The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1438 - The FBI Arrests Blaze Reporter Over “January Sixth” Reporting

Episode Date: March 4, 2024

The FBI arrests a conservative reporter over “January Sixth” reporting, Google is desperately trying to fix  their AI bot's leftism, and the Biden White House coins a new euphemism for illegal aliens.   Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl   Ep.1438   - - -    DailyWire+:   Get your Jeremy’s Chocolate here: https://bit.ly/45uzeWf   Unlock your Bentkey 14-day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go    Get your Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY    - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   PureTalk - Get a FREE Samsung 5G smartphone at https://www.puretalkusa.com/Knowles     Balance of Nature - Get 35% OFF Your Preferred Order + Free Fiber & Spice. Use promo code KNOWLES at checkout: https://www.balanceofnature.com/   Food For The Poor - Donate Today! Text ‘knowles’ to 51555 or visit https://www.foodforthepoor.org/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

How many discounts does USAA auto insurance offer? Too many to say here. Multi-vehicle discount. Safe driver discount. New vehicle discount. Storage discount. How many discounts will you stack up? Tap the banner or visit usa.com slash auto discounts. Restrictions apply. A conservative journalist has been arrested by the FBI for reporting on January 6th. The journalist is Steve Baker of the Blaze, and not only was he arrested, he was perpwalked, even after turning himself into authorities. The FBI's actions are particularly strange,

since, according to Steve Baker, his lawyers were assured by the government that it would be an in-and-out affair and that they had no intention of detaining him. According to Mr. Baker, the FBI went so far as to tell him to arrive in shorts and sandals. That's how casual it was all going to be.

But since we all know how the FBI has been corrupted to target conservatives in recent years, Steve had the good sense to distrust the feds and to wear a suit and tie, which was wise since the feds instead gave him the personal humiliation treatment. None of this should be a surprise to conservatives who might remember how the FBI spied on Fox News as James Rosen during the Obama administration, even going so far as to describe James as a criminal co-conspirator despite never charging him with a crime, or how the Obama administration spied on Cheryl Atkinson of CBS, alleged.

as she was reporting on the Fast and Furious scandal. The irony of it all is that despite the Lib's constant bleeding over threats to the free press and all the serious attacks on the press in recent memory have been against conservative journalists who dared to shed light on the misdeeds of the liberal establishment. Just as all actual threats to the Constitution in recent years, in recent decades actually, have been attacks by that same liberal establishment, which understands better than conservative, that the true lowercase C constitution that governs us

is rather different from the capital C constitution we all learned about in school. According to the capital C constitution, we have a free press. Under our actual constitution, conservative journalists who contradict the party line get perp-walked for doing their job. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show.

A Democrat state senator in Kentucky, Karen Berg, has just argued that child sex dolls might be a great way to deal with pedophiles. Rather than restrict that child sex dolls, we should maybe even encourage them. We'll get to that interesting line of argumentation in a moment. First, though, go to puretalk.com slash knolls. Free ought to mean exactly that. Free, if you ask me. When you switch to Pure Talk today, you will get a free Samsung 5G smartphone.

There is no four-line requirement. There's no activation fee. Qualifying plans start at just 35. bucks a month for unlimited talk text and 15 gigs of data plus mobile hotspot. Pure 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. Plus, with Pure Talk, you know you're spending your hard-earned money with a company that aligns with your beliefs. Let Pure Talk's expert U.S. customer service team help you make the switch today.

Go to Peartotoc.com slash Knowles, KennaWLAS, to claim eligibility for your free brand-new Samsung 5G smartphone and start saving on wireless today. Go to PureTalk.com slash Knowles, KnaW-L-E-S, to switch to my cell phone company. I don't own the cell phone company, but I do own the phone and the service, and it's phenomenal. Really, really, the top-tier quality service.

You can even use it outside the country now, and people who align with your beliefs, puretok.com slash Knowles. You want to talk about our real constitution, the lower-case C constitution, that makes up how we actually live our lives? Google is finally responding to the outcry after its new AI tool, Google Gemini, erased white people from history. Remember that? There were other AI bots, but the Google AI bot Gemini uniquely decided to write white people and specifically white men out of history, out of professions, out of everything, out of life.

And people made fun of this. Elon Musk said it was completely ridiculous. He called a lot of attention to it. and Google scrambled. They sort of took part of it offline. They said, okay, we've got to work to fix this now. According to Bloomberg, who have sources familiar with the matter, Google is desperately implementing technical fixes in Gemini to reduce racial and gender bias against white people and men in its outputs, but failed to fully anticipate how the image generator could misfire in certain contexts.

This is so fake. this is such a lie from Google and whatever sources here are speaking to Bloomberg. Nothing about Google Gemini was a misfire. Nothing about Google Gemini was a mistake. None of this should have taken anyone by surprise. This is what Google Gemini was built to do. The head of Google Gemini is this guy, Jack Krausik. I can't, I'm not pronouncing his name correctly, but it's some Eastern European pronunciation.

This guy is the Gemini Experiences Senior Director of Product Management. Here's just a little handful of this guy's tweets compiled by leftism for you. And even Elon, I think, posted one of these. Jack Craw, the guy from Gemini. White privilege is effing real. Don't be an a-hole and act guilty about it. Do your part in recognizing bias at all levels of egregious. Now, you might say, okay, Michael, are you just pulling tweets from 10, 15 years ago?

Maybe this doesn't represent what this guy thinks right now. No, this is from 2018. Here's another one. It's been a few hours, and it still feels like today's inauguration speech will go down as one of the greatest ever. Acknowledging systemic racism, reiterating the American ideal as a dream for the world, but we've got to work on it. America's back. Okay, that was 2020. There was just four years ago.

This is America where racism is the number one value our populace seeks to uphold above all. I don't mind paying more taxes and investing in overcoming systemic racism. At one point he says, Jesus only cares about white kids. I'm pretty sure that's in the Bible. Let's confirm with Jeff Sessions. So alternately blasphemous, and I guess he's really just making a point about

conservatives like Jeff Sessions. I've experienced none of these things being a white man in America. We obviously have egregious racism in this country. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Then Elon pulled one. This is from October 21st, 2020. This is the head of the Google AI. I've been crying in intermittent bursts for the past 24 hours since casting my ballot, filling in that Biden-Harris line felt cathartic.

Okay, I mentioned this line on Thursday or Friday, maybe both last week, and you know, I hate to say I told you so. It wasn't that I pulled out my Nolstradamus Crystal Bowl, but it just was proven correct within three days, which is personnel is policy. We, especially conservatives, we have too much trust. and confidence in documents. We have too much trust and confidence in the way things used to be, in the way institutions used to be run according to the bylaws and all the little statutes. And all of that without people to actually implement them correctly, all of that's worth nothing. Okay. The real constitution that governs us is the way that we all act and behave, the way the laws are actually applied and enforced. And that comes down to people.

when Google hires a bunch of crazy leftists, the inevitable result of that will be crazy leftism in the product. Period. Punta, end of discussion. So you hire this wacky guy and then you get this wacky bot that hates white people and hates men and probably hates America. And then Google says, oh, no, we've got to fix this. You shouldn't have to fix anything. The bot is doing exactly what it was designed to do. You want to fix it? Fire all these people. But you're not going to do that, so the thing's not going to get fixed. So why are we even pretending? You want to talk about things doing what they were designed to do and radical leftism. Do you know how much money Transheiser Bush lost in that boycott over Dylan Mulvaney and the embrace of transgenderism? The numbers are in. It's been almost exactly one year. Transheiser Bush lost $1.4 billion over the Dylan Mulvaney sponsorship. That is according to the parent company, obviously, but it was driven primarily by Bud Light. according to the latest report, the fourth quarter transizer bush report, revenue declined by 17.3% with sales to retailers down by 12.1% primarily due to the volume decline of bud light. Sales to wholesalers, STWs, declined by 16.1% as shipments lagged stronger depletions in December. Okay. So they got absolutely destroyed over a billion, almost a billion and a half dollars. in revenue declining because conservatives said, no, we're not going to buy your pro trans beer. This is a bridge too far. You're insulting your customer base. You're upending basic norms.

You're denying biological reality in the natural law. No thanks. We're out. We'll go drink Modello or something. That's good. And now you're hearing some conservative voices who have received huge payouts from Transizer Bush trying to say that we need to end the boycott. I'm fine in principle with ending the boycott at some point. The point of a boycott, the point of all political action is to cause some political consequence to take place. So the only way that you're going to incentivize that political consequence that you want is to have a stick and a carrot. The stick is, we're going to stop buying your product.

The carrot is we might start buying your product again if you get back in line. So you need both of those things. And that's why in principle, I have no problem ending the boycott. Once they apologize, they have to apologize. And I know that there are a number of very prominent conservatives. Some people who even helped to lead the boycott of Transizer Bush, they've come out and said, okay, go buy Transizer Bush again, because they all got fat paychecks bribes from Transizer Bush to get all of the conservatives to end the boycott.

Well, I'm glad that they got their bag. I'm glad that they're counting fat stacks from the Transizer Bush Corporation. But that's not going to work for us. It doesn't work for me. I didn't get paid off by Transizer Bush. I frankly, it depends. I don't know. They offer me $100 million or something.

Maybe I'd consider, you know, having a sip or two of Bud Light every now and again. But even then, I don't know that I would, I wouldn't be inclined to take it in principle because they didn't admit any wrongdoing, really. They need to admit they were wrong. Okay. And certainly, if they're just going to bribe a handful of conservative celebrities and then leave the rest of us out to dry, we have absolutely no incentive whatsoever to go back and embrace Trans-Hiser Bush and Bud Light. Uh-uh. Ain't going to happen. They need to come out and

apologize and say, we are sorry that we embraced transgenderism. We won't do it again. It was wrong of us to do. You know, frankly, what I want them to do? I want Bud Light to post my 2023 CPAC speech. I want, that's where I would like this to go. I want this to be so clear. They say for the good of society, especially for the good of the poor people who have fallen prey to this confusion, transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely, the whole preposterous ideology at every level. That's what I want. At that point, I'll buy Bud Light again, okay? But if all you're going to do is bribe a handful of already wealthy, famous conservatives, uh-uh, ain't going to work. What's the point of that? We've shown that the boycott can work. So take it all the way. Don't, you know, don't cave at

at 97% towards your political goal. Be crazy. Speaking of boycotts, we have a new, new couple of companies we need to boycott. Very, very sad story. The two biggest pharmacy retailers in the United States, CVS and Walgreens, have just announced that they will start selling the abortion pill. I'm not talking about the birth control pill. Not talking about contraception. I'm not even talking about Plan B, which is an abortive fashion drug. I'm talking about Mitha Prostone. I'm talking about the abortion drug that is now used in... most abortions in the United States where women ingest poison and it poisons the baby and it causes them to, it causes the baby to die and then they miscarry and they, they don't have to raise a baby.

Or give the baby up for adoption or anything else. Just kills the baby. Okay. Why are they doing this? They're doing this because the culture has moved radically pro-abortion. What are we going to do about it? Well, I don't know. it's going to be very tough because between CVS and Walgreens,

you're talking about 19,000 retail locations. They're the two biggest ones in the country. So it doesn't mean that there are no alternatives. There are alternatives. But conservatives will have to be very specific about the alternatives they use. So there's Walmart. Walmart's not selling the abortion drug. Right Aid, not selling the abortion drug.

Kroger, major grocery store. Albertson's major grocery store. Amerioresburgin, Publix, another major grocery store. McKesson. and Costco. Costco, another major store. If you add up all of those retailers together, you get about 16,000 stores. 16,000 stores is still less than, though it's getting closer to, just the two chains, CVS and Walgreens. Now, CVS and Walgreens are not introducing the abortion drug in every one of their stores. They're doing it just in select locations. So they know this is

controversial. They know people might not like this. There is still a decent chance that they could reverse this policy. The only way for that to happen is for there to be a concerted, pro-life, conservative boycott of CBS and Walgreens. Very, very difficult. It's easy to launch a successful boycott when we're talking about the most ridiculous issue in the entire country, the notion that a man can become a woman. That brings a lot of people together. And then you've got this most ridiculous caricature of a political activist, Dylan Mulvaney, who's the face of thing. And then you've got a huge mismatch of product and sponsorship. You've got this, does it get any more, more incongruous than Bud Light, which is a beer for construction workers

and frat boys? And then Dylan Mulvaney, who's prancing around pretending to be a chick. No, of course. So that was the perfect boycott. That's why it was a natural boycott. That was an inevitable boycott. This one, much less so, much harder to boycott a pharmacy, much less two pharmacies, much less the two biggest pharmacies in the country. People just get their drugs at these places. There aren't a ton of options everywhere. In any case, though, if conservatives are able to launch an even somewhat successful boycott of CVS and Walgreens, and just you go to the other places, you go to Walmart, you go to write aid, you go to Kroger, you go to Publix, you go to wherever. This issue is far more important because here we're not

just talking about some beer company embracing sexual deviancy. Here we're talking about major drug retailers killing kids and becoming complicit in the majority of infanticide cases in the United States. That's a much bigger deal. There is so much more to say first, though, go to balance of nature.com, promo code Knowles. Balance of nature fruits and veggies are a convenient way to get whole food ingredients every day. Balance of nature uses an advanced cold vacuum process that encapsulates fruits and vegetables into whole food supplements without sacrificing their natural antioxidants. The capsules are void of additives, fillers, extract, synthetic, pesticides, or anything sugar. The only thing in Balance of Nature's fruit and veggie capsules are fruits and veggies.

Right now, our listeners can get 35% off their first order, and they'll also get a free fiber and spice supplement. Balance of Nature's fiber and spice supplement is a revolutionary fiber drink with a unique blend of 12 spices and whole foods. Experience Balance of Nature for yourself today. Go to Balance of Nature.com. News promo code at Knowles, Ken W. W.L.A.S. For 35% off your first order as a preferred customer, plus get a free bottle of fiber and spice. That is balance of nature.com promo code, NOLS, KNAWLAS. For 35% off your first preferred order,

plus a free bottle of fiber and spice. Balance of Nature.com promo code Noles. Speaking of weird sex stuff, weirdest, creepiest clip that went over the internet all weekend. I'm not... There was a lot of weird sex stuff that went around the internet. There's that young, blonde actress, lady who was jiggling her breasts, you know, and I'm not even covering, I don't really know what to

cover on that story from Saturday Night Live. That, no, that, perfectly wholesome compared to some of the other clips that went around. Notably, this clip from Senator Karen Berg of Kentucky, she's a Democrat, you'll be shocked to hear, she is suggesting that perhaps we ought to allow pedophiles to buy child sex dolls. I was completely unfurably. I was completely unfurably. familiar with child sex dolls. So I had, of course, to Google it last night. I was a little scared to put it in my search engine, but I did.

And apparently there is research on the subject. Not much, not much. But there are what they call MEPs, minor attracted persons. And the limited amount of research that's done on these

dolls guys suggest that they actually for people who are attracted to minors, that these dolls actually decrease their proclivity to go out and attack children. You can see the rest of the panel. It gives them a release that makes them less likely to go outside of their home. Okay, she goes on. She ends up saying, look, guys, this is conclusive.

And it's kind of funny that she would initially she opens up, she goes, look, all these scientific studies, they're not perfect. There are very few data points to even reference here. And it's kind of dodgy science. They say, but this is conclusive. And that's why we need to create child sex dolls for petos. And the crazy part about this clip is everyone is cringing in this room. Everyone in the Kentucky State Senate, they're saying, oh, lady, what are you? Oh, this is so disgusting. This is so awful. but what that woman is articulating is a common misunderstanding of how desire works. Child sex dolls for petos are repulsive and intrinsically evil. It is intrinsically evil for the petos to do to the child sex dolls, whatever they're going to do. Even if this woman wants to make some consequentialist argument that actually it will reduce predation on actual children if the petos get to even, it's just still intrinsically disgusting and evil for the petos to do whatever they're. going to do to the child sex dolls. But this is how many people think of desire. Probably this is how most people think of desire these days, because we live in the wake of Sigmund Freud, and we live at a time

when we, when we are told that if you have any desire whatsoever, it's going to build up inside you, like a steam engine. And that's why every so often, if you don't want to go crazy and explode, you've got to just blow off a little steam. That's what she's saying. She's saying these pettos, they're born this way, there's nothing they can do about their desires. It's building up and building up, and so they've got to blow off a little steam. And better they blow off the steam with the doll

than with an actual child. The problem is that's not how desire works at all. That idea, which is associated with and comes from Freud, develops because of the technology of the time. Very often we map our understanding of human nature and the human psyche onto the technology at the time. So today we talk about the brain like it's a computer, because the computer is the chief technology of our time. So we talk about uploading our consciousness. We talk about downloading information.

We talk about how we just got to process information faster, just like a computer. But 100 years ago, 130, 40 years ago, the chief technology was the steam engine. And so we talk about how you've just got these desires building up in your mind and you've got to just blow off a little steam where else you're liable to explode. But it isn't true. actually the ancients were much wiser than Freud and the modern people and our civilization, as it had always understood desire, was much more correct than the people over the last hundred or so years. Desire is a matter of habit.

Maybe people are born with certain inclinations. I'm not denying that. Even for the petos, I don't know, maybe probably something just went terribly wrong in their lives. and there are huge associations with kids who were abused, later developing these kinds of extremely disordered desires. But I don't know, maybe let's just take this woman at her word and say there's some kind of innate inclination here or something like that. Even if that were the case, desire either deepens or begins to turn as a matter of habit.

So the more you indulge a disordered desire, a perverse desire, the more disorder, the more perverse, the more intense, going to become. And the less you indulge it and the more you cultivate other desires, the more virtuous and orderly your desire is going to become. It's like habits. It's not like a steam engine. It's more like a fire. If you feed the fire, if you keep throwing wood into the fire, the fire is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger. It's like a wolf. You know, you feed the wolf. The wolf is going to get used to that food. The wolf is going to get hungrier and bigger and stronger. Whatever cliche metaphor you want for this, desire is habit. And desire is actually can change. You're not allowed to say that anymore because the lips call that conversion therapy. It's kind of funny. They say you can't ever change your sexual desires in any way, but you can change your sex. You can go from being a boy to a girl, but you can't go from being a kind of a pervy guy to a less pervy guy. That's impossible. But of course, our desires do change. Even beyond sex stuff. Our desires for food. If you eat a lot of sweets, you're going to want to eat a lot more sweets. If you give up sweets,

for a month or two, you're probably not going to be as desirous of sweets anymore. Maybe you'll eat some healthier foods. This is true of habits. It's true of exercise. It's true of work ethic. It's true of everything. That's just true of human nature. The more we stick with this steam engine kind of view of human nature, the more, well, the more pervy the country is going to get. We're going to get a country of people living under Senator Karen Byrd who are doing weirder and weirder things for sex dolls. And eventually the dolls aren't going to do it, because there's no substitute for the real thing. There is so much more to say first, though,

go to foodforthepoor.org slash knolls. Tragically, thousands of families around the world are still struggling to put food on the table every day. Thankfully, food for the poor is dedicated to helping those in need. When you donate to Food for the Poor, you are making a real difference. Every dollar you give is used to provide meals,

nourishment, and a chance for a better tomorrow to hundreds of families. Thanks to a meal-for-meal match, a donation of 80 bucks can feed two children for an entire year. Your donation to Food for the Poor helps to ensure that no one goes to bed hungry. Together, we can be the change we wish to see in the world.

Donate now by texting Knowles, KnaWLES, to 5155.5. Or by visiting foodfor the poor.org slash Knowles. That is Knowles, KNAWLES, to 5155. Or go to foodfor the poor.org slash knolls. This is a penitential season. It's a good time maybe to increase your alms giving whatever you can. give, reach into your wallet right now, open it up, see what you got, and then give what you can

to a very, very worthy cause. That is food for the poor.org slash knolls. Speaking of liberal women speaking at public fora, there was a purple-haired mother who just showed up to a public hearing to describe how the issue of transgenderism is very, very dear to her because she has not one, but two trans children. I've been a resident of Kansas for the last 20 years. I have four children, two girls, two boys. My oldest is my transgender daughter, and my youngest is an 11-year-old transgender boy.

Both of my children have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and both are currently receiving gender affirming care. Through this care, my husband and my consent has all, always been required. They have asked my children what they envision their bodies looking like as an adult and never once

did they mention surgery to my children. We are well aware of what is going on with our children. It is not the government's job to decide on the best medical care for citizens. Treating gender dysphoria

it has widely accepted guidelines for care. It is not. It is not need to be scrutinized by non-medical experts in government. What are the odds that a woman who has green and purple hair would have transgender children? What are the odds? I think the odds are 100%, actually. I think it's approaching 100%. Some conservatives, and even psychologists, Jordan Peterson pointed out, he said the statistical odds that you would have not one but two, that anyone would have not one but two, that anyone would have, not one

but two, transgender children, are something like one in nine million. But even that isn't true. Even that isn't true. Jordan's point is a very good one, but even that is overstating the odds. The odds that you would have any transgender children are zero because that isn't real. Because there's no such thing as a transgender child, because there's no such thing as a transgender person, because transgenderism is a false anthropology because a boy can't really be a girl, because our identity has at least something to do with our body. It's not, we're not, we're not just free-floating spirits who are imprisoned in some awful shell of a body that's disconnected to our identity. That's not actually how it works. So the odds of that are zero

of having even one transgender child. The odds of having two are also zero. And the odds of an obviously insane liberal woman abusing her children in this way are very high, very, very, very, very high. I was wondering, when I first saw it, I said, maybe I'm being close-minded here. Is it possible that transgenderism is a heritable trait? It's inherited through, say, the epigenetics of the purple hair dye. Is that how it works? Must be. Must be. That's the only explanation for why all these green and purple-haired ladies keep, all of a sudden, have developed transgender children. Because 20 years ago, this never happened. What's weird is there were always witches. Sorry, let me rephrase that.

There were always very liberal women out there, very left-wing, angry, liberal women. And yet, they would mess up their kids in all sorts of ways. But they didn't have transgender kids. No one really had transgender children because that was not a social phenomenon. There were always people who were a little bit confused about their sex. And there have been eunuchs in all sorts of societies and all sorts of deviances. But the explosion of transgenderism, specifically among the youth, the fact that one in five zoomers identify as LGBT, we're obviously not even taking polls yet of the next generation,

Generation Alpha. The fact that in the matter of just a few years, transgender identity would explode 300% among young people, but not among older people. It would seem to suggest that this is a little bit more of an ideological fad and a social phenomenon. And guess who's driving it? Do you think the people driving it are going to be the traditional family out in Palookaville with eight children who homeschool, who go to church on Sunday, who all eat dinner together? No, I think the incidence of transgender identity in those families is probably exactly 0%. And yet when you look at the liberal families, especially on the coasts, but even in the middle of the country like that woman, with the mothers who are.

have the crazy colored hair, who believe all sorts of BS, who have the little sign in the front yard. In this house, we believe in science, and we also believe boys can be girls. And we also believe in blah, blah, blah, blah. The sun monster is going to kill us all, or whatever they say they believe in. It's weird because in those families, in the divorced families, in the extremely sexually deviant families, is weird that the incidence of transgenderism is so much higher. What are the odds? What are the odds? I guess we need to follow the science. We need to investigate somehow. You want to talk about weird, creepy investigations. NBC News, this has just conducted investigation into, well, I guess tying in all of these stories into fake AI underage pornography. So I guess the last three

or four stories we've been talking about. NBC News just did an investigation. And what they discovered is that fake nude photos with the faces of underage celebrities are at the top of many search engine results. These images feature the faces of well-known child celebrities under the age of 18 onto an adult naked body. Two of the top 10 image results for the term fake nudes on Microsoft's Bing.

Who searches on Bing? I don't know what people really searched on Bing. But it's not even just Google. It's Bing, too. Were sexually explicit deepfakes of female celebrities from between the ages of 12 and 15, according to a review conducted by NBC News. What does this tell us?

First of all, they're so shocked. NBC is so shocked that after encouraging a culture that says, do whatever you want sexually, it's fine. If it's on the internet, it's no big deal. If it's just simulated, there's no problem. Why not give the petos child sex dolls? Yeah, it's totally fine. A culture that says that children actually can consent, not only to sexual behavior, but to permanent sexual changes, like castrating themselves, like undergoing surgery and hormone therapy, quote, unquote,

and pretending to be the opposite sex, shortening their lifespans. in that kind of culture where all the ingredients for this degeneracy are baked in and affirmed as positive goods, what do you know the consequences of all that occur? What does this tell us? This tells us that we have limits necessarily in law. And some people, if they are indulged, are going to push things to the limits. What is the limit? The legal limit for nudity and all this kind of stuff is the age of 18. Why is it 18? Well, there's some good reasons as to why they picked 18, but to some degree it's just arbitrary. Could be 19, could be 20, could be 17, could be 16. The age of consent has varied historically and does vary by country and even municipality.

So they picked 18. And the one thing I can promise you is, whatever point they pick, there are going to be people who try to push it past the extreme. They're going to try to push it past that point. And what the liberals tell us is, this is an argument to get rid of all limits. We need to just liberate ourselves from all limits. I mean, even going, on the weird, like, young people sex stuff, even going back to the 1960s, you can find articles in newspapers written by Bernie Sanders, who was a relatively coherent leftist. But this is a very prominent left-wing politician, writing about how we need to get over all of our taboos over children doing sexual things. We need to get over it, man, we just need liberation, you know. Otherwise, people are going to get

complexes. What's funny, he, in these essays that Senator Sanders wrote, which were totally exemplary of the left-wing point of view on sex and liberation and even the age of consent. He said, you know, man, if we keep these taboos on young people doing weird sex stuff, that's going to give them a complex. It's going to give them a neurosis. He's speaking in the language of Freud. He's speaking in the language of the steam engine. He's saying, we've just got to blow off a little steam, man. But it's just not true. Because at that point, there is no end to the depravity. It just goes on and on. It's going to get weirder and weirder and weirer, especially as new technology like AI allows people to create

these images out of thin air, the more perverse, the better in many of their minds. There's no limit to that. So it has to, there has to be some limit. And the question for conservatives now is, are we going to follow the liberals down the ever loosening line of just saying, well, okay, maybe we can get a little more liberal here, a little more liberal there, we can lower the age, we can allow children to make certain sexual decisions, oh, we can allow certain behaviors, oh, we can change this definition of an institution, oh, we can, all right, look, look, I don't really believe in transgenderism, but you can't, you can't do it until you're 18, okay, you can't go under the transition until you're 18, okay, you can't go under the transition until you're 16, okay,

you can't go under the transition until you're 12, okay, you can't, there's just no end to it. So my point is, rather than following the liberals down this rabbit hole, why not just draw the firm limits much earlier and say, certainly at the very least, no one can do this stuff till 18, but really, look, transgenderism is fake, so no one should do it, because it's bad for everyone. Why not even when it comes to something like pornography? I recognize there's political prudence here.

There's always been some licentiousness and lust. I don't think that the natural law and the human law are identical. We talked about this last week on the show. St. Thomas Aquinas even makes a very good prudential argument that not everything that is immoral needs to be outlawed because not everyone is equally virtuous in society. And the point of the law is to encourage virtue and discourage vice. But you got to do it gradually. You got to kind of meet people where you are, where they are, rather. You don't want them to just totally break like a child under a parent who's too strict. So, okay, maybe you tolerate certain seediness. But we used to do, in society, we used to tolerate this kind of seediness in the red light. district and we would prosecute it sometimes when it got a little too out of control. We wouldn't encourage it. My friend, Jonathan Peugeot makes this point. He says, there have always been things that are off-center and a little weird and kind of bad, actually.

But they used to be on the margins. We would put the gargoyles on the facade of the cathedral. You wouldn't put it at the altar. Okay, you'd put the, in the medieval manuscripts, you'd put the little weird elf guys with like seven different appendages making a weird smile. you'd put that in the marginalia, put that on very edge of the page. You wouldn't put that right in the center. What our society has done is put this stuff right in the center. And as we do that, as we continue to affirm that it's all just fine, you're going to get more and more of this creepy stuff. And you're going to get more and more politicians like the Kentucky state senator Karen Byrd. And you're going to get more and more purple-haired mothers with three and four and five trans kids. Everyone's going to have a trans kid by the time these people are done. Now, if you don't want that to happen, one thing you can do, subscribe to this YouTube channel. Smash that subscribe button.

Ring the bell, ding the dong, do the thing. Talking about limits in law, a new euphemism has just dropped. The White House has a new term for illegal aliens. We'll get to that in one second. First, though, one year ago, Hershey's announced that a man would be leading their Women's Day campaign.

As everyone rolled their eyes thinking they would have to buy from another company that believes men can be women, we had a different idea. In 24 hours, we launched Jeremy's chocolate. Now, Jeremy's chocolate is turning one-year-old to celebrate. Make sure you get yourself some Jeremy's chocolate today. We have he-him with nuts and she-her, nutless chocolate bars.

Also, in microaggression size, go to jeremy's chocolate.com today. My favorite comment on Friday is from Sammy Hager. Not Sammy Hager, Sammy Hager 12, who says, quote, they're jiggling in a way that's not quite a waltz, Michael Knowles. I like that quote. I want that to be on one of my goodreads quotes, you know, the quotables page. They're jiggling in a way. That's not quite a waltz. I think that's a very apt description of those white girls with the Stanley Cups at the gas station. New euphemism dropped. The Biden White House has a new term for illegal aliens. You know, they've had a lot of terms, the libs. They've had illegal immigrants, undocumented Americans, future Americans. Dreamers. Dreamers was a good one. But no, we got a new one. The new one is newcomers. there are newcomers.

Wow. Wow, that sounds nice, doesn't it? The millions and millions of not even just Latin American, but Chinese, Middle Eastern, all sorts of people, unvetted crossing our border, many of whom have very bad intentions, all of them working with criminal cartels, just like truly psychopathic, worst people on earth kind of cartels.

They're just newcomers, according to talking points from the White House. So this goes back to 2023. When Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of DHS, issued a memo that said they would not use the term illegal alien when speaking of these people. They use the term non-citizen because that speaks to the importance of respecting the dignity of the individual. Now, I don't see why illegal alien doesn't respect the dignity of the individual. It's just a clinical term. they're not here legally. They're here illegally. That's an important distinction. That's actually the

crucial distinction for the enforcement of the law, which is this guy's job. And they're aliens. They're foreigners. They're not American citizens. So, but he says, no, because it's a crime. Because what they're doing is a crime and people don't want to be criminals. They know that's a bad thing. That's a shameful thing. But rather than just stopping the same shameful thing, because the liberals want these criminals to come into the country, they have to just pretend it's not shameful. They have to pretend it's not criminal. So they called them non-citizens. Then earlier this month, they changed it. And the talking points, they said they were going to provide critical funding for shelter and critical services for newcomers in our cities and states. Not just the Californians who moved to

Tennessee. No, we're talking about the Venezuelans who illegally moved to California and really more like Texas and a lot of other conservative states. All right. Well, now we get that word again. In the talking points on the bill to preserve catch and release, the bill also includes $1.4 billion, for cities and states who are providing critical services to newcomers and would expedite work permits for people who are in the country and qualify. I did write a book about this called Speechless Controlling Words, Controlling Minds. You should have been set up. These producers should have been set up from the moment I started this segment. But they didn't. They were sleepy back there.

It's a Monday morning. They were out a little bit too late on Sunday night. In any case, this is the point of the book, speechless, is that the libs, because they can't win the debate. They have to rig the debate from the outset. They do this sometimes with elections, but they certainly do it with the public debates. They knew they couldn't win the debate on something like same-sex marriage,

because it doesn't make any sense. The argument to preserve what marriage has always meant everywhere for all of human history was not a hateful argument. It's not because we hate guys who are a little light in the loafers or we hate lesbians because we hate Subaru's or I don't know what they think we hate. We don't hate anybody. We love everybody, all right? But we also love reality. And the term same-sex marriage is like saying a square circle. There just can't be a square circle. A circle in its very nature is not a square. And marriage in its very nature involves both sexes because marriage is the union of a man and a woman that is ordered toward the procreation and education of children. No knock. You can have the most effeminate looking dude who really pulls off a pair of stiletto heels.

but that guy is never going to be able to conceive a child with another man because they're both dudes and that's just not how it works. Okay. So they knew that. They knew there was no argument for it. That's why even all the big Democrats were opposed to same-sex marriage, including Joe Biden, including Barack Obama, including Hillary Clinton, including all the currently biggest Democrat names. So what they do? They just changed the term. They said, we need marriage equality.

Oh, well, everybody loves equality. Oh, we're talking about equality? Oh, yeah, I'm not for inequality. I'm for equality. So yeah. We need to talk about who has the right to get married. Oh, I want everyone to have rights. Okay, well, we all have rights. So yeah, let's go for it. And then even then, it didn't totally persuade people. So the Supreme Court liberals just had to come down and contradict public opinion and common sense in the natural law. And that basically did the trick. But it took them a long time. And they could never win the debate.

Same thing with immigration. Most Americans oppose mass migration, legal and illegal. When you actually get down to the numbers and you poll people on how many immigrants they think should come into the country, most Americans want far fewer immigrants to come into the country than we currently have. Certainly, they oppose illegal immigration. So they know they can't win the debate. Should illegal immigrants be here? Should illegal aliens be in the country? No, just by definition they should. Okay, well, we can either ditch our policy or we can just change the terms. Okay, let's change the term. But the problem is, as the Harvard professor Stephen Pinker points out, the euphemism treadmill. When you just change words, You change terms. Ultimately, that doesn't really change the reality. So the reality seeps through and people begin to recognize the reality again. So you've got to change the word again. That's why you've got to go from, well, not just illegal immigrant to undocumented immigrant, undocumented American future, American dreamer, newcomer. You got to do it because people then just even when they're dazzled for a few moments by the new term, they then begin to associate it with the realities of that, which is lawlessness, which is a spiking crime in certain places, which is the loss of American sovereignty, which is all these sorts of problems. So they have to keep changing. 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. Kris, saucy, and $4? dollars vary only at 711 value through 62326 participating stores only while supplies last the app for full terms so they're going to change it again what are we going to do i mean for goodness sakes the place that we saw this new term was in a bit talking points on a bill to preserve catch and release catch and release is where the government just basically rolls out the red carpet for the invasion of our country what can we do about it we talk about the capital c constitution lower case c constitution we talk about the importance of our sacred democracy how is it that most americans oppose this

stuff, and yet, no matter which party we elect, we have to have more mass migration. How's that? The only explanation of that is that our actual constitution is different from the one on parchment, that the actual way our government works is different from, I'm a bill up on Capitol Hill. Speaking of illegal aliens, really awful story, a previously deported illegal alien shot three cops who were serving him a warrant for animal cruelty. This happened last week, getting to it now. This is Stephen Claude Radigan, 48, opened fire on cops from Metro Police on Valentine's Day when they were serving him an outstanding arrest warrant at his home related to a 2023 incident that was involving animal cruelty. They weren't even trying to arrest him

because he's an illegal alien. They were doing it because he was torturing animals. DOJ says he was captured by a security camera beating one of his dogs several times in the face. Now, probably if you showed this story to most people, they would say, okay, deport this guy. even the liberals. And look, the cops came and they finally arrested him. That's good. We generally don't arrest illegal aliens who are in our country, even the ones who commit crimes. We often let those people who commit violent crimes just out that same day because of left-wing-funded DAs who have been installed in our cities.

But this one, okay, they arrest him, and this makes some news, and they probably will deport this guy. You know why? Because we now have a human face on it. And because people really like dogs. I don't really care for dogs that much, but people really like dogs, especially liberals. they go crazy for dogs. They think the dogs are babies now. They put their dogs in little strollers.

They're probably going to start sending their dogs to college. So that works. If you put a human face on this, the libs are very good about this, putting a human face on things. And then because they control the media, they can blast that narrative out everywhere. We need to do the same thing. Illegal immigrants. Even the libs do a good job about this with the illegal immigrants. They say, oh, these poor people, these poor asylum seekers, these dreamers coming over,

seeking asylum. How dare you? You want to send them back, these poor, sweet, dough-eyed little babes. First of all, it's basically all fighting-age men who were just coming here to make some money, and they're working with the criminal cartels to get here. So these are some of the last guys you want in your country, all right? Frankly, the only ones that I think it would probably be good to get into the country are the Cuban ones because they're right-wing, generally, and they're fleeing an actual communist regime, and they make good cigars. So those are, and we're going to have any kind of illegal immigration. That's the one I want. And that's the one that the liberals canceled. That's the one that under Obama, they said, no, no more Cubans, send them back. We're going to repeal the

whitefoot, dry foot, policy. Because they knew that the Cubans are generally a little bit more conservative, more likely to vote Republican, and they're landing in Florida, which is an important state for Democrats to try to win back. So it's just all completely preposterous. Well, what do we do about it? We've got to put that same human face on it. The human face of the people who are murdered, who are raped, or attacked, the human face of the human face of even of the guy who's torturing his dog. Now, speaking of things from Latin America, I have a story. I really want to get to.

It's going to be the most controversial story that I've covered in months, probably. This is a story that some of you are not prepared to hear. So I'm just going to tease this, and maybe we'll get to it tomorrow. Marijuana, the old sin spinach, the devil's lettuce. You know what I'm talking about? The Peruvian parsley, the old California cumin. You know what I mean? That Haitian oregano.

Pot is not good for you. There's a study shows that pot, weed, ganja, the old, I don't know, I've run out of euphemisms, that it increases the risk of heart attack and stroke. I'm glad I'm teasing this. Because the potheads who are listening right now, they're going to need a day to come down to calm, get over their fury at the suggestion, which so many. Marijuana users don't want to admit, which is that maybe this thing isn't just totally great.

Maybe there is a cost to this mind-altering herb that I light on fire and inhale it to my lungs. So, listen, I'm not sure everyone's ready for that. We're going to get to that story tomorrow. For right now, it's Music Monday. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member use code, Noles. KnaW.LAS would check out for two months free on all annual plans.