The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1138 - Twitter Was Weaponized To Rig The Election

Episode Date: December 5, 2022

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl Elon reveals how libs at Twitter rigged the 2020 election, Trump calls for the “termination” of constitutional rules, and a Wuhan whistleblower scientist affirms the COVID lab leak theory. - - -  DailyWire+: Become a DailyWire+ member for 30% off by using code HOLIDAY at checkout: https://bit.ly/3SsC5se Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY   - - -  Today’s Sponsors: Exodus90 - Is it time for your Exodus? Find resources to prepare at https://exodus90.com/knowles Good Ranchers - Use code "KNOWLES" at checkout and get $35 off your order: https://www.goodranchers.com/knowles  - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6  Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA  Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg  Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Two years and $44 billion later, thanks to Elon Musk, we now have proof that Libs at Twitter knowingly played a major role in rigging the 2020 presidential election for Joe Biden. Journalist Matt Tybee broke the news, which revealed corruption so egregious that President Trump is demanding immediate reinstatement as president, even if it means the, quote, termination of constitutional rules. And the cherry on top of the whole story is the reaction of the journalists who are furious, not at the corruption of our political system, but at Matt Tybee for exposing the corruption. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Knowles show.

Welcome back to the show. My favorite comment on Friday is from Joshua Anderson, who says, Alex Jones saying, I'm in the twilight zone right now, was peak comedy. It truly was. to have Alex Jones sitting there thinking, guys, don't you think you're going a little bit far on this? Hold on, I just was a shocking thing. I've never seen this happen before. And it was jolting, jarring, and in some ways delightful. Now, when you want to delight yourself at home with the family out by the grill,

you've got to check out good ranchers. Right now, head on over to good ranchers.com. Use code knolls. A hard year on the economy means that essential practice. practical gifts are going to be in high demand this year. Give the most essential gift of all America's best meat and seafood from good ranchers. With discounts on orders of five boxes or more, you can save on gifts for the whole family. When you give a box of good ranchers, you were giving them a true steakhouse experience with 100% American USDA prime and upper choice cuts of beef,

chicken, seafood, other meat delivery companies, and even your local grocery stores, import lower quality meat from overseas. Do not give your friends and family less than America's best this year. Not sure what to order. Good Ranchers now offers gift cards so you can let your friends and family members choose for it themselves. Or give the gift of a subscription and you can inflation proof someone's meat budget. Go to Good Ranchers.com use code Knowles, K&WLES, at checkout to get $35 off your gift. That is, good ranchers.com code Noles for $35 off. Good Ranchers, American Meat, delivered. Twitter gate. I'm sure you have seen the headlines. I'm sure you have seen a ton of spin. Most people have not taken the time to actually read through the reporting of the story because

it's very, very long and somewhat intricate. I won't bore you with all of the details. I will give you the highlights though, because this is at least as corrupt as we all thought it was. And in some ways, it seems much more so. Twitter was conspiring with the libs to rig the platform, which is in many ways the new public square for the libs and against the Republicans, which is a big deal because we, at least notionally, have a self-governing republic. So whoever controls the public square controls the political order. Because the way the political order works is that we all persuade one another of how we want to live in the public square. So Twitter is not just some tech platform. It's not just some app that we doomscroll on. Twitter represents, well, it represents the American political order. It represents

the way that we speak to one another and persuade one another. And Twitter colluded with the libs to rig it and exclude the conservatives. Met Tybee is a liberal journalist. He's a guy who's got bylines and all sorts of lib outlets, but he's become disillusioned with some of the liberal journalists in recent years. And so he's the guy that Elon seems to have picked to give this story to. And he says, hey, here are the docs. Run with it, Matt Tybee, do your thing. So we see from the very beginning that the Biden team by 2020 was regularly requesting that Twitter take down tweets that they didn't like. So they would just send emails in and say, hey, there's more to review from the Biden team. We don't like this tweet. We don't like that tweet. We don't like this tweet. We don't

like that tweet. And just random accounts, sometimes politically minded accounts, sometimes the accounts of regular actors, Hollywood celebrities. James Woods in particular was targeted. So the actor James Woods, you know, one of the greatest tweeters of all time, he had his account targeted by the DNC. They said an additional report from the DNC. Take down this stupid James Woods tweet. James Woods is now threatening to sue over this. But you see, why would they go after James Woods? or other people like that, because they had huge accounts, and those accounts were going after the Biden team, so they say, take it down. Okay.

Now, how were the takedowns being done? The Republicans would sometimes request to take things down as well. The problem is there was no neutral system, there was no formal system at all for this to take place. It was just kind of based on who you know. So if you knew somebody at Twitter, you could email them and say, hey, Uncle Joe doesn't really like that tweet.

let's get rid of it, okay? Hey, I don't like what James Wood said, take that down. And they would do it. Meanwhile, the Republicans say, hey, guys, come on. We're getting death threats over here. People take down this tweet. But it would be like howling into the wind because nobody at Twitter likes the Republicans. And you can see this based on the political donations of the people at Twitter.

If you look at open secrets, the donations are just all to Democrats. In the 2022 cycle, the donations from Twitter to Democrats, came to $166,000. The donations from Twitter to Republicans, $451. $451,000. That means that the percentage to Dems was 99.73%. 2020 cycle, 98.47% of donations to Democrats. The 2018 cycle, 96.38% of donations to Democrats.

So not only were the Twitter employees statistically all giving to Democrats, but all of the donations were going to, to Democrats, but it was actually getting worse over time. It was skewing even more toward the Democrats over time. So no surprise that the Republicans couldn't get the post that they wanted taken down. Democrats almost always did. Then you get to the Hunter Biden laptop story. So this was the story broken by the New York Post that they found this laptop from Hunter Biden that had a ton of evidence of crimes, not just drug crimes, not just sex crimes being committed by Hunter Biden, but potential political and financial crimes being committed by Hunter Biden on behalf of the

Biden family, trading on Joe Biden's name while Joe Biden was the point man to Ukraine, for instance, scoring crooked deals in Ukraine, trading on the Biden name while Biden was serving at the highest levels of the government to get money out of China, getting meetings arranged between these extremely corrupt actors all around the world and Joe Biden, Hunter's the nexus of that. What happens? Twitter says you can't share this story. Not only does Twitter say you can't post the story publicly and then Facebook and Google followed suit, but they say you couldn't even privately message the story. So this step, which says you can't even privately message something, was previously a mechanism reserved only for child pornography. And it's true, actually, that on Hunter

Biden's laptop there was, it would appear to be some evidence of pornography where the girls didn't totally look 18. But that's not the point here. We're not talking about the actual contents of Hunter Biden's laptop. We're talking about a story in the New York Post. So obviously there's no child pornography in the story, they just went as far as they possibly could. They said, this material is unsafe. So now we're going to have a new category. It's a category of content that is so dangerous that involves child pornography or something that threatens the Biden campaign. That's it. That is now the most extreme category on Twitter. The executives almost immediately start raising questions about this. The public policy executive, Carolyn Ström, sends an email out

to several people on the team saying, hey, guys, are you sure about this? Are we sure that this is really something that should be banned from the public platform and such that you can't privately message it? And what Tybee found out is there was a big tension between the communications and policy teams, which had basically no control over moderation, and the safety and trust teams, And those were the ones who were censoring everybody and ultimately who would even censor the duly elected sitting president of the United States. The next claim that was made by these guys is that it was a hacked material. So because, okay, forget about, yeah, it's obviously not child pornography, but it's very possibly hacked materials.

And so we can't allow that to be spread all around the internet. Again, this doesn't hold up at all. you're seeing messages from these top execs saying, are you sure, is this really going to hold up? It doesn't really make a lot of sense to us. Then the crazy part is Jack Dorsey, who was the CEO of Twitter, apparently had no idea what was going on. He was not the guy who made the call to censor the Hunter Biden story. He was, I think, away from the office at this point. So that call was made by the former head of legal policy and trust, Vijaya Gaddi, who Elon Musk

nuked from orbit on his first day in office. Everybody knew that this was messed up. This is, I think, the biggest revelation from the Twitter internal emails is we've just been gaslit this whole time. And Twitter and Big Tech, they say, no, of course, this is totally fine. This isn't keeping with our policy. There's nothing wrong here. Deny until you die. Deny until you die. You look at those internal emails. There is a ton of controversy here, and people are saying, gosh, this is really bad. We have screwed up. It's not going to hold up. But we can't back away now. we've got to stand firm. You see the former trust and safety chief of Twitter, Yoel Roth,

who is getting into these exchanges with Vijayagati and all these people. And then you got a communications official, Trenton Kennedy, at Twitter, who says, I'm struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this is unsafe. And then the other team basically says, well, just shut up and deal with it. Everybody knew it. There was even a Democrat. There was only one Democrat, but there was a Democrat member of Congress who knew that this was a big deal. that was Roe Kana, who writes to Vijayagati, this lady who's taking all the steps to ban people

and ultimately would ban Donald Trump, and says, hope you're well, Vigaya. This seems a violation of the First Amendment principles. If there is a hack of classified information or other information that could expose a serious war crime and the New York Times was to publish it, I think the New York Times should have that right. A journalist should not be held accountable for the illegal actions of the source unless they actively aided the hack. So you've got this lone Democrat out there. They're saying, guys, what about the First Amendment? Even if this were hacked material, which it's not, by the way, still, you can't just ban it from being circulated. By the way, you allow the publication of all sorts of Republican hacked material, material that was hacked, that does not bode well for Republicans on your platform.

It just, this doesn't hold up. And yet, even the Democrat admitting it, so then what happens? Then what happens? What happens is the journalists take stock of their failures. The journalists, this took two years. This shouldn't have taken two years. The journalists, they come together, right, and they say, gosh, we did not investigate this huge abuse of power. We, gosh, we did not speak truth to power as we are supposed to do. And they looked inside themselves and they were very introspective. And just kidding, they didn't say that at all. They actually just kept shilling on behalf of the Democrats. And they went after Matt Tybee. You've got all these liberal journalists turning on their liberal journalist friends. for doing the job of a journalist, or at least the ideal job of a journalist. In reality, journalists are pretty much just propagandists for a particular point of view. They're not neutral. They are not merely speaking truth to power. That has never been the case ever in the whole history of journalism.

But with the exception of maybe some independent people who have their own acts to grind usually as well. But you see the complete mask fall down by the liberal journals in reaction to Matt Tybee, who say, hey, wait a second. You're not supposed to expose the real power structures. Now, when you want to make yourself more powerful, when you want to stop being such a slob and a blob and a doom scrolling loser, you've got to check out Exodus 90. Right now, head on over to Exodus 90.com slash Knowles. Men, is it time to stop the mindless doom scrolling? Time to finally gain that higher quality of life you know that you're missing out on? If this sounds familiar, then on January 9th, join thousands of men all over the world to embark on a 90-day journey together in search of a better life. It's called Exodus 90.

It was built to help men enjoy the freedom of becoming who they were truly made to be. Exodus 90 guides you in removing the attachments that are holding you back from a better life, and it actually works. Independent research shows that Exodus 90 men report considerable shifts after the 90 days, including stronger satisfaction rates in their marriages, more meaningful prayer lives and dramatic decreases in time spent on their phones. For the past seven years, Exodus has helped more than 60,000 men build a roadmap for living with virtue in a culture that offers far too many paths to self-destruction. So, is it time for your Exodus? We start January 9th. Find resources to prepare for Exodus at Exodus 90.com slash Knowles. That is Exodus 90.com slash Knowles.

Wajahat Ali. He is a liberal journalist, very prominent on Twitter. He's been at all sorts of outlets. He says, Matt Tybee, what a sad, disgraceful downfall. I swear, kids. He did good work back in the day. Should be a cautionary tale for everyone. Selling your soul for the richest white nationalist on earth. Well, he'll eat well for the rest of his life, I guess. But is it worth it? And I read that. And I actually didn't get it at first. I said, the richest white national. Who is the richest white nationalist. I realize he's referring to Elon Musk. Is Elon Musk a white nationalist? I guess he's white, although he isn't African-Americans and that complicates things. But I guess he's white. Is Elon Musk even a nationalist? I don't know that he's a nationalist.

I see no evidence that he's a nationalist. And it made me realize the term white nationalism, that's just the new meaningless phrase that the lives throw around. It's just, the new racism. The libs used to call everyone that they didn't like racist. And if the word racist ever had any meaning, it certainly doesn't anymore. No one cares at all. When a liberal calls you a racist, you know you've won the argument. It's just, it has no effect in the public square. It used to be the worst thing you could possibly be called. Now I think it's really losing steam because it's so silly. So they have to up the ante. And so the new one is white nationalist. He's a what, but I don't see, even if I'm being as charitable as I possibly can to the left-wing

point of view, I don't see how you could possibly describe. I don't, I can't even make fun of it. I don't even know what this guy would be talking about to call Elon Musk a white nationalist. So that's just completely meaningless. And then, then what's the second church? What's this rich person? You're just selling out Matt Tybee for the rich person. This was a comment that was also underlined NBC's Ben Collins, who says, imagine throwing it all the way to do PR work for the richest person in the world, humiliating SHIT. Who do these people work for? Who does Ben Collins work for?

Ben Collins, does he work for the little sisters of the poor? That's who he does. No, he gets his check from NBC Universal, a very, very rich, powerful company. And he gets his check from all these guys, Wajahad Ali, all the rest of them. They get their checks. they get their funding. At the very least, they serve the interests of people who collectively are much, much richer than Elon Musk. Elon Musk is very rich. He's one guy. The people who run NBC, just like, just like GE, right, or just think of any of these corporations that own the media

companies. And think about the water that these, even the so-called independent journalists carry for the wealthiest people on Earth, for people like George Soros, the largest don't. owner to Democrat causes in the country. It's just preposterous. Doing PR work for the richest person in the world. All journalism has a little touch of PR to it, because all journalism has spin, because all journalism has a perspective, because the only people who go into journalism are people who have perspectives about things. And frankly, everybody has a kind of perspective about things, because we're rational creatures and we have moral judgment. So obviously, that's the And when we talk about journalism, journalism is very expensive. It's funded by people. It's funded by people for a reason to advance a certain view of the world. Daily Wire, we put, I mean, we're self-funded in the sense that we've run our business from basic, almost from day one, you know, from about a year and a half in, on cash. And we've done it because of you. Well, why do we, why do we do it because of you? Because we all share a sort of view of the world. And we share some basic principles like a country should,

have borders, kids should not have their genitals chopped off, babies shouldn't be killed in the womb, many other points of you that we all share together, and then you are willing to spend your money to help us get the message out there. And when we're talking about the corporate media, you've got corporations spending a ton of money on media because they know that it's important to have a bullhorn in public. So they're all to some degree PR people. They're all to some degree propagandists. The question is, on behalf of whom and on behalf of what? And when I see these guys, NBC and Wajahat Ali and all the rest of them, just whining and pulling their hair out over the publication of this story, it should ask you, it should expose, I think, quite clearly, who's

really serving the powerful entrenched interests. You have the entire corporate media and the entire liberal establishment on one side trying to suppress this story. And then you've got one journalist and one rich guy on the other side exposing it. A rich guy who is so incensed by this kind of behavior that he spent $44 billion to expose it. So money well spent, especially since it's not my money. Trump was shocked and appalled at this expose, as he well should have been. And so he's gone so far as to say that this sort of behavior allows for the suspension of the Constitution. Very Trumpian kind of dialogue. He says, so with the revelation of massive and widespread fraud and deception in working closely with big tech companies, the DNC,

in the Democrat Party, do you throw the presidential election results of 2020 out and declare the rightful winner, or do you have a new election? A massive fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great founders did not want and would not condone false and fraudulent elections. I love the way that Trump negotiates because he says, look, now that we know what we know, what do you do? Do you either immediately reinstate me as president or do you immediately hold a new election? As though, there's no third option. There's no third option of does Biden get to continue to be president? And we just all move on. No, no, no, that's not either. He's always talking you

past the sale. It's like a guy who says, hey, hey, I can borrow 20 bucks. He's already just begun with the premise that he was trying to argue. So he says, what are we going to do? We've got two options. We can either reinstate me as president immediately or hold a snap election immediately. And Then here's the line that's got him in trouble. He says, a massive fraud of this type in magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles even those found in the Constitution. What is he saying here? Well, it depends on what the meaning of the word allows, allows, which is, if he means allows, as in prescribes the suspension of the Constitution, that's a radical statement in all of the libs and the never-trumpers are going to pull their

hair out over it. But if the word allows, describes what has happened here, then I don't see how you could really disagree with it. Meaning, they've rigged the election, the libs, have rigged the election, they've rigged the public square, they've rigged the mechanism of government in a self-governing republic. Therefore, we are justified in going further and suspending the constitution. That's a radical claim. But isn't it merely descriptive? The libs have rigged the whole system successfully. The libs were able to dominate the public square and kick out dissenting voices and cover up anything that according to polls would have thrown the election to Donald Trump. Again, I don't really believe polls and I think most statistics are made up, but that's what you see.

12% of Biden voters, according to a poll right after the election, say they would have voted for Trump had they known about the Hunter Biden laptop story. So if the libs have already rigged all that and gamed the whole system, then haven't the rules of the Constitution already been suspended? And when we're talking about the state constitution in Pennsylvania, they were suspended before the 2020 presidential election. That's how Pennsylvania got widespread mail-in ballots. Furthermore, when Trump goes on and he says, this is not what the founders wanted and they would not have condoned this, that's obviously true. Now, of course, the meaning of Constitution has changed dramatically over time.

This is one issue with conservatives, and I think it's just kind of part of our character. We are always fighting yesterday's war. I talk about this on the show a lot. Our government is not run with the bill up on Capitol Hill, do-boo-do-da-do-do-do-do-do. The thing you learned in civics class, for those of you who are old enough to have had civics class,

that's not the way our government is actually run. And so you have conservatives, especially you saw this in the the Tea Party movement, say, well, according to the Constitution, that we shouldn't have the administrative state. According to the Constitution, I don't see any mention of the Federal Reserve system. According to the Constitution, I don't see it. And they describe the difference between America in the late 18th century in America in the early 21st century. And they say, these things are totally different. Yeah, that's true. But the Constitution has changed over time. I mean, just with the 14th Amendment and the way the 14th Amendment was interpreted in the 20th century, you see something like

the incorporation doctrine. The idea that the Bill of Rights would be incorporating. to the states. Previously, the Bill of Rights was only understood to apply to the federal government. The federal government can't establish a church. The federal government can violate free speech. But the states were totally allowed to do that. In fact, at the time of the ratification, one of the reasons the federal government couldn't establish a church is because multiple states already had established churches. So when you incorporate the Bill of Rights into the states, that's a major change to our constitution. When you see the expansion, well, the 17th Amendment, which says that you're going to directly elect senators, that basically takes states' rights

off the table. So that's a major change to our Constitution. When you see the Civil Rights Act and the Great Society and the programs, well, first, the New Deal programs in the 1930s, then Civil Rights Act and the Great Society in the 1960s, both of those are major, major changes to our Constitution, especially the latter, which creates, in many ways, a new legal regime, a new constitutional framework in our country. This was the argument of Chris Caldwell's book, the Age of Entitlement. So obviously, that's all true. And so the question for conservatives is, are we going to keep whining about the difference between the Constitution as we see it on paper written at the end of the 18th century and the present?

Or are we going to accept the actual constitution, the way that our laws are actually made, and then work against that system and fight it and win. You're seeing this in the Elon Musk case, right? We could either conservatives can keep whining about how we're being censored on Twitter, or we can get our own rich guy to go in and buy Twitter and then expect. it and then try to fight the system from within. Are we going to keep fighting yesterday's war? Are we going to fight the war being waged on us right now? Speaking of wars and constitutions, Iran has disbanded its morality police. This is the big headline here. So there have been protests

in Iran for a while now. This was over the killing of a woman Masa Amini, who was detained by the morality police because she broke the headscarf rules. She was, she was walking out without a headscarf, and then she died in custody. And there have been protests that were sparked since her death. And now the regime seems to be afraid of the protests enough that they're saying, okay, we're going to disband the morality police, that special police segment that goes around telling people to put their headscarves back on. What's most interesting, the story I don't find interesting at all. The reaction to the story is what I find very interesting. The protesters in Iran are saying this is not good enough.

We are not going to stop protesting. They are pledging to continue the demonstrations. And the reason that they are reacting that way is the same reason that the Iranian regime was willing to abolish the morality police in the first place, which is it's a completely empty gesture. It doesn't mean anything. a regime that remains in power cannot abolish the morality police

because all police are the morality police. Sure, maybe Iran, well, let me rephrase that, maybe Iran, more on that in a minute, maybe Iran has a special division called the morality police, but all the police are always the morality police

because all regimes have a moral view of the world, and they encode that moral view in their laws, and then the police seek to enforce those laws. So the protesters know it's BS. They know it's just a way to give a fake concession and try to disband the protests. The regime knows it's BS. You've still got the mullahs in charge. How on earth are you going to disband the morality police? And the only people who seem not to really get it are Westerners who misunderstand the role of morality in politics and who really,

and who recite stupid platitudes such as, you can't legislate morality. That has never been true. That is not true today. Both sides of the conflict right now in Iran understand that. And we would do well to understand that too. Americans would do a lot better, and American conservatives would do a lot better if we understood there is no way not to enforce morality. The only question is which morality are you going to enforce? I mentioned the Iran thing.

Iran, I'm sorry, I keep screwing it up myself. There's a big debate over how do you pronounce the name of that country? Is it Iran or Iran? And I took a Twitter poll and there were a number of people who wrote into me. They said, no, Michael, it's pronounced Iran. Iran, you know, like the way Obama pronounces it in a way all the sophisticated libs pronounce it. Iran, even the way I've been pronouncing it because I've been hearing it on TV for the last 20 years. Iran, because that's the way that the Iranians themselves pronounce it. I think, okay, my family is Italian. But when I'm referring to Italy, on the show, do I say, you know, a few years ago, I was, I was traveling to Italia.

I was, I was just walking through La Republica Italiana. And then I said, do I, I don't do that. When I discuss the country that is immediately to our south, do I say, I think, you know, we're going to go on a little trip, me and sweet little Elise, we're going to go down to Texas, and then we're going to go down to the Rio Grande Valley, and then I think we're going to venture into Mexico. No, I don't do that. I call it Mexico, because I speak English. I call it Italy. I call it because I speak English. And I think we should all call it Iran because we speak English. And more specifically, we speak American. And it really, really irritates the Libs when we call it Iran. And so that is it. I don't have any more sophisticated or scholarly reason why I advocate that pronunciation.

But I think that is sufficient. And I think we should all do it. All police are the morality police, okay? There's a slight digression on the pronunciation of Iran. All police are the morality police. but not all morality police are the police. It's kind of like the square in the rectangle. All police forces necessarily enforce the morality, but not all of the people who enforce the moral views of a culture are wearing police uniforms, okay? And that brings us right back to this Twitter issue.

The reason this Twitter issue matters so much is because we allowed a handful of lunatics, lunatic leftists, lunatic leftists in Silicon Valley to dictate the morality that would be accepted in the public square, and they did so in a way that was in contravention of morality. They did so in a way that elevated falsehood over truth, that elevated evil over good, and that elevated ugliness over beauty. That's the problem. So this guy, Yoel Roth, who is the former Twitter safety chief, he was filmed on on stage at some stupid lib conference, discussed. how the Babylon B and Libs of TikTok, two of the funniest accounts on Twitter, could kill people.

Okay, Babylon B, which is what got him to buy the thing, I think. That's the one which was not particularly funny. The Babylon B's Man of the Year is Rachel Levine. Not funny. Yeah. And you can ask. I didn't agree they should have taken that down, but go ahead. You know, it's interesting to think about what the competing tensions around that are.

And I want to start by acknowledging that the targeting and the victimization of the trans community on Twitter is very real, very life-threatening, and extraordinarily serious. We have seen from a number of Twitter accounts, including libs of TikTok, notably, that there are orchestrated campaigns that particularly are singling out a group that is already particularly vulnerable within society. And so, yeah, not only is it not funny, but it is dangerous, and it does contribute to an environment that makes people unsafe in the world. When the Babylon B makes a joke about how a man is not a woman, that kills people, okay? That kills people. And that's why we need to de-platform the Babylon B and Libs of TikTok.

When Libs of TikTok do the work that journalists pretend that they do, and when Libs of TikTok exposes abuses and corruption and child abuse, that is killing people. And so we need to kick her out of the public square. This is the fatwa handed down by the American Mullas. Those two people on stage, those are the American mullahs. There are many others as well, sitting there in their chairs with their microphones, just like the Supreme Leader of Iran, issuing the moral declarations by which we all must live.

And they have the power to enforce them, or at least they did until Elon came in and booted these people out. But they largely have the power to enforce this stuff, at Facebook, at Google, at Twitter, and in many other areas of power as well. but it's so noticeable there because they control the public square, they control the speech in the country. They say, we will not now tolerate anyone suggesting that a man cannot be a woman. We will, they're fixing their turbans as they say this. We will not, this is the fatwa issued by the supreme leader of Twitter safety and policy board. All hail the Twitter safety and policy board.

Americans, we make fun of the malas in Iran. We make fun of the Iranian form of government. Can you believe these men so divorced from the modern world, so divorced from reality, are going to issue these declarations and make these women put on head coverings? At least they're not telling kids to chop their genitals off. Okay? I think before we start casting stones,

there are a lot of criticisms to make of the Iranian regime. But maybe before we start casting stones, how about we take a look in the mirror, okay? Before we accuse them, how about we take a look at ourselves? Because that is how the United States is run. We are run by an elite, largely unaccountable, self-appointed morality police who have the ability to enforce their liberal fatwas. Okay. And in some cases, their view of morality is far more. perverse than the view of our enemies around the world. Speaking of laughing and the ruling class, speaking of mocking these sorts of things, Barack Obama just said something very interesting. And I almost have never said that. I never thought Barack Obama was a particularly interesting public speaker.

I know when he came on the scene in 2008, people said he was the greatest order since Pericles. I never saw that. I just thought he said empty platitudes in a large, boring way. His most famous speech was the one was just, there's not a red America, not a blue America, not a states of America, not a black America, not a white America. And you just think, okay, this is, this is the most banal kind of platitudinous thing I've ever heard in my life. But he at least has presented himself as this great speaker. And he does

always choose his words carefully. And while campaigning for Raphael Warnock, he took a shot at Uncle Joe. We all know some folks in our lives. who we don't wish them ill will they say crazy stuff we're all like well you know Uncle Joe you know what happened to him you know

it's okay they're part of the family but you don't give him serious responsibilities he's talking about crazy Uncle Joe that's a little awkward and the way that liberals are reacting to this is to say oh come on

give me a break he wasn't talking about Joe Biden. He was talking, you know, he was just saying, you know, he was just using Crazy Uncle Joe to mean, you know, whoever, your random uncle. I'm not, he's not talking about Joe Biden. I'm not convinced of that. Whatever you want to say about Barack Obama, I have plenty mean things that I could say about Barack Obama. The man generally does not misspeak. In fact, as Crazy Uncle Joe said during the 2008 primaries, Barack Obama is very articulate. I think it was Joe Biden who said that Barack Obama was the first clean, articulate black man in American politics. Okay? So you can take Joe's words for it, too, Crazy Uncle Joe. Barack Obama is precise about his diction. I think if for anyone who is paying

attention, this was a clear shot at Joe Biden, because in recent weeks, you've seen Joe Biden signaling, he does not want to get out of the way in 2024, that he does want to run again. A lot of Democrats don't want him to run again. And so what does Barack Obama do in this thinly veil? barb. He says, you know, when you got crazy Uncle Joe, Uncle Joe is Joe Biden's nickname. When you got crazy Uncle Joe, you don't, you're nice to him. You know, he's in the family, but you don't give him a lot of responsibilities. You don't do that. Insinuating, perhaps that Joe Biden doesn't have a lot of responsibilities now. He's just being sort of let around by the hand. And certainly, I think, implying that Joe Biden should not have a lot of responsibilities come 2024. So who is running the

show. Who will be the titular head in 2024? But even now, if Joe Biden doesn't have a lot of responsibilities, who's running the show? Who is actually enforcing, enforcing our morality? Who are the morality police? Who is the executive in the United States? Because Barack Obama seems to suggest it ain't the president. The holidays are officially here, everybody. Many of you are already DailyWire Plus members, and you get to enjoy the great content that we have released this year, such as what is a woman, the greatest lie ever sold. If you haven't been able to enjoy it because you're not a member, take advantage of our 30% holiday sale. This also applies to gift membership, so do not miss the opportunity to get everyone on your list an annual gift membership from DailyWire Plus with code

holiday at checkout. Since joining DailyWire Plus, Jordan Peterson has ramped up his already busy schedule. We have been reaping the rewards. Earlier this year, Jordan went to Washington, D.C. to film a beautiful and engaging documentary on the Museum of the Bible called Logos and Literacy. In it, Jordan meets with historians, theologians, and philosophers to discuss the history of the Bible and its influence on the world. Jordan was so happy with it. He actually watched it twice. No doubt you'll want to do the same, but the only way you can do it is if you're a DailyWire Plus members. So sign up today. Use code holiday at checkout to get 30% off your new annual DailyWire Plus membership at DailyWire.com slash Knowles. That is Dailywire.com slash Knowles today.

Speaking of incompetence in our federal government, really great news, everybody. You can breathe a sigh of relief. The Department of Health and Human Services has declared an end to the monkey pox emergency. I know you were all quaking in your boots. You were so nervous about the spread of monkey pox, but it's over. Well, actually, monkey pox is not over because they don't call it that anymore. According to Xavier Bacera, the Secretary of HHS, from the outset of the M-Pox, outbreak, the administration pulled every lever to stop the spread of this virus. So it's M-pox now, because monkeypox is offensive for some reason. I'm not sure what is offensive about it. I don't think they've renamed the chicken pox. I don't think it's the C-pox. So I don't know why that is. Some people said it had a stigma because the virus comes from Africa before the weird gay fetish

orgies in Belgium and Spain spread it around the world. Monkeypox was pretty much contained just in Zaire, or if there were stigma, because it pretty much only spread with promiscuous homosexual men. So if it seemed like someone was comparing them to monkeys, I don't know. But anyway, monkeypox, you're not allowed to say it anymore. It's M-pox. And that's not even the craziest thing that Bacera said in his statement. He said the administration pulled every lever to stop the spread of the virus. That just isn't true. The administration did not do that. It would be very simple to stop the spread of monkeypox. It would be very simple to stop the spread of monkeypox. It would have been very simple to stop it much faster than it already was. It was always going to be a more

contained sort of thing because it only really statistically affected one group of people, a relatively small group of people, and it was contained pretty much to just the cities. And because there were vaccines out there that were somewhat effective in slowing the spread, which, for instance, you didn't have with HIV in the 80s and 90s, as it was always going to be contained. But they could have contained it a lot faster. And they could have contained about being honest. I'm just saying, no, monkeypox doesn't spread to everybody. No, as we heard from the administration at the beginning, this is not everyone's equally at risk here and potentially going to contract monkeypox. Pretty much the only way you get it is if you're a very promiscuous homosexual

man. Not even if you're just a relatively mild homosexual man who has none or one sexual partner. There, you're not going to get monkeypox. But if you go to the bathhouses and you go to the fetish parties in Belgium and Spain, and later then in New York and San Francisco and all over the place, and you have sex with multiple partners in a very short period of time, you are much more likely to contract monkey bucks. So stop doing that. The administration couldn't say that, because that would be considered homophobic today, to tell a basic truth. I have gay friends who are more reasonable than the Libs, which is not saying all that much. But these are, these are sensible people who would come out and they, because I would ask, I'd say, am I, do I sound homophobic?

Do I sound bigoted? They say, Michael, they should rename it gay orgypox. That would get the message out very, very clearly. The Biden administration didn't want to do that because at every single turn, they seem so concerned with hiding the truth. You see it on Twitter. You see it in the statements of the administration, on public health and all, and everything in between. They want to hide the truth because the truth does not go very well with their narrative. Speaking of scientific truth, there is a scientist who worked at the Wuhan laboratory, who is now coming out and admitting that the Wuhan virus was a lab leak. This is his opinion. This is his bombshell.

I think it was reported in the sun out of the UK. this is Andrew Huff. Andrew Huff not only worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, he worked for EcoHealth Alliance. EcoHealth Alliance is, if you've seen my documentary on Dr. Fauci, which is available at Daily Wire Plus. EcoHealth Alliance is the organization Peter Dashak, Peter Daeshack, recklessly pursuing gain of function research,

recklessly working with the Wuhan Institute of Virology on BATGELF. coronavirus. This was covered up by the government. Dr. Fauci lied about this in front of the Senate. Then it turned out it was true. The NIH actually had funded this organization, had been funding subgrants to the Wuhan Institute of Irology. Well, this guy, Andrew Huff, who worked at EcoHealth from 2014 to 2016, says that the EcoHealth helped the Wuhan lab put together, quote, the best existing methods to engineer bat coronaviruses to attack other species for many years. Huff says, China knew from day one that this was a genetically engineered agent. The U.S. government is to blame for the transfer of dangerous biotechnology to the Chinese.

I was terrified by what I saw, he says, we were just handing them bio weapon technology. And I suspect this is behind a lot of the cover-ups. A lot of the, we don't want Hunter Biden's laptop getting out. A lot of this is a threat to safety. A lot of the, we've got to accuse Trump of colluding with the Russians. We've got to wield the federal government to stop Trump's campaign, kill it in the cradle. What is it all about? Is it about them fearing the conservative policies? Yes, that's part of it.

But I think another part of it, maybe an even deeper part of it, is that the libs don't want their screw-ups and corruption exposed. they knew that if Donald Trump had been elected president, that it would come out that the Obama administration was wielding the government against the Republicans, against their political enemies, that the Obama administration was wielding the government to spy on Donald Trump's campaign. And that did come out. So all of a sudden, the political operation to stop Trump because you don't like his policies becomes a little bit of a CYA operation.

Shoot, now we have to succeed here because otherwise he's going to cover up. He's going to uncover our corruption. A lot of the tamping down of dissent when it comes to coronavirus, the basic questions people were asking, where did this virus come from? It was not manmade. This had nothing to do with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. We've never funded gain of function research. We do not fund the Wuhan Institute.

None of that ever. All of that was a lie. All of that was fair. Why? Because Dr. Fauci is just so ignorant because he's so forgetful. No, because he was trying to cover up his actions that, as Andrew Huff is suggesting here, contributed to the creation of the coronavirus. And so that becomes a self-fulfilling cycle. It becomes a self-perpetuating cycle. You've got all this lib corruption from these people who have held on to power for far too long. And so their raison d'etra becomes continuing to cover up their corruption, which is in itself

corrupt. And so you get an ever-tightening grip on power. They can't let go even a little bit because it will expose just how corrupt they have been. Now, speaking of things that happened a long time ago that people are trying to cover up, Anna Navarro on the view is attacking the cowboys owner, Jerry Jones. She wants answers. Okay, she's going after the real stories. Not about the Twitter corruption, not about the Biden administration corruption, not about, no, she's going after the real stories.

When Jerry Jones was 14, he's 80 years old now, by the way, when Jerry Jones was 14, he was photographed near a rally about segregation. LeBron James gave an interview, or maybe it was Wednesday with that way, I thought was so incredibly pointing where he brought up the picture from 1957 of Jerry Jones, the owner of the Dallas Cowboys, standing in Arkansas as a mob of white boys, were blocking black students from going into a high school. And, you know, and LeBron made the point that he gets all these. questions about Kyrie Irving, about everybody else, about all these things, and he said, you know, you guys haven't asked me about Kyrie Irving, about Jerry Jones, and why the disparate attention. And I do think it's important. And I hope that Jerry Jones, who has so many black players, who has such a platform, who has all this money, who's got all this access.

I hope Jerry Jones really does take the opportunity to own this, to talk about it, to explain it, and to talk about the change that has happened in 65 years. And his role. Well, he claims he was just a casual observer at that event. And, yeah, he was 14. He was a casual observer. And how old does he now? 80 year old is 80. Oh, he's 80 now. Right? The best part of it is Sonny, who acknowledges she has to admit here.

Look, maybe he was just there. There was a crowd of people watching something. So maybe he was a casual observer. And also, he was 14. He was a child. He was in, what, ninth grade, eighth grade or ninth grade? But there are 14-year-olds in the KKK? Are there? Okay, maybe. The conservatives must be the most virtuous people. The American conservatives

in the year 2022 must be some of the most virtuous people ever to walk the earth if this is the best the Democrats can do. If the best that the Democrats can do to come up with a scandal about American conservatives is that 66 years ago, the Dallas Cowboys owner, when he was in ninth grade, was in a crowd of people watching an event about desegregation. If that's the best they've got, they don't have anything that they can point to, that they can complain about any time in the intervening 66 years, man, we must be doing something right because I can point to Democrat corruption right now that's going on right now in a really, really egregious way that is causing all sorts of problems, that is causing deaths in some

cases when we're talking about the COVID lockdown regime, all sorts of other problems and the best they've got. And this is true. This isn't just about Jerry Jones. This is all they ever talking about. Well, you know, there were Jim Crow. There was Jim Crow. When was Jim Crow? Oh my gosh, man. Was it 70 years ago? Yeah, and that's why you need to give us all this power now and we need to kick you out of the public square. Because there was slavery. When was slavery? That was 150 years ago? That's the best you've got. Okay, keep talking about all the problems from over a century ago. We're going to keep pointing out the awful things that you're doing right in the here and now. We'll see who the people side with. We know who the people

will side with. That's why they got to rig the system. That's why they feel that they've got to rig the system. Because if the Democrats felt that they could win fair and square, they wouldn't have to rig the public square, and they wouldn't have to change all of the election rules. in contravention of state constitutions in some cases. You know the rest of the show continues now. All right. And this is a music Monday baby. I told the guys, I said, no more rap. Okay, we've done enough rap. Let's hold off on the rap for a little bit. I've had enough. So they're going to take me back to the 90s. They're going to take me back to the 90s and early 2000s by playing a little alternative rock. Okay. So I'm going to bleach my tips

in between now and the member's block. I'm going to get out some nice quick silver and billabon clothing, throw out a skateboard, and meet you guys over at the member block. If you're not a member, click the link in the description and join us.