The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1165 - These Global Elites Just Want To Destroy Everything

Episode Date: January 19, 2023

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl The World Economic Forum happening now in Davos has announced a new way to censor you online, a new pandemic that could take over the world, and a new way to edit your genes and rewrite the code of humanity. What could go wrong! - - -  DailyWire+: Use code DO NOT COMPLY to get 40% OFF new annual DailyWire+ membership plans: https://bit.ly/3SsC5se Get 40% off Jeremy’s Razors Shave Kits at https://www.jeremysrazors.com/  Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY   - - -  Today’s Sponsor: Epic Will - Use Promo Code 'KNOWLES' for 10% off your Will: https://www.epicwill.com/ - - - 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

Whether it's a movie night or just midday, Skinny Pop is a salty snack that keeps on giving. Made with just three simple ingredients for an irresistibly delicious taste and a large serving size that lasts. Deliciously popped, perfectly salted. Skinny Pop, popular for a reason. Shop Skinny Pop now. As the Krispy Chicken Sandwich from 7-Eleven, people always call me loud.

And I'm like, yeah, I know. I'm crispy. Did you expect me to whisper? If you want quiet, go eat some soup and reflect. Like, I know I'm a handful. I'm bold, I'm juicy. Throw some pickles and barbecue sauce on me, and baby, I'm a whole meal. And with seven rewards, I'm just $4.

Quiet? No. Krispy, saucy, and $4? Very. Only at 711. Valley through 62326, participating stores only while supplies lastly out for full terms. You've likely heard by now that the World Economic Forum wants to make you eat bugs, live in a pod, and own nothing.

And all of that is true. But the WEF is taking some more immediate and concrete steps to upend your life. One such power play is something called Safety by Design, which is probably the biggest Big Tet threat that you have never heard of. Safety by Design is the hobby horse of a woman named Julie Inman Grant. She's just a bureaucrat. She's the Australian E-Safety Commissioner who went viral last year. in Davos at the World Economic Forum when she proposed a recalibration of free speech. We are finding ourselves in a place where we have increasing polarization everywhere.

And everything feels binary when it doesn't need to be. So I think we're gonna have to think about a recalibration of a whole range of human rights that are playing out online. You know, from freedom of speech to the freedom to be free from online violence or the right of data protection to the right to child dignity. Since then, Grant has taken significant steps in collaboration with the WEF to make their recalibration a reality. Safety by design is the notion that government regulators can't

possibly keep up with all the bad things confronting people online. Not just real problems like criminal threats and fraud and child pornography and things like that, but a much broader array of topics and opinions that leftists deem harmful. So the safety by design solution is to take the burden of suppressing those things off of the regulators, out of the government agencies, and just build liberals' regulatory preferences into the design code of the tech platforms themselves. Here's how it works. Safety by design to me is key. This is putting their responsibility back. It's having companies from the leadership from the top down, prioritize safety, build it in at the front end. And now we have the basic online safety expectations,

which basically lay out the duty of care and what we respect the interactive services to be doing as a right to or a license to operate in our country. So in order to operate in Australia, they've got to build the liberal regulatory preferences into the code of the platforms. Otherwise, the platforms don't get to operate in Australia. But safety by design is not merely being implemented in Australia because Grant serves on a bunch of boards for the WEF. And her plan, in perfect alignment with the broader globalist goals of Davos, is to export this scheme all around the world to control speech in all sorts of categories. Not just the threats and the fraud and the porn and media, entertainment, even sports. Through safety by design, Grant and the W.E.F. intend and have been open

about their intent to push diversity, equity, and inclusion to suppress what they call misinformation and hate speech, all of which is gobbledygook talk for censoring conservatives and promoting liberals. And if they can convince just a handful of countries to implement these sorts of policies, that could tip the scales to force Big Tech's hand to implement it for everyone. It's not that you need to convince every country in the world to adopt this stuff. If you convince a few of them, frankly, even if you just convince one of them, that is going to send a signal to Big Tech to say, okay, look, we're not going to build completely separate platforms for Australia and, let's say, Canada and the U.S. and France, and then separate, separate platforms for all the rest of the countries. So, okay, we'll do what Australia wants us to do. And then safety by design governs the speech for everybody. People are posting all sorts of conspiracy theories to social media as the WEF's annual meeting goes on in Davos, Switzerland right now.

But if the globalists get their way, we won't see those conspiracy facts online for much longer. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Nulls show. Welcome back to the show. My Favorite Comment yesterday is from Lucky Jacks, who says, if we could harness even the fumes from these windbags at the WEF, we could power the entire world for a year for free, at least a year. I think actually you're not being nearly optimistic enough. I think we could probably power the world for a decade, okay? And we could avoid the death of our culture. The death that the globalists tell us is coming to all humanity if we don't give them all. all of our rights and our political power and our cars and our stoves and all the rest of it, okay? I don't think the world is going to end in five minutes as these people scare us into thinking. But I do think that you will die and you will die sooner than you think. And that's why you need to check out Epicwill. Right now go to Epicwill.com, use promo code, NOLS. It can be very tough to stick to your New Year's resolution. You set out with lofty goals. You stick to them for

two weeks. Then you fall right back into your old bad habits. Lucky for you, I have a goal that you can accomplish today. Complete your will with Epic Will for just $119. And in as little as five minutes, Epic Will can help you create your last will and testament, living will, and even healthcare power of attorney. Their step-by-step online form makes it incredibly easy. All you need to do is fill in the blanks.

It's very, very important to have a will for a long time. I did not have a will, and I was very irresponsible because then what would happen to my stuff, what would happen to my family, what would happen to my kids? 50% of Americans don't have a will choose today to be in the smarter half. Go to Epicwill.com. Use promo code Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to save 10% on Epicwill's complete will package. That's Epicwill.com. Promocode Noles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S.

All sorts of conspiracy theories. Here's a conspiracy theory. This comes from AP News. AP News says the World Economic Forum, which opens Monday is slated to take on pressing global issues, but online, it has become a target of bizarre claims from a growing chorus who believe it involves a group of elites manipulating events for their own benefit. We'll put a pause right there. Yes, there are right-wingers who say that about the World Economic Forum. That is what the World Economic Forum says about itself. That is the entire raison d'etre of the World Economic Forum.

is to gather global elites to change the world, to become masters of the future. That's what Klaus Schwab says, the founder and king of the World Economic Forum. It's a conspiracy fact. It is a theory about a conspiracy, but the conspiracy is real. And so the Libs are very upset about this. They say, this isn't a conspiracy that's playing out on the extreme fringes. That's according to Alex Friedfeld, a researcher with the Anti-Defamation League, who studies anti-government extremism.

I'll put a pause right there. The Anti-Defamation League, isn't that the group that talks about anti-Semitism and accuses people that they don't like of anti-Semitism? Why are they now talking about Davos?

Why are they now talking about the world economic forum? Why are they upset when people point out that we don't want to eat the bugs and live in the pods and have all our property taken away by Klaus Schvaab, who is not a Jew, he's a German?

He says, this is very, very bad. This is, we're seeing this on mainstream social media platforms being shared by regular Americans, we were seeing it being spread by mainstream media figures right on their prime time news, on their nightly networks. Oh, no. It's a crazy conspiracy theory. I mentioned on the show yesterday.

If you say that Davos is where the elites get together to completely transform society and change the future, and that's a good thing, then you're a good, wonderful person, you're insightful, you keep up with the news. If you say the exact same thing, but you conclude it with, and that's a bad thing, then you're a crazy fringe wild conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. You got the tinfoil hats on. You probably worry about chem trails and gay frogs. It's what Michael Anton at the Claremont Institute calls the celebration parallax. The lives are allowed to tell you their plans and celebrate it. But you can't repeat to them the very things that they just told you if you were going to criticize it. That's one. tactic. One tactic that the Libs have been using to downplay what's going on in Davos is to say, well, this is just a crazy conspiracy theory. Then the other tactic that they've used, and it's really only started this year, is they say, oh, that stuff that's going on in Davos, it's not a big deal.

I saw a headline. I think it was in CNN. So the real story of what's going on in Davos is the world economic forum, it's actually losing its influence. Yeah, people don't, they don't care about that anymore. It's not a big, you guys. You guys. are worried about some crazy conspiracy theory. Not the real stories? They have way less power than they ever did. I don't know. 2,700 big wig attendees from 130 countries, 116 billionaires and 52 heads of state, and they don't have any power. I don't know. The mainstream media, the establishment press, seem real eager these days to play down the influence of Davos. But you just heard one example. Just one And this is one little tiny example of how the WEF operates.

It brings together influential people who all have the same liberal left-wing progressive agenda. Then they all trade influence and they all work on each other's power. And it's people in the private sector and in the government sector. The point of Davos is to bring those two sectors together. Because if you bring those two sectors together, then sometimes the private sector can do the dirty work of the government. And people have no recourse against the private. sector. This is what happens when the government uses allegedly private corporations like Facebook, Twitter, and Google to censor Americans. Well, it can't be a First Amendment violation if the FBI

just had a secret meeting with some Facebook exec and said, hey, censor the Hunter Biden laptop story. I mean, I think it is a First Amendment violation, but they have plausible deniability. They say, no, it's a private company. Private company has no First Amendment responsibility to protect your speech. But really, it's the government that was pressuring the social media companies. Or you will see corporate influence onto the government pushing massive deregulation, not for the small business owners, not for the mom and pops, for all the people who are in the rooms at Davos. You see it play out in real time. Some random Australian bureaucrat through the power that she wields among liberal globalist networks is currently in the process of

changing the way that the internet operates on potentially the biggest platforms on the internet to decide what things you're allowed to say, to ban hate speech. Are you going to be allowed to say in five years? Are you going to be allowed to say on the internet that a boy is a boy and a girl is a girl? You're barely allowed to say it now. But no, they have no influence. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. We have got to pay attention to what the Davos types, to what the globalists are saying, what they're predicting. about the future because they have an outsized amount of influence to make those predictions come true. One prediction comes from the head of the World Health Organization.

Warning of the next epidemic. Mark it down. Here it is. Breaking news. New epidemic dropped. Get ready for more social distancing and masks and losing your job and giving up your money, giving up your rights. Which epidemic is at this time? It is. Drum roll, please. Tuberculosis. One of the most practical sort of economically effective and human

life-saving, effective ways of making the world more prepared for future pandemics would actually be to turbocharge the fight against TB. This is the disease of the poor, as Peter said. It's not the problem of the

high-income countries. When do we stop this behavior? It's only when the rich countries affected that then becomes a serious issue. It's a matter of time, but sooner or later, of course those countries who think that it will not come to them as a problem may come. Even imagine the extreme disease resistance TB, it's already coming. Sooner or later it may come. Now, had we not just lived through the three years that we just lived through, had the WHO not been caught with its hand in the cookie jar, caught red-handed, caught

mixing metaphors like I'm doing right now, in a state of utter corruption when it came to COVID, first helping China cover it up, cover up the outbreak of the virus, then helping China cover up where the virus came from, going along with the BS ridiculous story that it came from a bad batch of bat soup at the Wuhan wet market, when in fact it almost certainly came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. in fact, with research, the likes of which the United States was funding right there at the Wuhan Institute, if the WHO had any credibility at all, and if the World Economic Forum were not so cartoonishly villainous in its designs and in its overall demeanor, then you might

listen to that and say, oh, wow, that's scary. I guess we better prepare. I sure don't want to get tuberculosis. But knowing what we know about the WHO and Mr. Tedros, it sounds less like a prediction and more like a threat. Sounds less like a prediction and more like a promise. Sooner or later, it may come. And now you've got the terrible, awful conspiracy theorists. You never believe the conspiracy theorists about anything. Now they're posting all over social media because they point out that Bioentech has announced

clinical trials of an mRNA vaccine for tuberculosis, apparently developed with the and Melinda Gates Foundation, that will begin, or I suppose at this point, that did begin in 2022. I don't know anything about this potential mRNA vaccine. I do know that scientists are now working overtime to apply the MRNA vaccine technology, which has had so many problems to all sorts of other viruses. So don't know anything about this. May or may not be the case that they've got this vaccine. But the reason, I don't even mention it to say anything about some potential M RNA treatment for TV. The reason I mention it is because it is the behavior of these people, of the people in Davos, that explains why people have all sorts of terrible crazy conspiracies

about them. Because the conspiracy theories have often proven true. And because the World Economic Forum is a conspiracy by definition. That is the whole point of it, is you get a bunch of people together who are very powerful and you have them all work together to decide the fate of the world whether you want it or not. It's a conspiracy out in the open. It's a conspiracy that is airing on TV. The revolution will in fact be televised and a lot of people won't do anything about it. My question for Tedros, my question for the people predicting the next epidemic is, are you going to stop it before it happens? Not are you going to. to lock us all down and take away our businesses and shut down our churches and upend our societies

after it happens. But are you going to stop it before it happens? My question for the globalists in Davos is, are you people really the masters of the universe or not? Because you present yourselves as the masters of the universe who, through your own unfettered reason, your brilliance, the likes of which we've never seen in all of history, Aristotle, Plato, Thomas Aquinas, those guys were all dummies compared to you. You all figured it out. You've mastered the future. You're going to conquer death. You're going to, you're going to go in, you're going to edit our genes. You're going to recreate humanity, not just culture, but our very biology. Okay, if you want me to trust you to do that, then you better be able to live up to those promises that you, that you shall

be as gods. So can you stop a virus outbreak? I see no evidence of that. In fact, from the behavior of these sorts of globalists, I see them exacerbating a lot more problems than they're fixing. I see them funding gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology on back coronaviruses that almost certainly caused the outbreak of that pandemic that they exploited to shut us down for three years, which they then called a rare but narrow opportunity for a great reset of our whole society. What a wonderful turn that could be. And then they applied their genius to create these vaccines in a mad rush that they told us we're totally safe and effective. Now people are dropping dead of strokes, blood clots, heart problems, people are getting nerve damage, all the rest of it.

Are you the masters of the universe or not? If you're not, that's fine. I don't think you're the masters of the universe. But then stop messing with our societies. Stop messing with our very selves. More predictions coming out of Davos. Another prediction, promise or threat, there's going to be a big cyber attack. We're here today to share the findings of the the World Economic Forum's Global Security Outlook Report, 2023. This is a result of research and collaboration with the forums communities and our partner Accenture, which we've interviewed and sought input from over 300 executives globally.

The most striking finding that we found is that 93% of cyber leaders and 86% of cyber business leaders believe that the geopolitical instability makes a catastrophic cyber event likely in the next two years? A catastrophic cyber event is likely in the next years. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Are these people going to stop it? If they can't stop it, they don't seem quite so omnipotent as they present themselves.

Are these people going to cause it? Are some of them going to cause it? If they cause it, they don't seem quite so omnibenevolent as they present themselves. They seem like pretty false God. and yet they want to rewrite humanity itself. See a clip. This is put out by the World Economic Forum. Rewriding the code of life, gene editing technology

can change a whole organism, could enhance our existence to materials, fashion we need to fix the economy. Redesigning organisms for beneficial purposes. It's going to allow us to not just edit genomes, but also, and importantly, write a new code for life. will have right level permissions. We already started to see some of that this year. COVID-19 vaccines, they make use of engineered code

in the form of messenger RNA. Technology will cut out unwanted sights and sounds. What's on the horizon are diminished reality glasses that look very much like what I'm wearing. That would allow you to remove things from your view, whether that's garbage or other people. I did not believe that clip when I saw it. I said this has to be fake.

They cast some woman. It's a hoax. I don't believe it. I looked it up. It's real. The concept of diminished reality glasses where our rulers, they're not going to clean the garbage out of our society. They're just going to put on blindfolds, basically. They're going to blind us so we don't see it anymore.

That's a plan being pushed by one of the most elite and exclusive clubs on planet Earth. Do you trust these people to be your knowledge? new gods. Some people do. Some people, atheists who don't believe in the real god, they say, well, these people are so smart, they're so genius, they're billionaires, they run the world. And so, yeah, if they can go into my DNA and hack it, oh, jab me, baby, let's do it, let's make it happen. Come on, I want augmented reality and diminished reality. Get that trash out of there. Pump me full of drugs, make me live in a video game, put me in the pod, I'll eat the bugs, whatever, I don't care. Do you really want to live in a world in which these people are gods?

I, for one, call me crazy, I for one to prefer to live in the world where God is God. I trust God more than I trust these people. I'm fine with medical advances that can cure diseases and deficiencies because we live in a fallen world and everyone encounters some kinds of flaws and errors. But do I want to rewrite what a human is, period? Do I want to go in and enhance what a human being is? No, I don't think that I'm going to improve very much on God's design. And I am sure as how convinced that those people are not going to improve on God's design at all. But if I got to choose between gods, I'm picking the real one. Speaking of religion, a professor has just lost her job. because she showed a picture of Muhammad in class.

Dr. Erica Lopez Prater showed images in a course on Islamic art. Islamic art, Muhammad, you would think that these things go together. Most people know that a lot of Muslims find images, physical depictions of Muhammad, to be sacrilegious. And the teacher acknowledged this.

Apparently the teacher gave a sort of warning beforehand. and said, hey, some people might find this offensive, but it's a course on Islamic art, and so I'm going to show Islamic art, okay? And because she taught this, she's been fired. A senior student complained to school leaders who decided to fire the teacher. They said, this is what David Everett, who is the Hamline University, Hamlin, Hamline, not sure, Associate Vice President for Inclusive Excellence. It reads like a Dilbert cartoon. It reads like an absolute joke. David Everett, who has got this completely useless, woke job where he takes tuition money to create problems. He says, in lieu of this incident, it was decided, it was best,

that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community. First of all, David Everett might know a lot about inclusive excellence. He does not know very much about the English language. in lieu, what does that mean? Does he mean in light of this incident? In lieu of means instead of this incident. But he doesn't know that. He doesn't know anything about basic English, but he knows a lot about woke ideology. That's true of many college graduates these days. I guess it's true of some teachers. It's definitely true of these no-nothing administrators. In lieu of this incident, we felt it was best. And so what did the Hamelin, Hamline, Vice President, rather, Fainesey Miller said, it is not our intent to place blame.

Rather, it is our intent to note that in the classroom incident, where an image forbidden for Muslims to look upon was projected on a screen and left for many minutes. Not just several minutes, many minutes. Respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom. Okay. You're going to hear a lot of conservative commentators say, this is outrageous. We have a commitment to academic freedom. and nothing should supersede academic freedom. That's not my point of view. I don't even think that's a conservative point of view.

In fact, the modern conservative movement, which many, if not most people, credit with beginning by a book by William F. Buckley Jr. called God and Man at Yale, that whole book was making fun of academic freedom. The subtitle was the superstitions of academic freedom. I don't think there's any such thing as academic freedom. I don't think teachers have any right

to teach whatever they want in the classroom. I do think that this professor had a right and frankly an obligation to present images, including images like this one, in a course on Islamic art, or at least, certainly was within her rights to do that if she didn't have an outright obligation to do so. But I'm not denying that Muslim students might have been offended, and they might have considered it sacrilegious. I consider it sacrilegious. I'm a Christian. I consider it sacrilegious when people deny the divinity of Christ. I consider that to be very sacrilegious. I bet a Jewish student would consider it sacrilegious if at a, I don't know, a religious studies party,

religious studies happy hour with a lot of Jewish students present. They served shellfish and bacon. I could see how a Jewish student would maybe be offended by that. Okay. We live in a pluralistic society. That is a fact. And we all make certain kinds of conciliations and come to a sort of kind of imperfect agreement where we are able to get along with each other. I would be more than happy seeing laws against this kind of offensive material beefed up a little bit. I do not believe that the Satanists have any right to put up a Baphomet statue in a state capital or a courthouse, as many of them contend. I don't think the founding fathers ever believed that that was the case. In fact, we had blasphemy laws on the books in this country for most of our

nation's history. In fact, they're still on the books. in a number of states, even today. I think it would be great. I think it would be a good thing in this country if we offered people of different religious views far greater respect than we do in our extremely atheistic culture. But we can't be just banning images of Muhammad in Islamic art classrooms, okay?

In this university, I promise you, a teacher could get up and blaspheme Jesus, could mock the God of the Bible, could specifically mock God in the Old Testament, mock the ancient Israelites, could say it's all of ridiculous, stupid, made-up story, but contrived by a bunch of lunatics who were afraid of a magical sky daddy.

I bet a number of professors, certainly many professors around the country have done that. I bet a number of professors at this school have probably done that. You wouldn't hear boo about it, but because it is politically incorrect to, in any way, disparage an image of Muhammad,

or in any way to transgress some practice of Islam. Forget about Christianity, forget about Judaism. That's the only reason they did it. They're not doing it to protect Muslims. They're doing it to protect political correctness. Absolutely outrageous. And they're doing it to further a leftist political agenda. They're using the Muslims to do that.

But they don't really care about the Muslims. They don't believe in Allah any more than they believe in the God of the Old Testament or the God understood in Christianity and worshipped by Christians. Speaking of matters of life and death, you know I've got a little bit of a hobby horse. I referred earlier to the hobby horse of that World Economic Forum lady. I've got a little bit of a hobby horse myself, and I got it from my wife, sweet little Alisa, and that hobby horse would be seed oils. Listen, I've never been convinced of any fad nutritional diet stuff ever in my life.

I thought the Atkins thing was crazy. I thought all the paleo, the keto, all these different. I always think they're all very silly. But there is one nutritional fashion that I'm completely bought into. Seed oils. Canola oil, palm seed oil, rape seed oil. It's called rape seed oil, for goodness sakes. All these gross seed oils that cropped up in the last 30 years and replaced good oils like olive oil,

or replaced good tasting butter, all the rest of it. I am totally anti-seed oil. I was thinking about the evolution of conservatism the other day. I thought, how has conservatism changed? In the 18th century, it was about opposing revolution. In the 19th century, it was about defending tradition. In the 20th century, it was about preserving liberty. Today, as far as I'm concerned,

one of the most exciting motivators of the conservative spirit is just freaking hating seed oils. It's so funny. It's kind of an internet-y, you know, you're paying too close attention to politics thing right now. It's going mainstream. I know it's going mainstream.

It even appeared on a very popular TV show. What's the worst oil out there to cook with? You know, this is a really controversial thing. I'm going to be honest. And there's a huge controversy right now about processed seed oils, which are relatively new in the food supply, and have taken off as very,

rates of obesity and other problems have taken off. So some people think that processed seed oils might be bad for us. Others argue, no, they're not. There's a difference in omega-3 versus omega-6 fatty acids in them. Seed oils tend to be very high in omega-6 fatty acids, which might be more inflammatory. That was live with Kelly and Ryan. That is a very mainstream TV show, and they are just throwing a ton of shade at seed oils. Why do I like the seed oil thing?

One, I'm pretty convinced that it's true that seed oils are not the best for you. But the reason I really like it politically is that it's not really about the seed oils. The seed oil hatred is a sign for a broader political view. When someone comes up to me and they say, Michael, I hate seed oils. I can tell you who that person voted for. I can tell you how that person stands on the major issues. I can probably. I can probably. I can probably. I can probably. I can probably. probably broadly tell you that person's religious views. I can tell you which people in the government that person trusts and doesn't. I could tell you a lot about, even though we're talking about canola oil. It's sort of like yoga. It's like yoga in the sense that it's not 100% correct as a predictor. But if someone is really, really into yoga, that person is probably a lib. I know that there are white conservative girls who do yoga. I know it's a conversation for another day. Okay. But the majority of of people who are super duper into yoga in the United States are big libs because yoga offers an

alternative spiritual vision, an alternative religious practice, it is just a religious practice for people who reject the traditional religious practices and spiritual vision of the West, because it satisfies certain longings and speaks to all sorts of political issues. even if it doesn't seem to do so directly. I love these signs because even if they seem completely out of left field, they suggest that there is a kind of coherence to people's religious views. I remember one time I met Anne Coulter in college, and at the time I think I was pro-abortion at the time,

or I was weakening on and I was rethinking about the issue and I was maybe in the midst of that. And Anne Coulter said, look, if you're ever debating between which of two Republicans to vote for, You got one who's pro-life, you got one who's pro-abortion. And all you care about is lowering your taxes. Vote for the pro-life Republican. He will lower your taxes more. And that was a really, really insightful comment.

Seems like abortion and taxes have very little to do with one another. But they do share certain base. Those two issues derive from the same kind of basic understanding of the human person is, what kind of rights we ought to have to our own property, what respect we ought to have for life, what skepticism we ought to have against unjust powers. That person will lower your taxes more, that there's a kind of coherence to these views.

Very often you'll hear people in the middle and the libs and the squishes say, come on, we don't need to all agree. There's one party or anything like that. We can have a view on this over here and a view on that from this other party. And it's true. you won't make sense. You can do it. But it's much better to make sense. You know what makes sense?

Buying Jeremy's Razors. Jeremy's Razors is offering a giant discount right now, 40% off on all Razor's subscriptions. Why? I'm glad you asked. I'm glad I asked. One year ago today, Joe Biden tried to force vaccines on just about everybody. Here is what Jeremy, co-CEO of the Daily Wire, had to say about that. We won't be enforcing Joe Biden's unconstitutional and tyrannical vaccine mandate. That's it. We'll use every tool at our disposal, including legal action to resist. Yes, that's the same Jeremy from Jeremy's razors, who you may remember from this viral commercial. Did you see any other CEOs out there publicly suing the government on your behalf? No, just Jeremy. And the best part about it is, we won.

The Biden vaccine mandate is as good as dead. We said do not comply and you did not comply. In fact, over a million of you signed our petition saying as much. And today, together, we kick the government's ass. So are you going to keep buying from those other guys or from the guy who sued the government on your behalf and won? And for all the ladies out there, give your man something else to smile about every time that he picks up at Jeremy's razor. He'll remember just how much you care. Trust me. If he listens to this show too, he will appreciate you even more. And if he doesn't listen to this show, leave that man. He is not a good man. He does not have good judgment. We will make it even easier for you. Switch right now and get 40,

off on your razor subscriptions at jeremy's razors.com. Speaking of hippie stuff, Greta, St. Greta of the Blessed sailboat. She sounds kind of Irish. I'm trying to do a Swedish. I don't know how to do it. I don't, okay, I'm not, I'll work on it. We'll try it again next time. St. Greta was just arrested. She was arrested by law enforcement in Germany. I would have expected that she would have gone to Davos either to appear at the World Economic Forum or to protest the World Economic Forum,

even though the World Economic Forum loves Greta. But that didn't happen because she was arrested in Germany. She was protesting the expansion of a coal mine in Western Germany, and according to Reuters, she was warned by police that she would be removed by force if she did not vacate the mine site and what did St. Greta do? She did not vacate the minesite.

And so what happened? She was dragged off by police, marking, I believe, the first time that Greta has ever been arrested. I assumed she would have been arrested as a teenager for skipping school for like 180 days in a row. But no, I don't know, maybe the laws are different over there in Sweden. In America, I think that would have happened, truancy laws. But this apparently was the first time she was arrested. And what the Libs have said now is it's time for many more of us to stand up. risk arrest for the sake of being a livable planet. That's right. She stood up to power, except some video came out, not just of her arrest where they're dragging her off,

but video of a little bit before the arrest when Greta is palling around with the cops and actually posing for photos with them. You see everybody smiles, giggling, taking some photos, all these Greta just laughing, having a grand... Okay, but then photos come. She's got to straighten her face a little bit. There are the cops posing, and they're posing holding her arm in her hand for the reporters. She's there looking defiant. Cops aren't doing.

They're not actually arresting her. They're just posing. And then they finally walk with her in the position of arresting her. Some are suggesting that this was all a stunt cooked up by Greta Thunberg, that these weren't real police officers, that they were just men wearing costumes. I don't think that's true. I bet, I don't know for sure, but I bet those were real cops. No, no, the explanation for this photo op followed by a fake arrest, I guess, technically a real arrest,

but then they released her immediately. They just checked her identity and let her go, and the whole thing was just such a fraud. The real explanation is far darker than Greta paid some actors, Jesse Smolett style. The real explanation is that they're all on the same side. Greta and the police are pretending that they're on opposite sides and they're fighting, but they're not. They're on the same side. This is why it's always such a farce when Greta protests at things like the World Economic Forum or any other liberal event. It says, you're not going far enough.

The libs love that. The libs love the pressure from the left to give them an opportunity to seize even more control and pursue an even more radical agenda than they were already doing. It gives them the excuse to say, well, we're getting popular pressure from St. Greta of the Blessed Sailboat, and so we've got to do this sort of thing. You don't need a conspiracy theory for that. This is how the system works. There is the appearance of opposition, but very often it's simply that. It's a facade. And the people who appear to be locked, locking horns fighting to the death, they're really palling around. They're really on the same team. You see this from the

Republicans who cheer on the globalists at Davos. There's a Republican congressman, Maria Salazar, who showed up to the World Economic Forum not to defend American national sovereignty, not to say that we won't eat the bugs and live in the pods, give away all our property to Klaus Schwab. No, she showed up there to demand dignity for illegal aliens in America. It's time for both parties to pay attention to something that for the last 35 years, either party has been able to do, which is to pass complete overhaul of the immigration system. Because not only we need those hands, like the Congress, like us, a senator was saying, but we need to also give dignity to those people who are in the country.

And those are the people that I represent. We're talking about 13, 15 million people who are, most of them Hispanics, I would say 85%, who speak my language, look like me and sound like me, that are contributing with the economy of this country and they live in the shadows. So it's time to seal the border, like she said, put order, let's see who comes in and who doesn't, and then turn around and give dignity. That doesn't mean path to citizenship.

That means to include them and make the dignified members of our community. Thank you. How does that not mean path to citizenship? In what way do the illegal aliens in America lack dignity that is not merely synonymous with citizenship or a pathway to citizenship. In what way? You're saying they're contributing to the economy. Okay, so they're getting jobs. It's not that they're being kept out of getting jobs. Like when the Irish came here and in New York, they put up signs Irish need not apply because there was a prejudice against the Irish.

That's not what's happening. Hispanics are getting a ton of jobs in America. That's why they keep coming. Is it they're not being allowed into restaurants? No, they're being allowed into any public accommodation they want. is it that they're not being addressed by the political class? No, the political class, not only the Democrats who are importing them by the millions every year, but the Republicans, like Maria Salazar, they can't stop babbling about the illegal aliens and how great they are. In fact, Maria Salazar said that she represents them. When did that happen? Maybe I'm a little bit thick, maybe I'm a little bit stupid. It's been a while since I took civics. I thought, though, that the members of Congress represented their constituents who voted for them, who voted in the elections, who are citizens,

who are members of that political community, that by definition, would exclude the foreign nationals who are illegally residing in our country, in contravention of the most basic laws of our country. And what does she say? She says, I represent them. She does. I'm sure she does. When these people tell you who they are, believe them, says, I represent the illegals. That's true. She doesn't represent you. She shows up to Davos. She pals around with all the libs. Yeah, she's got an R next to her name. Maybe she votes the right way. Look, we have a thin majority in the House of Representatives. I'll take what I can get so that Republicans can maintain control. But you think she represents you? You're crazy. She just told you she doesn't. She told you that she represents foreigners. And she represents them

before she represents you. If she represents you at all, she represents them first. And she goes, to their parties first, and she speaks on their fancy panels first, and she is dead set on giving them dignity. The World Economic Forum is dead set on taking away your dignity. And the best she can say is we need to give foreign criminals more dignity, more than we've already given them, which is quite a lot, more than we've already recognized, which is quite a lot. We'll wrap up my little W-E-F rant with a turn to another kind of squishy guy. But he's not as squish as a Republican who, is basically a Democrat. He's a Democrat who is largely a Republican. That would be Joe Manchin, who said that we got a real problem in our country here in the United States. He said this before a crowd

at the World Economic Forum. And you know what that problem is? A free press. The problem that we have is the open press system and basically all the platforms. So if you're able to have five platforms, social platforms, that you can basically personify the extremes, somebody who is extremely right or extremely left, and it seems like that as the majority speaking, they're not the majority, but they're basically driving everybody to make a decision. What side are you on? Are you on this side or this side? And in America, there's only one side, the American side. It's not the Republican side

or a Democrat. We should be coming together to solve the problems from a different angle. We should come together to solve the problems, but in order to solve the problems, you have to have a clear view of what you want to accomplish. And in order to do that, you have to pick a side, Joe. And so the kumbaya talk of, come on, man, let's not have any labels. You know who doesn't want us to have any labels? The globalist said, because they don't want us to have any power, because they don't want us to have any vision. They want to blind us. They actually want to

blind us to what's going on in society. They want us to wear glasses that will reduce our vision. And they brag about it on their website. And that's true of our physical vision and that's true of our political vision too. Come on. That's probably, that's our big problem as well. is the free press? First of all, we don't have a free press. The press is a total corporate sham that shills almost entirely for the lives, okay? That's our free press in this country. So, I mean, that's a bit of a problem. The problem is our press is too free. They allow the Republicans to say too much. Maybe not for long, though. Maybe not too long. Not for too long. If the World Economic Forum gets its way. I'm Michael Noles. That's the Michael

Nulls show. See tomorrow.