their euphemistic abstract policies choice and affirmation. And we're seeing what that means in real life. There's a video brought to aspire great friends over at Libs of TikTok of a queer surgeon. That's his name on Twitter, at Queer So.

surgeon, this guy Blair Peters, bragging about performing, quote, gender-affirming mastectomies, top surgeries for three young adults and adolescents in a day sometimes. And why that, he means, lopping off the perfectly healthy breasts of teenage girls, of these young girls. He brags about it on video. I'm here to clarify and speak some truce about what's happening with gender affirming care and adolescents. Most of the bills that are going through right now aim to limit this care for people under the age of 18. And there's this false news. And there's this false narrative that a lot of teenagers are having gender affirming surgery. Most of the teenagers that are having surgery are getting chest surgery, and most of that is happening before 18 because these

individuals didn't have access to early enough medical treatment. So using surgery as sort of this false narrative to attack gender affirming care as a whole is not correct. The truth is that by limiting access to medical care with some of these bills, you're actually going to cause more people to need gender affirming surgical care. That's his explanation. He's saying, look, so the reason that I'm lopping off the perfectly healthy sexual organs of teenage girls left and right in medical experiments, the likes of which we've never seen before in the world, we're doing this because they're not letting us pump five-year-olds full of hormones and eight-year-olds full of cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers. So if they would

just let us do that, then I wouldn't have to lop off the perfectly healthy organs of the teenagers, okay? And that's why it's so important for us to pass these laws that will that will ensure our right to sexually mutilate little kids. That's what he's saying. In a just society, this guy would be in prison. His name is what is his name? Blair Peters. In a just society, this man would not be practicing medicine.

He would not be bragging about, he posted this video. It wasn't some undercover investigation. He himself posted this video to TikTok, which none of us would have seen, because TikTok is all young people and obviously skews to the left. and then lives of TikTok reposts it to Twitter and we get to see it. This guy should be in prison. There should be laws against the sort of thing that he is doing. And obviously there should be laws against the sort of thing that he is advocating, which is even more radical. And there's no throw your hands up in the air, guys. There's no, bury your head in the sand. There's no, you do you.

I'm not going to force my views on you. Either we're going to live in a country that sexually mutilates little kids or not. The law is going to say one thing or the other. Either we're allowed to do that or we're not allowed to do that. I think we should not be allowed to do that. I think it's wrong. I think it's wrong because of biology and because of philosophy and because of morality. And I think it's wrong in part because we just all know it's wrong. And even people who are not the most educated or sophisticated or read the latest journals, we just know it's wrong to do that, to lop the breasts off of teenage girls. It's just wrong, right? And we know it. And we're right to know that. And we don't need to second guess that, and we don't need to try to deny the intuitions that happen to be correct.

And we have the right in a self-government, if indeed we live in a self-government, to pass laws against that and to criminalize this. And if this creep, if this pervert, Blair Peters, decides to keep pushing this radical, destructive sexual ideology on innocent little kids, then that guy should go to jail. And there's nothing wrong with that, okay? Speaking of prison, we have to get to, I guess, probably the biggest story of the weekend. This awful shooting in Buffalo. There was a guy who went in shot up a supermarket in Buffalo. I believe 10 people are killed. As always, whenever there is a shooting with a potential political or especially racial motive, everybody goes in instantly and tries to find out why the guy is actually on the other team. That's what always happens, right? The left goes in.

try to make him on the right, and then the right goes in and tries to make him on the left. I guess actually the first thing that happens is the media will go in and decide whether or not to cover the story. And if the story corresponds with their predetermined political narrative, then they will cover it. So if the story is about a white racist killing black people, they will cover it, they will make that a huge national news story. The president of the United States, as in this case, will go and visit and make a big media spectacle out of it. If the story contradicts the narrative, if it is, say, a black racist killing white people or a black racist killing Asian people, they will bury it. They will not talk about it. That's what happened with the Wauke Shaw killing.

That's what happened with the New York City subway shooting. There were news stories for about 24 hours. And then when the narrative did not fit the media's preconceived political agenda, then they just buried that news story. The president didn't have time to go to Waukesha. The president didn't have time to go to New York City, but now he will. Okay, that is just what always is going to happen. I thought Candace Owens had the best take on this. She said, don't forget folks, the media don't care about white people, the media don't care about black people, the media only care about power. And so that's going to affect all of the coverage here. Then the next thing that happens is that everyone tries to go in and make the guy on the other side. And so the left is obviously doing that

to the right right now. And the right, to some degree, is doing it with the left too. I read the purported manifesto of this killer. I don't see any reason to read his thesis on why he committed this crime. I don't see any reason to say the guy's name. I don't see any reason to give him the airtime and fame that he is obviously seeking. But I will go in just to clarify things in terms of who he is and what some of his motivations were. Not what he was necessarily hoping to achieve or his grand political thesis, but just what might have motivated him. Because he's, you know, you're going to hear a lot of misinformation, certainly from the left, but maybe some from the right, too. So he says, are you a Christian? No, I do not ask God for salvation by faith, nor do I confess my sins to him.

I personally believe there is no afterlife. So if anyone tells you this is about Christianity or Christian nationalism or Christian, whatever, that's not true. He says it's not true and he seems sincere. Are you a fascist? Yes, he says he's a fascist. Are you white supremacist? Yes. Are you an anti-Semite? Yes. I wish all Jews to hell, he says. This is more evidence that he's not Christian, because if you're a Christian, what you want is for Jews to accept Jesus and go to heaven and be in heaven forever with everybody. Not just Jews, but everybody on earth, you are praying for everyone's salvation. This guy's obviously not doing that. He's wishing someone to go to hell.

Are you a neo-Nazi? He says, I support neo-Nazism. Are you a conservative? No. So they're going to say, this guy's a conservative. He explicitly says, I'm not a conservative. Are you right-wing? he says, depending on the definition, sure. Are you left wing, depending on the definition, sure?

And this is a point that I always try to make. You always hear the left invoking Nazis and Hitler. And they call everyone to the right of Hillary Clinton, a Nazi, and Hitler. And then sometimes you'll hear people on the right, come back and say, actually, Hitler was a leftist. Actually, Nazism is a left-wing ideology. It's not a right-wing ideology. And the answer is, not everything breaks down on the left or right. the answer is left and right, which is a political framework that comes out of the French Revolution and describes the people who defended the church and the monarchy on the right and the people who defended the radicals and the atheists on the left and the revolutionaries on the left. That doesn't apply to every single political situation. Hitler and the Nazis had some aspects of their political movement that were right-wing,

that had some aspects of the political movement that were traditionalists, and there were traditionalists themselves, and had some aspects of their political movement that were left-wing, the rampant atheism, the anti-Christianity, the modernism, the modern scientism, those things were the statism, those things were aspects of the left. And so you really can't, I know that's the least satisfying answer of all, but you actually can't categorize Nazis or lots of political movements on just the left or on just the right.

He says, are you a socialist, depending on the definition? So he says, in a way, I actually am a socialist. You're not going to hear that from the media. What does that mean? It means you can't neatly characterize this guy. Did you always hold these views? He says, when I was 12, I was deep into communist ideology from age 15 to 18. I consistently moved further to the right. On the political compass, I fall in the mild, moderate, authoritarian left category. So that's the category where you would lump Stalin or somebody in. Again, this is going to contradict the media narrative. So you're not going to hear about it. And probably the media are going to attack me for even reading this, but I think it's important to read this if you want to understand what the

motivations are, not because this guy is some grand political thinker who should in any way be emulated, but rather because we know that the media are going to lie about this, and so we want to be able to form our own conclusions. If we had a trustworthy media, we wouldn't have to do that. And then this might be the most interesting aspect here tactically. This looney tune says, won't your attack result in calls for the removal of gun rights in the United States? He says, yes, that is the plan all along. You said you would fight to protect your rights and constitution. Soon the time will come.

So he's saying, yes, actually the reason that I'm using these guns and in the manifesto, he posts all sorts of information about the guns, is to get gun control. Because he says that if there's gun control, this will really irritate the people who defend the Second Amendment. And this could increase the chances of some kind of war between the left and the right or the raises or whatever. That's really all I have to say about this. There's nothing left to say that isn't said, obviously, you know, it's very wrong to kill people. It's very wrong to embrace these insane ideologies. But the rule of thumb, the rule of thumb that is really worth looking at here,

whether you find yourself being radicalized to the far left or radicalized to the far right or radicalized to the far, whatever, if you can't place it, there is no end that justifies an immoral means. We actually were talking about this last week, or the week before that. In parts of this guy's ravings, he asked, will you regret this? And he says, I probably will. Yeah, I don't, you know, I don't bear any ill will toward these people individually. I don't think they've done anything wrong individually, but my ideology that I've formed is such that I'm just going to suppress that moral intuition and kill these people. Don't do that. People do this all the time. Usually it doesn't have these sort of tragic, extreme consequences, but people do this sort of thing all the time.

They believe that their ends, their political ends justify immoral means. They don't. They don't. They don't. There is no end that justifies an immoral. Almost all the time, when you commit an immoral action because you think, that there is some good end that that will result in. It doesn't actually result in a good end. But even if it could, the immoral means would not be justified. You judge the action on the action itself. In a completely separate sort of version of this, a month or so ago, I was with Ted Cruz at Yale, and some kid thought he was going to be funny, and he got up and he said, to end world hunger, would you philate another man? And he thought this was a really funny

question because if we answered no, then we look heartless because we don't want to end world hunger. And if we answered yes, then we just said we would fillate another man on stage and the kid would have thought that was funny. But I actually didn't think this was a complicated question. The question was, would you commit an immoral action for an ostensibly good end? And the answer is no, no, don't. That's really simple stuff, folks. And we're living in the age, post-Mache of L.A., we're living in the age where we judge everything by these. abstract calculations and utilitarianism and maximizing the greatest good for the greatest number involves cracking a few eggs to make an omelet. Uh-uh. That's morally idiotic. That's morally bankrupt.

Just do the right thing. Okay? Simple, simple, simple enough. Now, the moral confusion that we've got is spread throughout the political culture. It's spread throughout, especially throughout academia, which is ironic because you would think the academics would have some sense of the reality of the situation because they're supposed to spend their lives studying it. But that's not what really happens. Do you remember some months ago, there was a chick who was a professor at Old Dominion University, Alan Walker, a chick who now thinks she is a man or some kind of other sexual category? And this woman wrote a book called A Long Dark Shadow, Minor Retirement, attracted people and their pursuit of dignity. The thing that got this gal in trouble is that she

seemed to want to destigmatize pedophiles. I use the term minor attracted person or map in the title and throughout the book for multiple reasons. First of all, because I think it's important to use terminology for groups that members of that group want others to use for them. And map advocacy groups like before you act have advocated for use of the term map. They've advocated for it primarily because it's less stigmatizing than other terms like pedophile. A lot of people, when they hear the term pedophile, they automatically assume that it means a sex offender. And that isn't true, and it leads to a lot of misconceptions about attractions toward minors. I've definitely heard the idea that you brought up, though, that the use of the term minor attracted person

suggests that it's okay to be attracted to children. But using a term that communicates who someone is attracted to doesn't indicate anything about the morality of that attraction. Okay, so it doesn't, and look, we need to call them maps because we need to destigmatize this, okay? And we, so Old Dominion University had the good sense to fire this chick, because she's defending pedos, and she's trying to normalize pedophilia, as the right has warned would happen for many years, and we were called cooks and conspiracy theorists, and now that's what's going on. So just over the past few days, we get an announcement from Johns Hopkins University, which is ostensibly a more prestigious university saying we're excited to share that Alan Walker,

PhD, will be joining the Moore Center as a postdoctoral fellow on May 25th. So the reason I mentioned Johns Hopkins is a more prestigious name brand university is this chick wasn't punished for trying to normalize petos. She got a promotion. Now, of course, I have a great deal more respect for Old Dominion University than I do for Johns Hopkins. Old Dominion seems to know that it's not right to normalize pedophilia. Johns Hopkins doesn't understand that, but it shows you how deep the rot runs that in this sort of society, things that would have gotten you run out of town on a rail, not 10 years ago,

will now not see you punished. Now you will get a promotion because all the incentives are in favor of that kind of disorder. Another thing happened over the past few days that the media are covering. You probably haven't even heard of it. Did you know that we're at war? Did you know that the United States of America is at war? I didn't know that. I don't remember the president declaring war. I don't remember the Congress declaring war. I don't remember there being a vote on this. I don't remember there being a big national discussion about this. Nevertheless, apparently we are at war according to the Democratic majority leader, in the United States House of Representatives

who says this is a time of war and we are at war with Russia. I wish we'd get off this and really focus on the enemy. I know there's a lot of politics here, but we're at war. We need to produce energy. As I told you, Code Point is now sending 80% reversing Asia supply to European supply

because they need it because we're at war. But very frankly, we're at war. A dictator has invaded, without justification, a friendly country, the Ukraine. And they have fought back with extraordinary valor. We're at war. Now, Steny Hoyer has been in Congress for about 7 billion years at this point. What's funny is he undercuts his own argument, even as he's describing. He's saying, a dictator, Vladimir Putin, invaded a friendly country, friendly to whom?

Obviously not friendly to Russia. Friendly, he means, I think, to the United States. the West invaded a friendly country without justification. I agree with that. I don't think the invasion was justified at all. And Putin did that. He invaded the Ukraine. And because Steny Hoyer is so old and he's been around so long, he doesn't realize that the Ukraine is not the name of the country. The Ukraine is a name of a region of the Soviet Union, a part of Russia, actually. The Russians refer to Ukraine as the Ukraine. The Ukrainians refer to Ukraine as Ukraine because Ukraine, Ukraine is its own sovereign country. So this guy is so old, he's so confused, he's been around Washington

for so long that he actually undercuts his own argument for being at war even while he's making it. And then he has the audacity to come out and say, no, the country is at war. And you didn't get to vote on it. You representatives, and you, the American people, didn't really get to express your views on it. But too bad, we're at war because I say that we're at war. Do you want to go to war with a nuclear former superpower? over a territorial dispute that's been going on for a thousand years. Do you want to do that? I'm not saying, if you even raise this question, you will be called pro-putin, you will be called a coward, a Neville Chamberlain, you'll be called all sorts of names. Do you, for the entire history of the Cold War, we managed to avoid direct war with Russia. We fought little proxy wars,

but we managed to avoid saying that we were in a direct war with Russia, because of the threat of nuclear war. And now this old coup has decided in the twilight of his political career that he is going to undo all of that and declare a hot, direct war with a nuclear former superpower that has lots and lots of missiles aimed at us right now over a territorial dispute in Ukraine. Do you think that's a good idea? In order to think that's a bad idea, you don't need to think that Putin's invasion is justified. You don't need to think that the Ukraine should just roll over and let it happen. You don't need to think that Ukraine is a bad country or that Ukraine is a good country or that any of that. You don't need to think any,

you just, I think the American people still get some saying whether or not we go to war, right? Russia is not attacking the United States. This is not an existential threat to the United So why is this happening? Because it actually ties into all the same things that we've been talking about from the top of the show that we've been talking about for weeks now. Because the ruling class and the Democratic Party is the majority party in the ruling class and the Republicans are kind of the junior partner. Some establishment Republicans obviously play a role in that, but they're the junior partner. The Democrat Party believes that they do not have accountability to the voters anymore. They don't need to answer to the voters on anything, on life, on the economy, on energy, on immigration, on even mass. matters of war. The Democrat views right now are completely opposite to the majority of the American people, and you're seeing them really underwater in all the polls. The Democrats don't seem to care. Two explanations for that. Either they're just extremely stupid. Could be. Could be. I'm not putting it past them. Or they don't think it really matters. They don't think that they're really going to be held accountable. On this point, I just watched Dinesh DeSuzza's new movie, 2000 Mules,

about the rigging that took place in the 2020 presidential election. It's a terrific movie. You should go check it out. It doesn't make the whole argument with totally definitive everything that the election was totally definitively stolen, but it makes a pretty good argument, makes a pretty convincing one. I would recommend checking that out. And I think it's a better explanation because I don't think that the Democrats are just complete idiots. I don't. Call me charitable. Say I've gone soft in my old age. I don't think it's that. I think they feel comfortable that they are going to be able to broadly maintain their political power. And so they don't need to be answerable to the voters on really any of these questions. They're going to go out there and

they're going to trans your kids and they're going to flood your country with foreign nationals and they're going to destroy the value of your wealth and they're going to raise the price of gas and they're going to kill your energy industry and they're going to send you to war and you're not going to get to say jack diddley squat about it. And now what they're saying, there was a report out that Vladimir Putin's sick. There have been lots of reports. on this. Vladimir Putin is sick. He's got cancer. He's saying an oligarch close to the Kremlin was recorded on tape saying the president is very ill with blood cancer. Some people have said he has Parkinson's disease. People have been saying this for years. The evidence for it is pretty weak.

I'll say, well, his face is puffy. So that's how you know he's dying. And I don't know. I don't really believe any of the so-called news coming out of this war in Ukraine because there's propaganda on both sides. But let's say that it is real. I'm not saying it is. He might be sick. He might be terminally ill. If so, do you think it's a really good idea to heighten, to escalate a war with that guy? Do you think that's really smart, a dying, desperate man? And if it's not real, the reason I sort of dismiss the claims that Putin is sick, or I just don't focus on them when I'm trying to think about this war,

is because it just, it's so prideful to say that everyone, every other actor in the world, all of our adversaries, they're just crazy. and they're just crazy and there's no, I'm not sure that they're just crazy. I think a lot of them are pretty sophisticated and I think that if we believe that they're crazy, we're going to put ourselves at a disadvantage because I think there are plenty of rational reasons for Russia to invade Ukraine. They've done it many times throughout history and Putin's been talking about doing this for a very long time as well. And I think that if we understand the rational reasons and not just write all of our adversaries off as total nuts, it's going to give us a much smarter foreign policy. It's going to

allow us to better rebuff our adversaries around the world. And that's also going to allow the American people to engage in a debate over how we want to act. But of course, the ruling class doesn't want to do that. They don't want to hear from anybody else. They don't want to be told now. They don't want to hear from any of us. And so that's the question. As we head into the midterm elections, will we still be permitted to make our voices hurt? Will we still be able to do that in the political process? Or not? I hope we are. I hope there's still. I hope there's still. I I still have some hope. Hope's a theological virtue. It's a requirement. It's going to take a lot of work. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Knowles Show. See you tomorrow.

If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe. We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro Show, the Andrew Claven Show, and the Matt Walls Show. The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies. executive producer Jeremy Boring, supervising producer Mathis Glover, production manager Pavel Vidovsky, editor and associate producer, Justin Turley, audio mixer Mike Coramina, and hair and makeup by Cherokee Hart.

Michael Null's show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2022. Today on the Matwell Show, we hijacked the women's march this weekend to let all the attendees know about my new film, What is a Woman? Today I'll play the full trailer for you and we'll talk about why the film is needed and what we hope hope to accomplish with it. Also, speaking of why the film was needed, three middle school boys have been charged with sexual harassment for misgendering, quote-unquote, a classmate, and the media vulture is immediately set to work politicizing a mass shooting in Buffalo. Plus, the mayor of Chicago poses for embarrassing photos in Texas while violence rips her city apart. And in our daily cancellation, an immigrant posts a sign in his Uber instructing passengers not to ask him where

he's from because that question makes him uncomfortable and sick. We'll talk about all that and more today in The Matt Wall Show.