The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1410 - Supreme Court Allows Biden To Cut Open The Border

Episode Date: January 23, 2024

The Supreme Court stops Texas from trying to stop mass illegal immigration, Elon calls DEI “anti-semitic” at Auschwitz, and Nikki Haley plays the race card.   Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl   Ep.1410   - - -    DailyWire+:   Get 20% off your Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/433ytRY  Unlock your Bentkey 14 day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go   Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY     - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month at https://www.puretalkusa.com/landing/Knowles   Gravity Defyer - Get $30 off your order of $150 or more! Use promo code: MK30 at http://www.GDefy.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

The Supreme Court ruled 5'4 yesterday that President Biden can tear down barbed wire in Texas, put up and paid for by the state of Texas, to try to stop the historic invasion of cartel criminals and other foreign nationals invited and encouraged to enter Texas illegally by the Biden administration. Four of the court's conservatives voted to allow Texas to even somewhat slightly attempt to protect its territorial integrity, while Amy Barrett and John Roberts sided with Biden and the court liberals to tear down the meager 30 miles of wire. Texas had been erecting nothing, 30 miles of barbed wire to try to stop this unprecedented historic influx, multiples more than anything we've ever really seen in American history, and Border Patrol kept cutting it down.

So Texas takes Biden to court and the court rules 5'4. Nope, sorry, Texas. You're not even allowed to protect the territorial integrity of your own state from a mass influx of foreign nationals. And you know what? I'm not surprised. The libs hold all sorts of terrible, disordered, and deadly things dear. Abortion, weird sex stuff, racial discrimination, you go down the list. And the Supreme Court has struck some of that down. Sometimes we win on some of those. issues. But this issue was too much. Because more than any other issue, mass migration is sacrosanct to the liberal establishment. Because mass migration in the long run is how the liberals plan to win on all the other issues. Not just here, but all around the West. Wherever you look, Britain, Hungary, Italy, Germany, France, America especially, mass migration is deeply unpopular with voters. Not even just the right-wing Republicans, the conservatives, deeply unpopular with most voters. But so are the liberal elites and all their terrible policies.

So there's only one option for the liberals, the mass importation of new voters who are overwhelmingly statistically more likely to side with them. It's a cynical scheme, but the liberals in charge are dead set on it. and nothing as insignificant as the law or the Constitution or a conservative court majority is going to stop them. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show. Dana White, the head of UFC, just schooled a reporter on free speech with facts and logic.

And his answer is even better, I think, than perhaps Dana White knows, which we'll get to in just a little bit. First, though, on court decisions. got a really, really bad one yesterday. The court just totally squished. Amy Barrett in particular, and John Roberts, we always expect him to squish the Chief Justice. But in recent years, we have had some big court win. So it's not all doom and gloom. The biggest one, of course, is Dobbs.

The Dobbs decision which reverses Roe v. Wade, which saves who knows how many babies into the future. And President Biden, a supposed Catholic, supposedly a member of a religion that says that abortion is completely unacceptable, that it's not just a mere political matter, but that the right to life is the fundamental right on which all of the other rights depend. President Biden marked the occasion by whining and complaining and hoping that more babies will be killed in the future. He said, quote, 51 years ago today, Jack, some hairy-legged fella came down.

No, he didn't say that. He said 51 years ago today, the Supreme Court recognized a woman's constitutional right to make deeply personal decisions with her doctor. Decisions to murder her child. Free from the interference of politicians. Then, a year and a half ago, the court made the extreme decision to overturn Roe and take away a constitutional right. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

The best part of this statement, the best part of this anniversary of the Dobbs decision, is that now it feels like old news. That's my favorite part of it. Well, no, I guess my favorite part is all the babies who aren't being killed. But my second favorite part is how it feels like old news. Because when it happened, we were told in the lead up to that decision, we were told it's going to cause a civil war. You remember, in the lead up to it, the liberals tried to murder Supreme Court justices to stop the decision from coming out. They tried to kill these guys.

Alita, rather, had to go into hiding. A liberal traveled from California to Washington, D.C. to murder Brett Kavanaugh and started going up to his house. Okay, this was, we were told this was going to be the big. big issue. And then it happened. And then what? Everyone just kind of accepted it. And now lots and lots of babies are alive and will grow up to be adult human beings because of that decision. And the liberals who whine and say, but it's the law of the land. It's a constitutional right. I want to kill more babies. They seem more and more ridiculous. Because not only is their claim about the Constitution, not only is their claim about human life and the supposed right to murder

innocent people, not only is that absurd, but even just their historical legal arguments seem silly, because it's been a couple years now. And now it's not a constitutional right. For the vast majority of American history, no one has believed that killing a kid is a constitutional right. They didn't think it for most of our history until the early 1970s. Then we got confused for that a little under five decades. And now we're not confused. anymore, and that's that. This vindicates something that I mentioned on the show yesterday, which is this idea of the Lindy effect, the notion that the longer a non-perishable thing endures, the longer you can expect it to endure. So, you know, if a Broadway show has run for

six weeks, you can expect it to run for another six weeks. If a Broadway show has run for three years, you can expect it to run for another three years. Recently, Nassim Nicholas Talib, the writer, has articulated this. It comes from a mathematician, a fractalist named Benoit Mandelbrot. It actually goes back even further than that. Well, it's true in war. It's true in show business. It's true in New York Delis. And it seems rather true in law and jurisprudence. Because I was thinking about how long Roe endured. We got Roe has decided early 1970s. Then fast forward about 20 years and it's up for reconsidering. in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey. And what happens? Planned Parenthood v. Casey decides, another conservative

squished on the court, they decide that there is a right to abortion somewhere in the Constitution, even though they totally rewrite the justification for it that was given in Roe v. Wade. And then what happens? Roe endures for almost the same amount of time that it had previously endured for. It almost doubles. It goes a little bit over doubling, actually. And then it's up for consideration again, and it gets shot down in Dobbs. So the key here for conservatives is what we've got to do is just build up that inertia. What we've got to do is just make the Dobbs decision normal, just protect it at all costs. Because right now it's a little dangerous.

The Dobbs decision is kind of fresh, kind of new. The libs are still very motivated to overturn it. The way they're going to overturn it is they're going to put liberal justices on the court. The way they're going to get liberal justices on the court is they're going to keep Democrats in the presidency. So it is very, very important. If we want to protect Dobbs, if we want to protect innocent little babies, we need to get a Republican president in office soon. This is a weak conservative majority on the court, obviously. They just rubber-stamped Joe Biden's invasion by foreign nationals of the country to give him more voters.

So obviously it's a weak conservative majority, and it's only been a couple years here. Very easy to overturn that kind of a decision. So we've got to get the Republican president. and right now the Republican presidential primary is all but over. Tonight is the New Hampshire primary. We'll see what happens. There is still a chance. Nikki Haley pulls out of victory.

I wouldn't put my money on it. Even if she does, there's still no path to victory for her. So for all intents of purposes, Trump is the nominee. And I'm very pleased to see that he is now pivoting, even after this very rough, mean, brutal primary, he's pivoting to try to bring the party together and say very nice things about his most recently vanquished rival, Ron DeSantis. Before we begin, I'd like to take time to congratulate Ron DeSantis and, of course, a really terrific person who had gotten to know his wife, Casey, for having run a great campaign for president.

He did. He ran a really good campaign, I will tell you. It's not easy. They think it's easy doing this stuff, right? It's not easy. But as you know, he left the campaign trail today at 3 p.m. And in so doing, he was very gracious, and he endorsed me. So I appreciate it.

I appreciate that. And I also look forward to working with Ron and everybody else to defeat Crooked Joe Biden. We will have to get him out. We have to get him out. He's put our country at great peril, at great peril. So I just want to thank Ron and congratulate him on doing a very good job. It's a tough situation. it's a tough thing to do.

He just said, will I be using the name Ron DeSanthamonius? I said, that name is officially retired. Hold on a second. Wait, oh, you just heard for over a year that Rob DeSangtononius is a terrible governor and he's awful and he's the worst and he's, but now you're saying you like him and he's a terrific guy and he's done a good job. And then even jokes there at the end. He goes, that name, Ronda Sanctimonious, officially retired. It's done. It's going to drive

some people up a wall. It doesn't drive me up a wall. In fact, this is one of my favorite things about Trump. Because what this kind of a reaction disproves is one of what I think is the dumbest arguments against Trump, one of the dumbest lines of attack where people say, Donald Trump is totally undisciplined. He's just a ball of emotion. He takes everything personally. Everything we know about Trump shows the opposite to be true. Perhaps he's undisciplined in that he makes errant comments on Twitter back when he had a Twitter or something. But he's not an undisciplined campaigner. He's an extremely disciplined campaigner, actually. He sticks to his message, at least when he's talking about friend and foe, which some have called the fundamental

distinction in politics, he sticks to his message with extreme discipline. When you are opposing Trump, you are the worst person in the world, you are the devil on earth, he will bring the fires of hell, he will bring 10 times the power of the sun against you to destroy you. And then the moment that you flip over and you're on his team again, that's all done. He doesn't hold a grudge. You know the evidence of him not holding a grudge? Forget about even Governor DeSantis for a second. Go back to 2016. You think the Trump DeSantis primary was bad? Do you remember the Trump-Cruz primary? Cruz was the number two guy in 2016. It was a vicious, brutal primary between these two men. And Trump coined the term lion-ted, L-Y-I-N-A-A-Postrophe, lion-Tead. And it was just so, so nasty.

And then what happens? Senator Cruz drops out, votes for Trump. They work together very well. and Trump ends up campaigning for him. Here's what he says. Ted and I got along very well, very late into the campaign, and I said, don't worry about it. It's only a question of time. And then it became very nasty. And then it was over.

And when it was over, we've gotten along great. No, I like that. If you remember, he was the last one that we really had. I mean, I went very late into the campaign. We actually held a rally together late into the campaign. I said, We'll add, and it did, and then it got back. No, we're very close. We've done great on tax cuts.

We've done great on regulation cuts. Now, he's been really terrific. What is he beautiful, Ted? Beautiful, Ted. I call him Texas Day. No, now he's beautiful, Ted. Now he's Texas Ted. I know the people who hate Trump are going to say, well, this shows he doesn't believe anything or he doesn't. No, it doesn't show that. It shows that he knows how to campaign. It shows that he sees politics as a team sport.

It shows that he's going to be really, really tough. And maybe you think he's going to go over the top when he's campaigning. But, you know, I think that probably applies to every single politician, but that he's not going to take it personally. A politician who took it personally would take his ball and go home. A politician that takes it personally would still be talking about that terrible Ted Cruz. I hate that, that Cruz. And Ron DeSantis, he's mean and he said this mean thing about me.

A politician who doesn't take it personally who appears not to take really anything personally. He treats it like business. You know, it's just, it's Michael Corleone talking to Sunny. When Sunny says, what, you want to go kill a cop because he slapped you around a little, come on, you're going to get his blood on your Ivy League suit. Don't take it so personal. And Michael Corleone, he says,

it's strictly business. Politics is a contact sport, okay? It's a team sport. It's a contact sport. As I said from the beginning of this primary, these are all big, tough guys. They've all run plenty of races. None of them are little wallflowers, okay, and they ran a bruising primary. Trump won. And now the question is, can they come together? Can they not take it personally? Can they come together? Are they going to live up to what they've all been talking about, which is this is about party, this is about principle,

this is about doing good for the American people. Okay, well, in order to do that, you've got to put personal ego aside. Can, I don't know, it's a very difficult thing to do, especially when you're running a bruising primary. I know it's hard, but I love that Trump does it. And by the way, the minute DeSantis attacks him again, he's going to be back to attacking DeSantis, and then the minute DeSantis is nice to him again, he's going to be nice to DeSantis. And the same thing's going to be true of Haley. Same thing is going to be true of Chris Christie, I bet, okay? It's going to be true of everybody. And from my vantage, where I don't particularly care about the personal lives of these people, and I don't care about their personal emotions at any given point, I just want

good victories for a conservative vision of America so we have a good country again. That is fine by me. Don't take it personal. Keep it business. Let's go out and win. We got to talk about this, okay? And when you want to talk, you got to check out Pure Talk. Right now go to Peartotoc.com slash Knowles.

My friends over at Pure Talk are beating today's inflation and making it easier than ever to connect with the most important people in your life. Peer Talk gives you phenomenal coverage on America's most dependable 5G network. It's the same coverage you know and love but for half the price of the other guys. With unlimited plans starting at just $20 a month, the average family saves almost $1,000 a year. Could you use $1,000 a year? I think we all could. As a veteran-owned company, last year alone, they raised $10 million toward veterans' debt.

What's more, Pure Talk's customer service team is located right here in the U.S. and can help you make the switch in as little as 10 minutes. I've spent a fair bit of time with these guys. I have a Pure Talk phone. I use Pure Talk, and it's great. It's the best network out there. You can take it internationally now, which is really great. Not that everyone's traveling internationally all the time, but it's just a full, amazing cell service,

and you're just saving so much money. And these guys are on the right team, and they're doing good stuff, and you should head on over right now at Peartotalk.com.com slash Knowles. Make the switch. Right now, our viewers save an additional 50% off your first month. Peartalk.com slash Knowles, Canada, W-L-E-S today. Obviously, very, very tough race for Trump ahead. Some Florida Republicans are suggesting that we cover that, not we, I'm not a Florida resident, that the Florida taxpayer cover President Trump's legal bills with taxpayer funds.

This proposal was filed by Senator Ileana Garcia in Miami. It doesn't specifically name Trump this bill, but the bill says that legal fees incurred as a result of criminal charges brought by a U.S. public entity on qualified persons who have been subject to political discrimination would be covered by state. funds. So obviously this is about Trump. Trump is covered here. DeSantis has come out and said, I'm going to veto this if this makes it to my desk. We are not spending taxpayer money to cover Donald Trump's legal fees. I actually think they're both right in this instance. I side with the state senator on the general thrust of the legislation, and I agree with Governor DeSantis that the Florida

taxpayer should not be on the hook for this. I think this should be paid for by the federal government. this should be paid for by the taxpayer because it's not going to be. Now, not what rent cent is going to come out of a taxpayer here. Okay. President Trump's legal fees. We've never seen anything like this in America. They are throwing everything they can to destroy this man. His legal fees amount to, according to him, about $100 million right now.

In 2022, according to the government accountability office, the U.S. government wasted $247 billion dollars just in improper payments. I'm not saying they wasted it on some stupid study, you know, like lesbian obesity in seahorses or something. I mean, just in payments the government should not have made that they did make for no reason whatsoever. They spent $247 billion. Trump's legal fees are $100 million. So you divide that number in half, then you go an order of magnitude lower and you'd still have a lot of change left over. But this should be paid for by the government. It wouldn't be paid for by the taxpayer, but it would be paid for by the government. Truly, you could cut just even a tiny sliver of a sliver of an iota way you should cover this

at two seconds. It should be covered by the government because otherwise you're creating an incentive for the ruling party to persecute the leader of the opposition, to prosecute specifically, but then at a broader level, to persecute, to try to destroy, to bury in legal fees, the leader of the opposition. And that's bad for both parties and that's bad for the citizens. If the ruling class can just destroy all opposition by burying them in legal fees when they're not running against a billionaire or a former billionaire, I don't even, I don't, I can't imagine Trump even has a billion dollars anymore. They've taken his money away. That's a very bad situation. You want to talk about a threat to American democracy. That's a major threat to American

democracy. It has such a chilling effect over anyone who wouldn't want to run, certainly, who wouldn't even want to work in an administration where the ruling liberal establishment afterward will prosecute you, throw you in jail, or take away all your money. So I think it would be a very, very good thing for the federal government to be accountable here and say, no, you know, if you're going to try to behave like some tin pot dictatorship or some, you know, Stalin-esque totalitarian state, then you're going to have to pay for it at least. You're going to at least have to pay the legal fees for it. Absolutely. These legal battles are really not about Trump. You want to talk about not making this

personal. It's not about Trump. What are they over? Because Trump made a phone call to the Secretary of State of Georgia because Trump handled documents in a similar way to every other president in recent memory, including Joe Biden. Trump less egregiously mishandled classified documents than Joe Biden did? Because Trump, what, because some gossip columnist says she met him in a Bergdorf Goodman 30 years ago and ravished her. And she spoke sort of glowingly about this for a while. And she's obviously pretty kooky. And then now you're going to get it. Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Got to hold the government accountable for that stuff. Now, speaking of a system being turned against normal people, Elon Musk was over in Poland.

yesterday with a friend of mine. There's a fella I know by the name of Ben Shapiro. They were over there touring Auschwitz and then afterward they had a conversation and Elon made the claim that DEI is anti-Semitic. The diversity and actually inclusion, we should always be, always be wary of any name that sounds like a good come out of a George Orwell book. That's never a good sign. And because it sounds like, sure, diversity, equity, inclusion, these all sound like nice words. But what really means is discrimination on the basis of race, sex, and sexual orientation, and it's against merit. And thus, I think, is fundamentally anti-Semitic. Fundamentally anti-Semitic.

Some people saw that as a non-sequitur. I do not. I think Elon is totally right here. but the implications of this go far, far beyond anti-Semitism or the Jewish people, which we'll get to in one second. First, though, you're going to talk about your feet and your shoes and your health. You got to check out Gravity Defyre. Right now go to GDefi.com promo code MK30.

Good footwear is about more than fashion. What you wear on your feet matters to your health, your comfort, your well-being, Choosing footwear that provides support for your daily routine is important and now easier than ever, thanks to G-Defi shoes. G-Dify shoes are anything but ordinary. While others have clung to shoes featuring a run-of-the-mill memory foam soul, bleh. G-Difai offers a patented sole construction meticulously designed to bring the pep back in your step.

G-Dify shoes aim to foster healthy movement, alleviate pain, and prevent further wear and tear. This is not just about absorbing shock, but don't just take my word for it. explore the multitude of reviews and testimonials from individuals who attest to the miracles and the impact of G-Dify shoes on their lives available on G-D-D-Fy's website and social media platforms. Your feet deserve more than just another pair of shoes, okay? And right now, using my code M-K-30, you will get $30 off orders of $150 or more at G-D-D-D-F-Y.com, with promo code M-K-K-30 for $30 off your purchase of $150 or $150.

or more. Experience the miracle that is G-Defi, your feet will thank me. You will have health and comfort and fashion on top of it. G-Dify, where comfort meets innovation. Friends, Valentine's Day is coming up. Jeremy's has the perfect gift to surprise your better half. Whether you're shopping for him or her, Jeremy's has a bundle for everyone, from delicious chocolate to smooth razors to the iconic leftist-years Tumblr. To celebrate, Jeremy's is offering a deal you will love. Get a 20% discount on all Valentine's Day bundles. That's right. 20% off.

But you have to act fast because this offer is only here for a limited time. Go to jeremy's raisers.com right now order your Valentine's Day bundle before they are gone. Jeremy's Valentine's Day sale, the best way to treat your Valentine and yourself. Elon says diversity, equity, and inclusion, D-EI, is anti-Semitic. totally agree totally agree with that it is because the Jews have done

very well the Jews perform very well they succeed at very high levels you could be the most Jew-hating anti-Semite in the world you have to admit they've been pretty successful

over the millennia haven't they if you're a Christian surely you would say the Jews are obviously a gifted people what other people could bring forth the Virgin Mary what other people would bring forth our Lord and Savior, the Lord and Savior, the Lord of Lord and King of Kings, Master of the Universe.

No other people. And even if you're less religiously inclined, you look and you see the Jews do very well in all these industries, they score very well on IQ tests, right? So DEI, which says that we need to factor in other things. We need to prioritize other things than merit and work and success and IQ and blah, blah, blah, that's going to be effectively anti-Semitic. You saw this in university admissions in the U.S. 100 years ago. There were Jewish quotas because the Jews were getting into the schools too much. But you wouldn't say that DEI is just anti-Semitic. You would say it's also anti-Asian, because Asians share a lot of those attributes as well.

Certainly, in affirmative action, you would say that that's anti-Asian. We just had a major court case about this, that the schools say, oh, Yeah, you've done very well on your SAT. You've scored very well. You're the valedictorian. Yeah, but you're Asian. So sorry, we're going to give your spot in a university to someone of a more privileged race than you are. Ironically, we're going to say they're a less privileged race. So we're going to give them a special privilege and they're going to take your spot. Sorry. So you'd say it's anti-Asian. You could make all of those claims. The one thing you can't say is that it's anti-white. That's the weird part. Because white people also do pretty well. You know, historically, they've done pretty well on the statistics and they score well on the tests and everything. But you're not allowed to say that DEI is anti-white. That's not one of the reasons for which you can criticize it. Anti-Semitic, that's okay. Anti-Asian, that's okay. Anti-white, not so much. It's even deeper than that. It's not only that you can't do anything about these policies that explicitly discriminate against white people because they are white in hiring, in university admissions,

in promotions, in everything. You can't even talk about it. You can't even mention it unless you are willing to suffer social consequences for it, unless you work for a company that lets you speak your opinion. I work for a conservative company. My job is to state my opinion, and I have accepted the fact that I will incur social ostracization and all sorts of calumny in the press for stating simple truths. I have accepted that. And so in my job, I'm allowed to at least point out that these policies explicitly and intentionally discriminate against white people. But if you're a middle manager at some company, you can't really say that. You could lose your job. If you're at a university and you're just trying to get a good grade and graduate, you can't really say that too openly

or you will be discriminated against. If you work for the government, oh my goodness. If you work for a university and you ever said that, you would lose your job in two seconds. That is a major political problem. I agree. I just think Elon is scratching the surface here. When he says, yeah, DEI is anti-Semitic.

It totally is. And that is one of the reasons to oppose it. And these sorts of policies are anti-Asian. Yeah, that's true. That's another reason to oppose it. and it's anti-white. I consider that a pretty big reason to oppose it. And we have a political climate right now where you're not even allowed to mention that. It is so not only legally acceptable to discriminate against white people, but socially encouraged to malign white people all

the time that if you ever speak up and say, hey, maybe we shouldn't, you know, like legally discriminate against them. You'll be called a Nazi for that. That is actually a deeper political problem than the direct effects of any of these DEI policies. Say yes and, Elon, yes and, but it's so much worse than all that. Now, speaking of racial politics, Nikki Haley, theoretically the last Republican other than Donald Trump in the primary, in the lead up to New Hampshire on NBC News, has played the race card. We were the only Indian family in our small southern town. I was teased every day for being brown.

So anyone that wants to question it can go back and look at what I've said on how hard it was to grow up in the deep south as a brown girl. Anybody can look at my record and see when Walter Scott was shot down by a dirty cop, how I made sure that the Walter Scott family didn't suffer because we put the first body camera bill in the country in place. Anybody can look at the fact that when we had nine amazing souls dying Mother Emmanuel Church, I did something that no Republican or Democrat ever wanted to touch, which was called for the Confederate flag to come down because it would take two-thirds of the House and Senate and was an impossible feat. I don't know what you're implying with that, but what I will tell you is saying that I had black friends,

is a source of pride, saying that I had white friends as a source of pride. You know I really like Nikki Haley personally, and I like a lot of the candidates in this race, and all of the candidates at some point will say something that's a little hyperbolic or that I don't quite believe, and I've got to tell you, I'm a little skeptical that Ambassador Haley was bullied every single day of her life as a child for being brown. And the reason I'm a little skeptical is, had she not told me,

I would not know that Nikki Haley was brown. She's very light-skinned. Her parents are Indian. They're Punjabi, so that's northern India where there are a lot of people who are very light-skinned. And I'm not even saying

that no one ever made a comment about it when she was a kid. Probably someone did at some point. Maybe that someone figured it out. But every day she was bullied for being brown. I'm a little skeptical. Why is Ambassador Haley saying this?

I suspect she's saying this because she's doing an interview on NBC, and they're accusing her of being a racist like they do to every single Republican. And this is her natural reaction. And this is the natural reaction of many, many Republicans. Nikki Haley is far from alone in this kind of a response. But I think this kind of response is ill-advised, because what this response amounts to is accepting the leftist framing. Nikki Haley, are you racist? I'm not racist. I'm oppressed. I hear this all the time.

One time I was in Washington, D.C., and the black Hebrew Israelites were on the street, they're the ones who scream out, and they say, white people are the devil, and they're disgusting, and they're demons, and they're, you know, the ice people and whatever. They have all these crazy racial theories, and they yell mean things at women and all this stuff. And so I was standing in line at a coffee shop afterward. There was a gal in front of me, this little white gal wearing a North Face jacket. And she goes, oh, did you hear those people out there? Oh, yeah, yeah. Did you, could you believe they called me a white devil and an awful woman and everything? And I told them, this is crazy. I'm a woman. I'm oppressed too.

And I couldn't, I just turned away from her when I heard that. I thought, lady, you took, you've taken exactly the wrong lesson from this. You're trying to play a game that you will certainly lose. First of all, young, affluent white girl in a North Face in Washington, D.C. you're not oppressed, okay, at all, at all. By historical standards, you are the least oppressed human being that has ever existed ever. We're all oppressed by sin and the fallenness of this world, but you in particular, uh-uh. But a lot of people think, well, look, that's just, that's just the culture right now is just this, it's this race hustling oppression Olympics, and I've got to play it

or I'll be totally cast out. So, no, no, I'm actually oppressed somehow. There are men today. I'm not, I actually remember this starting when I was in college. There are straight guys who will call themselves non-heterosexual. They'll call themselves queer. They could be dating women. They could be, they've never done anything weird, never even tap danced, okay?

And they'll say, I'm non-heterosexual or I'm queer because they just need a struggle. You know, if you're a rich, successful white guy, you need some kind of a struggle in in this oppression Olympics. I just think it's going to make you lose from the beginning. If Nikki Haley wins by accepting and framing that the South is evil and white people oppress the brown people and it's, you know, this is a systemically racist country. I'm not saying she's going to go that far, but that's what she's leaning in toward in this kind of an answer. If she does that, then even if she wins, she lost. You know, if we as Republicans do this, then any victory will be a Pyric victory because we will only have won by embracing all of the left's premises.

This is what happens when the libs, or when the conservatives, rather, they tout how, you know, we have conservative transgender activists. You know, you don't, listen, I, if you're a transgender activist, you don't need to be with those liberals, you can vote with us. Well, not really, right? you know, like we, if you think a man can become a woman, then you're, you're not really conservative at all. No, no, but they support low taxes too. Okay, well, you know, life's about more than low taxes, guys. If we just embrace all of the left's fundamental points, then we just

surrender. And even if we're in office, we're just kind of like zombies, just doing the bidding of the left, totally infiltrated by the left possessing our minds. Don't do that. Not a good stuff. Now, speaking of people who have been attacked for being brown, and I've seen it and heard it, Senator Tim Scott has just announced some happy news. He is getting married. Senator Scott is, you know, a little bit older. He's 58 years old. And then he thought he would remain a bachelor. He's obviously a very busy guy. He's a politician. Politicians don't always have time for a family. But he just proposed to his girlfriend, Mindy. He said, She said yes, Mindy, thank you for making me the luckiest man in the world.

He who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the Lord. That's from Proverbs chapter 18, verse 22. As Senator Scott tweeted out, it was great for him. He's 58. She's 47, though a lady never tells. So obviously this is a later in life marriage, but wonderful. I think it's terrific. And I wish the many, many years of happiness.

And I've had the pleasure of meeting Senator Scott on a couple occasions. And he's a really terrific guy. So I think that's all great. But there is a little voice inside me. A little voice of that political cynic crying out inside me that makes me wonder, hold on a second here. Is Senator Scott in the running to be Trump's VP? Because not everyone is called to marriage. Senator Scott made it 58 years without getting married.

And if you make it to 58 without getting married, you probably could go the rest of your life without getting married. He's getting married now just after he drops out of the presidential race, before the nominee who he's endorsed picks a running mate. Even today in our very loosey-goosey culture, I think you probably have to be married to be a vice presidential contender. Haven't had all that many bachelors in American history serve as president. Is this sending signals about who Trump is going to pick? We know that Senator Scott is in contention for it. I don't know. And maybe, I'm not saying it's totally cynical and they're just getting married as a political

arrangement or something. They might love each other very much, and I think it's good to get married, so it's all wonderful. But if there already was chatter on the veep stakes about Senator Scott, I think the chatter has increased in volume. My favorite comment yesterday is from Austen C, who says, if you're going to eat pork, do it until your mouth drips. Winston Churchill. So true. I am what I am, and that's all that I am, Winston Churchill. That's all. That's all. folks, Winston Churchill. Every quotation is Winston Churchill. People who quote Churchill with things that he's never said in casual conversation, one usually lets it go. But if you are a speechwriter, especially a speechwriter for presidential campaign, no, that's not good. You've got to watch out

for that, guys. Come on. Not a great look. I'm just saying it just popped into my mind. Nothing in particular that I'm trying to call out. Speaking of women, and politics. A trans-identifying golfer, a fella who identifies as a woman, is complaining now that women don't want to compete against him. Of all the shots she has hit over the years, Haley Davidson never expected to find herself at the center of a political storm around transgender athletes competing against women in elite sport. For a lot of people, because you were born a man, you clearly have an advantage. Do you accept that?

Honestly, I 100% agree. You know, the men do have advantages. You know, say you get a trans person on hormones for a year, no surgery, nothing. Of course, for the most part, yeah, they're going to have an advantage. I don't believe trans people should be banned from sports, but I do believe there need to be guidelines in effect. Why do you think people have such a big problem with you competing in women's golf in particular? I don't understand that.

I don't get what the fear of me, one person is doing. The 31-year-old, who was the first male-born golfer to win a professional women's event, is speaking out. I think that's why. I think what an amazing brain arrest. What an amazing bit of cognitive dissonance there. He says, yeah, men obviously have an advantage. And so, you know, if you haven't done all that much and, you know, you're kind of, you just started your hormones. You're just, yeah, obviously, you've got a huge advantage because you're a dude.

Why do you think women don't want to compete against you? Oh, I have no idea. Me, this hulking dude sitting here, a man much larger than my male interviewer here, just a giant among men and women. Yeah, I have no idea why women would be upset against competing against me. So in so, transvestite golfer was the first fella to be. the women in golf. Oh, well, I think that explains it. The first part explained it and the second part explained it, and that's why. That's why. I'm not a huge golfer, but when I, when I've golfed, I've noticed that the teas for the men are further back than where you put your tea if you're a

woman, because the men are much stronger, which is why they beat the women in the sports. By the way, this guy is not the first guy to beat women in golf. Any man who has ever golfed against a woman has beaten a woman at golf. This guy is just the first guy to do it while calling himself a woman doing it in a professional competition. His answer was pretty good, actually.

His answer was pretty honest at first when he said, look, yeah, men obviously have advantages. But where he lost it is he tried to distinguish himself in his experience from the other undeserving trans-identifying people, where he says, well, sure, if you've only been on the hormones for a little bit of time and you haven't chopped off some of your organs or the right

organs or what, yeah, then it's unfair. But for me, I'm a woman. He probably really believes it. That guy can hulk over the male interviewer. But in his mind, because he has a form of body dysmorphia, he really thinks he's a woman. He thinks there's no difference between him and some actual woman. So he has a form of mental illness. I don't really blame him.

So I blame him to some degree in as much as his own behaviors might have fed into this delusion. But I mostly blame society for allowing this guy to do it when he's obviously not in his right faculties. 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 home. Oh, 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. What he's getting at here is something that's actually deeply American. And in small doses, it's good for Americans, but in large doses taken to an extreme, it's really bad. Which is this notion that in America, you can be whatever you want to be. That's true. You could be a poor immigrant who comes over here with not two pennies to rub together, and you can become a titan of industry. It's happened.

You can come over here. You can have nothing. You can come from some slum somewhere. You can rise up to the heights of prestige and power and influence. You can. It's amazing. Basically nowhere else on earth can that happen. Or it's rare, at least, in other places.

Here it can happen. But you can't be anything. if you're a man, you can't be a woman. There's no amount of effort that you can put in. There's no amount of money you can spend. There's no amount of determination you can exhibit that will ever make you a woman. There is simply a natural limitation on you. And you have to accept that.

Or you'll go completely insane. The extreme version of the American ideology is one that does not respect limits. It's good to have ambition and to push yourself and to recognize that you can do a lot. That's good. That's the wonderful side of the American ideology. The bad side is when you think that you're God. The bad side is when you think you have no limits whatsoever. That's crazy. And that will lead to a great deal of confusion as it has with this guy.

There are just some things you cannot change. And you can accept that in a spirit of resignation. and you can excel in accordance with reality, which will lead to genuine human flourishing, or you can run up against a wall and make yourself look ridiculous and fail at that and despair because of your failure. Choice is yours, I guess, in America.

You can do whatever you want in that regard, but there is clearly a better choice than the other. Now, speaking of tough love, Dana White, head of UFC, comes out, And he destroys a reporter. He didn't hold a press briefing. He held a press beating for some reporter who questioned what sort of things UFC fighters can and cannot say. You obviously give a long leash to your fighters about, you know, what they can say when they are up there with a UFC microphone and you are getting into territory of homophobia, transphobia.

Like, is there? I don't give anybody a leash. Well, I'm saying you. A leash? Free speech. Control what people say? Going to tell people what to believe? Going to tell people?

I don't tell any other human being what to say, what to think, and there's no leashes on any of them. What is your question? I was asking that question. I'll move on, though. Yeah, probably a good idea. That's ridiculous to say I give somebody a leash. Free speech, brother. People can say whatever they want and they can believe,

whatever they want. Good answer. Though, it's a good answer. He destroyed this reporter. Though, in the reporter's defense, do we really think Dana White would be totally fine with his fighters saying anything or saying anything from a UFC platform? You know, if his fighters came out and said, we need to trans all the kids. We need to go and trans all the kids behind their parents' backs, and, you know, he came out and he was wearing a big rainbow leotard. Well, he said, do you think Dana White would be totally fine with that? What if, take the weird sex stuff out of it, what if a UFC fighter came out and said, we need to support ISIS, we need death to America, we need to support all of the terrorist regimes around the world, and we would

be much, much better off. Forget about that even. Do you think Dana White would support it if some UFC fighter came out? He said, black people, they're the worst people in the world. We should kill them all. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. That's what I'm going to do. I think. I'm going to do you think. I I said at my UFC press conference? No, I don't think so. I think Dana White would probably have a problem with all of those things, rightly so. But Dana White doesn't need to worry about his fighters doing that. Because Dana White has cultivated a stable and unified culture at UFC. Everyone is broadly on the same page. They might disagree on this issue or that issue on this thing or that thing. But they all share basic premises. They got a same basic attitude. They all work together and

fight together. They all seem to get along together pretty well. That's why it works. That is why Dana White is able to afford his employees so much freedom of speech because it's true freedom. These are very disciplined guys. If you're fighting in the UFC, you are a very disciplined person. You work very hard. You know how to control yourself. You understand how to respect limits that are imposed by you on yourself. That is how American free speech worked for most of our history. The reason it broke down is because of the breakdown of the breakdown of the limits, ironically. It's not that we just started imposing limits all of a sudden. It's because of the breakdown of those self-imposed limits. There will be order, okay?

There will be some kind of cohesion. It'll either be something cultivated and habituated from within or it will be imposed from without with a very heavy hand. But there will be order. Okay, that's our show. It's Trans Tuesday, baby. The rest of the show continues. Now, you don't want to miss it. Become a member Use Code Knowles at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.