The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1588 - Kamala Gets #MeTooed

Episode Date: October 4, 2024

Pennsylvania Democrats get caught trying to rig the election, Kamala Harris finds herself in a "Me Too" controversy, and a high school girls' soccer team refuses to play against a fella.   Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri   Ep.1588   - - -   DailyWire+:   Join the Fight for 47 with 47% Off NEW Annual DailyWire+ Memberships using code FIGHT! https://dailywire.com/subscribe   From the white guys who brought you “What is a Woman?” comes Matt Walsh’s next question: “Am I Racist?” | IN THEATERS NOW! Get tickets: https://www.amiracist.com   Order your Mayflower Cigars here: https://bit.ly/3Qwwxx2 (Must be 21+ to purchase. Exclusions may apply)   Check out The Daily Wire Shop at: https://dailywire.com/shop   - - -   Today's Sponsors:   Birch Gold - Text "KNOWLES" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/Knowles, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit.   Lumen - Get 15% off your purchase! https://lumen.me/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. Pennsylvania Democrats get caught trying to rig the election against President Trump. Kamala Harris gets caught in a Me Too pickle as her husband is accused of beating his ex-girlfriend in public. Lots to get to. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show. Hot on the heels of Republican up-and-comer J.D. Vance, completely destroying Tim Wolves at the vice presidential debate. Another Republican up-and-comer, Byron Donalds, destroyed the lives on the breakfast club with facts and logic and calmness and articulation.

And it was really great. It was another master class in rhetoric for Republicans. There's so much more to say first, though, text Noel. to 98-98-98. Kamala Harris' economic plan is a disaster. Get ready for massive tax hikes, and you might be thinking it's time to make more of your savings tax-sheltered and inflation-sheltered. That is where I trust Birch Gold Group to help. Birch Gold will assist you in converting the existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold. And the best news, you don't have to pay a penny at a pocket. Just text the word Knowles, KennaW-L-A-S to 98-98-98. Get a free info kit on gold. There's no obligation, just information on fortifying your savings before the crazy really hits.

As the exclusive gold partner of the Daily Wire for the past eight years, an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers, you can trust Birch Gold too. Right now, text Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S to 98-98-N-W-E-S to 98-N-E-E-S. Text it to 98-98-8-2. I have a good chunk of my portfolio in gold. I'm glad I've diversified. you should consider diversifying too. Text Noles to 98, 98. Ninety eight.

Shenanigans are afoot, my friends. What day is it? October 4th. Already big shenanigans. Because tomorrow, President Trump will be returning to Butler, Pennsylvania. This is the site of the first assassination attempt, the one that did put a bullet through his ear and very nearly put a bullet through the back of his skull and very nearly killed President Trump back in July. Trump, Trump, because you can't keep the guy down because he's indefatigable and he's an American original, is showing up to the site where his life almost ended. That will be tomorrow. Scott Pressler, who's done some great work, registering voters, getting out the vote.

He's done the actual nuts and bolts of Republican campaigning, whereas most people are just out, you know, I don't know, blabbing about it or something. But he's really, really tuned in to what's going on on the ground. and Scott Presser just sounded the alarm of some shenanigans. During President Trump's rally in Pennsylvania, what do you know? The voter registration application website in Pennsylvania, quote, will undergo scheduled system maintenance

and be unavailable Saturday, October 5th, from 6 p.m. until 12 a.m. We thank you for your understanding. Of course, October 21st is the last day to register before the November 5th election. The very day that President Trump is going to return to Butler PA, right there in prime time, 6 p.m. to 12 a.m., oopsie-dazy, the voter registration website's going to be down.

This is such transparent election rigging. I'm impressed by how brazen it is. I'm not impressed because usually the Democrats are subtler about these things. But in a way, I am impressed by just how brazen this is. Yeah, we're going to shut down the whole voter registration website exactly during the time that Trump is most likely to turn out new people to register to vote in our state, in a crucial swing state. Now, after Scott sounded the alarm, Pennsylvania implicitly copped to the rigging

because they changed the time. Now the website reads, the website will undergo scheduled system maintenance. and be unavailable October 5th, 10 p.m. until October 6th, 4 a.m. Thank you for your understanding. Not good enough. First of all, the fact that they changed the time is the state of Pennsylvania, these crooked Democrats admitting, yeah, we tried to rig it against Trump. We tried to shut it down for his rally, and we got caught. All right, whatever. We'll push it a few hours later. Not good enough. This is, if the Pennsylvania voter registration website is going to remain down from 10 p.m. until 4 a.m., There are going to be a ton of voters who are enthusiastic, who are inspired to register because of President Trump, who will not be able to do it.

Okay, we're not going to do it during Trump's rally. We're not going to shut it down during Trump's rally. We're going to shut it down right afterward. Give me a break. This is brazen rigging. These crook Democrats in Pennsylvania are trying to steal the election. This is not some wacky, crazy conspiracy theory. Here it is, in their own words, on the government website. If they are allowed to go through with this, this should be the first, is it the first, I don't know, it's early evidence of what must be countless other attempts to cheat and rig the election in a swing state in 2024. Now, speaking of scandals, Kamala Harris is in a scandal of her own because Kamala Harris's husband has been accused of smacking his ex-girlfriend around in public. we talked about this story a little bit yesterday. I didn't even really want to get into it too much because it's a little salacious. It's obviously not a private sin or allegation that one's revealing because it's

all public. And the second family is a public family. But if it were just that some ex-girlfriend accused Doug M. Hoff of being a brute. And there's a lot of evidence that he was a brute because another public scandal of his is that he cheated on his now ex-wife and he impregnated the nanny and Now, according to multiple sources close to the former couple, he smacked his ex-girlfriend around in public. But if it were just about him, I probably wouldn't even bring it up because I don't think it's exactly breaking news that liberal men are brutish and disreputable people. The reason I bring it up is because it highlights a real problem for Kamala Harris and for a lot of demonstrations. women because not so long ago during the Me Too movement, Kamala Harris demanded that we believe all women. All women who make any accusations against men must be believed. And all these women,

on the Democrat side, decided to embrace this movement because the movement was being weaponized against Donald Trump. It was really cropping up, I think, because of Donald Trump. Brett Kavanaugh it was used against without any credibility whatsoever. He had that complete lunatic Christine Blasey Ford, whose story changed every time she opened her mouth. But she had to be believed her testimony was unimpeachable, even though it was self-contradictory, and it was contradicted by her friends at the time and people who could have been eyewitnesses. But it was good then because it was being used against Republican men. Kamala Harris, during Me Too, tweeted out, I stand with women. across every industry to say, times up on abuse, harassment,

marginalization, and underrepresentation. Join me. We want all survivors of sexual harassment everywhere to be heard, to be believed, and to know that accountability is possible. That's not all she said. She also tweeted out, I wore black today in support of all survivors of sexual assault or abuse. We won't let them be silenced or ignored. Hashtagued, and then she's got this picture of herself there, looking real smug, looking real serious. is times up, believe survivors, except when the survivors accuse her husband, because the second gentleman, the man who wants to be the first gentleman, has now officially denied the allegation through a spokesman. So through a spokesman, Kamala Harris's husband says, don't believe the woman who's accusing me of beating her in public.

Kamala Harris says, believe all women, believe survivors. Her husband officially, So this is obviously through the Kamala apparatus, says, don't believe that woman. Hillary Clinton did the same thing in 2016. We need to believe all women. We need to believe all women. Hey, what about the woman who says your husband raped her? Don't believe that woman. This is why it's a political problem for Kamala Harris.

This is the only reason I'm talking about it. It's Exhibit Z. I don't know. It's evidence number 3,255 that Kamala Harris is completely inauthentic, that she doesn't have any serious beliefs of her own, that she will just recite whatever the liberal establishment would like according to prevailing wins. And in this way, in a particularly egregious way, because she's saying this is about, this is about, you know, woman's solidarity, this is about defending women. She's staked so much of her campaign on women's rights

really used as a euphemism for abortion. She says, you know, we, stand with the girls, except the one who says that my husband beat her up in public. There's so much more to say first, though, go to lumen.me, use code noles. It can be tough to prioritize your health, especially if you're not sure where to start. It is not just about making a decision, it's about making a commitment to a better quality of life. Now, for me, I've never been the most athletically inclined, let's say. So any little hack that I can have to be better about my health is fabulous. It's one of the many reasons I love Lumen. Lumen is the world's first handheld metabolic coach. It is a device that measures your metabolism through your breath.

All you have to do is breathe into your lumen, first thing in the morning. You will know what's going on with your metabolism, whether you're burning mostly fats or carbs. What sets Lumen apart is its ability to understand you on a personal level. It takes your unique metabolic data and crafts a personalized nutrition plan for that day, tailored to your body's needs, and goals. Getting in decent shape is difficult enough. Why not avail yourself of all of the cutting edge technology that can help you to do it? If you want to take the next step in improving your health, go to loomen.me. me slash knolls. Get 15% off your Lumun. L-U-M-E-N-D-N-me. Use code NOLS for 15% off your Lumen. Thank you, Lumen, for sponsoring this show. Speaking of women,

got to give a big hat tip to Libs of TikTok here, as is often the case. there are members of a New Hampshire girls high school soccer team, Hillsboro during high school, who are refusing to play soccer against the Kyrsarge team because this other school's team allows a man who thinks that he's a woman or a boy who thinks that he's a girl to play on the team. And the girls are saying,

we're not going to play against a man. We have a girl's soccer league. This is unfair. Men are physically stronger and better at sports than women. And so we're not going to subject ourselves to this. That's not the best part. We've heard a thousand versions of this story. The best part, this was pointed out by Riley Games,

is that the boy who plays on the girls' team, his name is, where is it? Male Jacques. M-A-E-L-E-J-A-C-Q-U-E-S, male jock is the guy's name. When I saw this, I said this can't be true. This has to be a setup. This has to be the Babylon B or the humor of providence of the tightly knit logic of history is really on the nose right now. the girls soccer team refuses to play against male jock.

Of course. There are no mere coincidences. This is a good one. I mean, this really shows you the issue. But furthermore, this isn't just about fairness. This isn't just about, you know, the girls being at a disadvantage and not being able to win the game because the men are stronger or whatever. This is just a basic matter of safety for girls. As I've said from the beginning,

I would like girls and women to have their own sports leagues because we told them they could, and it seems like a nice thing for them. But I don't really care about women's sports. Nobody really cares about women's sports. The closest to anyone has come to caring about... Maybe tennis, people kind of like, the closest anyone's coming in recent years

to caring about women's sports is now the WNBA, because that star, Caitlin Clark, is in it. And even then, people aren't. actually watching it. Like, it's, no one really cares. It's, it's the injustice that bothers us, for starters. And then the second thing that bothers us, and I think it's a good argument for these girls not to play against other schools

that let men on the team, it's not safe. In 2022, Peyton McNabb, a girls' volleyball player, was paralyzed and suffered a brain injury because the other team let a dude play on the team. And the boy spiked the ball so hard that he permanently paralyzed this girl and left her with a brain injury. If I only have boys,

if I had a daughter, my daughter wanted to play volleyball or really any sport, and there were a man on the other team, I would just say no. And I wouldn't say no just to prove a point or anything like that. I would say no because I want my daughter to be safe, and this isn't safe.

This is needlessly endangering girls and leaving them vulnerable to the possibility that they could be permanently paralyzed and brain injured so that some extraordinarily confused and potentially perverted, I mean, I guess by definition perverted, boy or man gets to live out a sexual fantasy. Ain't doing that. Sorry. This is a winning issue for Republicans because what the Democrats have done is so grotesque, unjust, and dangerous, and obviously dangerous. This is why my friend, the junior senator from Texas, Senator Cruz, has just released perhaps the best ad of the 2024 campaign cycle. Keep your eye on the ball. Ready? Okay, that's okay. Concentrate. Texas girls are tough.

You got this. Let's do it again. But they're facing a new opponent they can't beat by digging deeper. Colin Allred could have stopped men from competing in women's sports, but instead he voted against our daughters. What kind of man does that? Truth and Courage Pack is responsible for the content of this advertising. Oh, man, this is good.

And, you know, I think I know, actually, who wrote that. ad. It's a, it's a provocative ad. You get all red, who is an athlete, right? And he just tackles this girl at the end. And I love that tagline. What kind of man does that? And now, some people are going to roll their eyes. They're going to say, this is the best you got. This is the best you Republicans have. We're going to pretend that girls' sports is the most important issue of the election. It's not the most important issue of the election. But it's it's the clearest issue of the election. Let's put it that way. It's a novel issue. It makes the Democrats look completely absurd. And it's an issue that resonates with every single parent,

certainly every single parent of a girl, but I think just every single parent. It is disgusting and scandalous and reckless to allow men and boys to compete in girls' sports. It endangers women. But that's the Democrat Party now, I guess. It's the party of Doug M. Hoff and Colin Allred. Doug Emhoff accused of beating his girlfriend in public. He's the new kind of man, though.

He's redefining masculinity, according to Jen Socky. And then Colin Allred, who voted against protecting girls from being brutalized by men in sports. That's the party, I guess, so much for the party of women. This is a strong issue. If you think this is a minor issue, it's an ancillary issue, I would say look at Virginia. This issue, transgenderism in schools in particular, might have been the defining issue that got Glenn Youngen elected and flipped a blue Commonwealth red. This issue was one of a number of issues, but a prominent issue that got Ron DeSantis reelected in a landslide in Florida.

This is a good issue. Democrats want us to be talking about abortion and enviorenton. fertilization or something. They don't want us talking about this issue because while it's ancillary in its immediate effect, you know, girls' sports, it is universal. It tells you the whole story because it gives you this whole absurd premise that the Democrats think boys and girls are exactly the same and women need to suffer so that perverse men can be titillated a little bit. Now, speaking of the trans issue, is a story just came out of the United Kingdom.

The lead child psychologist at Tavistock, this infamous gender clinic that was transing the kids, probably the most infamous in the world. The lead child psychologist at Tavistock was just caught, allegedly, grooming a 15-year-old boy. This guy, lead psychologist at Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, was ensnared by a group of vigilante pedophile hunters in an online sting after he allegedly, I have to say allegedly a hundred thousand times as I talk about this, allegedly sent sexually explicit messages to someone who told the psychologist that he was 15 years old. And then the 53-year-old psychologist allegedly met up with his would-be victim,

in a restaurant, a Nando's restaurant, nice little restaurant chain in the UK, and then arranged to go to a local park to do illegal activities, allegedly. It is always the ones you most expect. This is example number 10,057. It is always the ones you most expect. Who would have thought that a guy who dedicates his life and career to scandalizing sexually confused children would have a weird sexual fascination with children. Who could have imagined? And in particularly aberrant ways. Who could have possibly guessed that? This issue, I know there are going to be people, not just the Democrats, but they're going to be GOP figures who say, all right, enough about the transgender thing. I agree. I think it's absurd that our culture has to talk

about how boys and girls are different all the time. I agree. I'm sick of it too. This is an important issue because the Democrats are scandalizing and mutilating and sterilizing children and shortening their lifespans. So just in itself, it's a really crucial issue. But it's a winning issue. And if you pull on this thread just a little bit, you're going to wind up with a big pile of yarn. There is a lot here. Okay. It is, it's always the ones you most expect. 99.7% of the time. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to dailywire.com slash shop.

You know the yes or no game. You love the yes or no game. This is my game. We launched it as a show, and then we brought the card game right to your home so you can play it with your friends and family, figure out who knows each other best. Well, we have the politics, philosophy,

and religion expansion pack in stock right now. That's right. order is over. Put your knowledge of your friends and family to the test with more than 110 new cards featuring the most controversial stances on politics, on philosophy, on religion, of our time, stances such as women can be pastors. Public executions are good for society, and AI will eventually develop a soul. You are not doing enough to spice up your fall parties, soire, social rendezvous, and other friendly gatherings. Fix that with yes or no. Go to DailyWire dot com slash shop to get the all new yes or no politics philosophy and religion expansion pack

today. My favorite comment yesterday is from two toy boys. Jack Smith is the black knight for Monty Python and the Holy Grail. He keeps losing limbs but refuses to admit defeat. So true. Your case is thrown out. What? You're talking about my case is thrown out. No, hold on, but I, Trump, well, let's go back to D.C. Trump, uh, he did an insurrection. He didn't really do an insurrection. No, but we, anyway, he, huh, he, but one of his campaign staffers made a joke about rioting. Yeah, but it wasn't Trump who did that. Well, I'm going to fall off my desk if I, if I continue that charade. Speaking of Republicans winning on issues, Byron Donald's man, Florida congressman, rising star in the GOP, hot on the heels of J.D. Vance's

master class in oratory and rhetoric at the VP debate. He gives us a another one on the breakfast club. This is a left-wing show geared primarily at a black audience, and Byron absolutely killed it. What does qualified immunity have to do with having less police officers? Because the economic incentive of qualified immunity means that your personal assets aren't gone after if something goes wrong. So, you know, you're in business. You're in business. do you get involved in a project or a deal that leaves you massively exposed financially? You may, depending on your passion for that project, but then you also sit back and think, now, wait a minute, if something goes wrong, I'm going to be held massively viable.

Maybe I need to do something else. When we're saying if nothing goes wrong, we're talking about people getting violently hurt or killed. Yeah, clearly when it's not, yeah, rushed over. But it's clear when somebody clearly violates the constitutional right. And when you're, when you violate a constitutional right, qualified immunity doesn't apply to you. And that's what I'm talking about. It does not. And Angela, don't do that.

It does not. I thought that was the definition. No, it does not. I thought that was the definition. No, it does not. If you carry yourself outside of the confines of your training and the protocols of that department, qualified immunity doesn't apply to you. That's not true.

That is very true. That is patently false. That is patently true. And we need to make sure we have that accurate. Okay. Well, listen, qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects government officials from civil lawsuits when they perform their jobs unless they clearly violate a constitutional right. That's exactly what I'm saying. Oh, total knockout. Total look at what was the

key here. Two things stand out in particular. And this is a lesson I want every Republican who's in any way in public life from the U.S. Capitol down to the PTA. I want you to write this down. First of all, he's calm. He's calm. He's firm. He's direct, but he's calm the whole time. Even as that and that he's trying to grill him is starting to get a little emotional. He's just remaining calm but firm. But second of all, he knew his stuff. He knew the issue well. He was able to recall the precise definition that he was talking about, and he was confident enough in what he knew to stand firm on it. The minute that you hear in a debate, that's not true, you are now in a rhetorical fight to the death because one of you is going to lose a lot of credibility.

If you are arguing not over first principles even, or not over an interpretation of something, or not over a preferred policy proposal, but if you're just arguing over basic facts, one of you is going to lose. And so she did it. She threw down that. She goes, that's not true. He goes, no, it is true. And then that other guy, Charlemagne, who's the host of the show, he says, well, man, we don't need to sit here arguing about this. I can just Google it. And you could see Byron. I don't know, did he catch Charlemagne out of the corner of his eye? He didn't try to double down and fight what's her face on it. He just let it go. He said, no, it just, it is true. And the Charmaine looks up. He's like, oh, yeah, it turns out Byron's right. Masterclass. Absolutely killer. Between Byron and J.D. Vance and Vivek Ramoswamy and this whole crop of young Republican politicians, I feel great about Republicans' rhetorical skill. I don't see any analog on the left. Now, speaking of debates, President Trump has just come out. He has said definitively, no more debates in 2024.

He posted to Truth Social. Lion Kamala just put out a request for another debate because they lost so badly tonight. Again, it's like the fighter who lost gets up and says, I want a rematch, I beat Biden, I then beat her, and I'm not looking to do it again, too far down the line. Boats are already cast, and I'm leading big in the polls. I'll make America great again. She's incapable of it. So Trump had already said he probably wasn't doing another debate.

After the VP debate, Trump coming out and saying, definitively, it's over, no chance, not doing it. that's a vote of confidence in J.D. That means J.D. did his job. Because if Trump did another debate now, that just opens up the opportunity for some missed moments, some misunderstanding, some flub, why would you do that? If you've already landed the debates on first, Trump doing so well in the first debate that he actually blew away the Democrat nominee, no longer the nominee, then the second debate, Trump versus Kamala, basically a draw. Kamala did have some good moments in fairness, but Trump had a lot of great moments in there, too, and it didn't... It was a good debate.

Then you end with JD, basically doing the VP version, so the less significant version of what Trump did in the first debate, why would you risk it? It's like you go, you take the SAT and you get a 1590 or something. You know, you get almost a perfect score. Why would you go... Why would you take the test again?

You could only lose points. Things would appear to be, at least on the ground voter level, looking up for Trump, even CBS News admitting that Trump is doing pretty well, portraying a Milwaukee resident, a black woman describing why she wants to vote for Trump. I'm voting for Donald Trump in 2024. Abigran says she felt safer when Trump was president. The city is ran by Democrats, the county is ran by Democrats, and they have done nothing to stop the crime. There it is. Milwaukee, you don't generally think of Milwaukee residents voting for Trump.

You don't generally think of women voting for Trump. You don't generally think of black women in Milwaukee voting for Trump. Now, maybe this woman's a lifelong Republican, conservative, I don't know. But if she's just deciding later on, if it's really as CBS portrays here, one thing that could probably get me to vote for someone is if the other guy is threatening my life. if the other guy is Kamala Harris, who is bailing out violent rioters, if the other guy is Tim Walz, who allowed his city to burn to the ground, and I'm here and I'm a resident of a swing state, even more than I'm worried about immigration, even more than I'm worried about the so-called social issues, maybe even more than I'm worried about the economy.

I'm thinking, hey, on whose watch am I going to be safe in my person and my property, on whose watch do I not need to go to bed at night worrying about my kids being violently attacked? In this race, it's eminently clear. It's Trump. Now, speaking of realignment and people shifting their allegiances, JD Vance just showed up to the firemen's union. And the firefighters' union, even though firefighters are tough guys, It's a union, so the unions often back Democrats. The liberal media are playing this clip and saying, look at this, J.D. Vance shows up to the fireman's union, and he got booed.

And there were some booze in it. Take a listen. Thank you guys. Thank you so much. Well, Ceprify guys. It sounds like we got some fans and some haters. That's okay. All right, there's Van, so he has some cheers and then some booze. And he goes, yeah, we got some fans, we got some haters. That's cool. and the liberal media headline, J.D. Vance gets booed at the fireman's union. I don't know. Because then I look, I say, hey, how was J.D. received? And this is Politico. This is a center-left outlet. Firefighters Union declines to issue a presidential endorsement. The Fireman's Union was the first union to endorse Joe Biden in 2019.

It's not even just that like most unions, they go and historically have endorsed Democrats. First union. Now they won't endorse. A non-endorsement of Kamala is effectively an endorsement of Trump for these unions. The Teamsters won't endorse the Democrat. That is effectively an endorsement of Trump. This is the loudest reaction, forget about yelling boo or this or that in the room. The loudest reaction you can hear from these unions.

is that they will not endorse the Democrats, the Democrats that they've endorsed for decades. That is a sign of real political realignment. Now, when you want to follow this beautiful realignment, you've got to get your DailyWire Plus membership. Get 47% off right now with Code Fight at dailywire.com slash subscribe. You will get uncensored, unfiltered, ad-free shows, real-time-breaking news alerts, and more. But most importantly, you will get the truth that the establishment media don't want you to hear.

Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe to join the fight. Now, finally, finally, we've arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag. This episode is sponsored by PureTalk. Go to PureTalk.com slash Knowles, K&WLES today. Switch to a qualifying plan, get one year free of Daily Wire Plus Insider. Hi, Michael. My question is, how can I talk to my liberal sister from Denver about abortion so that she at least doesn't have this view of me as some misogynistic right-wing extremist? For context, we had our first conversation about abortion recently.

Since then, she has been sending me articles and texts, all of which essentially say pro-lifers don't care about women, I don't care about women. Additionally, she doesn't expect me to understand or care because I'm not a woman myself. And because I'm just forcing my religious ideology on women. And therefore, I don't believe in religious freedom either. So I'm afraid that based on the biased media she consumes and everything she's been saying to me recently, that our relationship has been hurt by this subject. And I would appreciate any tips on talking to her about this in a charitable and compassionate way

so that she understands my views are caring about both the child and mother completely and totally. Thank you, Michael. Bye. First question to ask, sorry that you have problems with your sister. First question to ask is, and ask yourself, I'm not saying you have to ask her this. has your sister had an abortion?

According to the Goopmacher Institute, which is the think tank for Planned Parenthood, one in four women will have an abortion at some point in their life. And that number seems really high. I sort of believe it. I know a number of women who have had abortions. Has your sister had an abortion? I think many of the most vocally, not all, but many of the most radically vociferously pro-abortion women

have had abortions. And so as a defense mechanism, they have to defend abortion as a political matter. And they have to do it because the alternative is they have to look themselves in the mirror and admit that they committed murder. Not just any murder, that they murdered their own child. And that is just really hard to do. Okay.

So I think that's a big part of it. The arguments your sister is making are totally scattershot and ridiculous. She says, if you don't think baby you should be murdered. that you don't believe in religious freedom or something like that. But of course, you know, you could flip that on its head and say, well, you're demanding that we live in a country that sacrifices babies. So you're demanding that paganism be the religion of the land and you're infringing on my freedom to live in a country that does not sacrifice babies to Moloch.

Or even if you wanted to say it in a more secular way, say, well, you're demanding that we live in a country that is effectively atheistic that does not tolerate a public expression and a public life of Christianity so that you're forcing liberalism on me. If she says, well, I just want women to have choice, right, you're making an idol of choice. You are forcing the totalitarian ideology of liberalism on me, even though my religious views are not liberal. So some view is going to predominate. You just want your view to predominate, and I think my view should predominate, happens that you, not your sister, but you are more correct. If it is the case, as it is for many women, that they really support abortion because they've had an abortion themselves, then the thing to impress upon them is, it's paradoxical, but it's twofold.

You have to impress upon them that they really are much worse than they admit they are. they are morally far more broken and degraded than they admit they are. And simultaneously, there is redemption. And they could be made better and they could be made more whole than they ever dreamt in their wildest dreams. This is the paradox of it, I suppose, but it's a trick of the devil. The devil tempts you and says, hey, the sin you want to commit, it's not that bad. It's not a big deal. It's your choice.

It's not even really a baby. It's not a person. and don't forget about it. Your career is more important. You can't be a mother. Your boyfriend doesn't love you. You're not going to this. Da-da-da-da-da-da.

It's no big deal. Just kill the baby. And then the minute you do it, the devil gets in your ear and says, wow, you're the worst person that's ever lived and there's no redemption and no one could ever love or forgive you ever. This is it. This is your whole life. You better.

You better. If you acknowledge what you know is morally true, you're done. You're toast. You're irredeemable. That's the trick that the devil plays. and he's a liar and he's the father of lies, so everything there is a lie. It is a big deal.

You don't really have the freedom of choice to murder a baby. You don't have any right to do that. It really is your baby. And you can be forgiven and you can and God still loves you. But you have to repent and you have to acknowledge moral reality. Are you just going to spin out into madness and continue to make bad arguments and drive yourself crazy? That's the hard way. You know, perhaps you're asking me this question.

So I give you three easy. arguments to convince someone that abortion's bad. I was convinced by arguments by a bioethicist, because, in part, because I'm a man, I suppose, and obviously I've certainly never had an abortion. But I think for a lot of women, it's much more personal. And I think I was talking to a female friend of mine about this. And she said, yeah, I think women just gaslight themselves, basically. Women know it's a baby, but they just gaslight themselves. Okay. And so I think that's a part of it. I think you got to get more to the heart of the matter. Okay. Next question. Hey, Michael. I doubtly you'll be that fond of the origin for my question, but bear with me.

As conservatives, we all know that the modern idea of separation of church and state, which tells us that we have to separate our religious and spiritual beliefs from our politics, is not only false, but completely impossible because our beliefs influence our worldview, which in turn defines our politics. However, when researching the origin of this phrase, I find that the classic meaning of separation of church and state is much more literal, referring to the idea that the church and the state as institutions are and ought to be separate because they have different purposes and goals that cannot be properly achieved when both are combined into one institution. Or, to put it simply, the state should not be the church and the church should not be the state.

What are your thoughts about this traditional meaning of the term and where do you think the distinction lies? Thanks. Excellent question. stated and I totally agree with that view. The notion that the state should have nothing to do with the church is absurd because all political order involves practical morality and that necessarily comes from religious premises. So there's got to be some kind of religion. But in pagan ancient Rome, the religion and the state were identical with one another. Not in Christian Rome, not after Constantine, but in pagan Rome and in some modern establishments up to an including the United Kingdom. So I agree with that classical distinction.

That's why I follow Dante in this. I think that the state can receive great light from the spiritual power, you know, the church. And they should cooperate, but they're not identical. So this is why I'm a Catholic and not an Anglican. Next question. Hey, Michael. Happy Friday. I am such a huge fan.

of your show and really thankful for what you do. With this election cycle, naturally, when conversing with undecided or independent voters, January 6th comes up a lot. I recently had a conversation with someone who stated that because that incident took place inside the Capitol building, which is the seat of power for America, the location is what made January 6 an insurrection and worse than the BLM riots, unless they could never be convinced to vote for Trump. So my question for you is, what bearing does the location of January 6 have in these conversations and how would you respond to somebody making this argument? Thanks. Well, it's a false distinction between BLM and the January 6 people because BLM also attacked

federal buildings and government buildings. So even if you're saying, no, it's one thing if you burn down the Nike store and kill people in their private homes, but it's another if you take selfies at the Capitol, somehow the capital thing is worse because it's a government building. No, BLM burned down like federal courthouses, okay? So at least lit them on fire. So that's a silly distinction. But furthermore, no, probably you would say in a certain sense, not maybe not to burn something down or to commit acts of violence, but to have a major protest, it is much more defensible to do it in a government building or at the U.S. Capitol than it would be to do it at someone's home. So for instance,

The Libs protested outside of the Supreme Court conservative justices private homes. That's illegal. Now, it's not as though the federal government or even the Virginia government did anything to stop them, but that's illegal. You're not allowed to do that. It's actually illegal to protest outside of a courthouse, too, because the court is supposed to have independence and not be swayed by the mob. However, the private homes have a particular kind of protection, whereas we do have the right to arrest our grievances. So as long as we don't get violent or make any direct threats or anything, you can go and, in fact, are encouraged to go to the Capitol and err your grievances in an orderly way. So your friend's argument is a little bit weak.

Next question. Hi, Michael. Aaron here, big fan. Wanted your thoughts on inviting children to weddings. So my fiance and I are currently planning our wedding for next year. And we plan to have a traditional Catholic ceremony followed by a more formal reception outside of the church, obviously. So we initially decided that we didn't want to invite children in our family because we wanted the reception in particular to feel like an adult event

and really allow people in our family to enjoy themselves without being distracted by children running around. But my family, who's very Southern, has become very offended by this decision and thinks that we are intentionally leaving out members of our family from our special day. What are your thoughts on this? Am I overreacting about children or am I right? Looking forward to it. Leave the kids at home. Basically, I'm not saying that kids should never be invited to weddings. I've been to weddings that have kids that can be very fun.

But if you would, there are two different kinds of weddings, though. And if you would like the kind of wedding that is really just for adults, or maybe really older kids or something, then do that. There's nothing wrong with that. Look, I mean, I love kids. I'm around kids all the time. I got three kids of my own, three under four, you know, and we're going to keep churning them, God willing. So I am not in any way anti-kid, but it's good for there to be adult spaces too. You might say, okay, if a lot of members of your family have a ton of kids and they don't have a lot of money and they can't find a babysitter and they've got to travel and this.

And it means that a lot of your family, not just the kids, but a lot of the adults in your family won't be able to come to the wedding because of the kids. And then maybe you make a prudent judgment. You say, okay, maybe we'll allow kids just so that we don't lose 50%. of the guests of our wedding. But if generally speaking, people can find babysitters and it's only a few people who might have to miss because of the kids thing, and this or that, it's okay. It's okay for

adults to have their own spaces. It's all right. There are hierarchies. There are different, there's variety to life. That's actually very conservative. It's not anti-kid for adults to go to an elegant affair every now and again. Okay, it's fake headline Friday.

The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member use code. Noles at Checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Republicans or Nazis, you cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people. Growing up, I never thought much about race. Never really seemed to matter that much. At least not to me. Am I racist?

I would really appreciate it if you love. I'm trying to learn on this journey. I'm going to sort this out. I need to go deeper undercover. Joining us now is Matt, certified DEI expert. Here's my certifications. What you're doing is you're stretching out of your whiteness. This is more for you and less for you.

Is America inherently racist? The word inherent is challenging there. I want to rename the George Washington Monument to the George Floyd Monument. America is racist to its bones. So inherently. Yeah, this country is a piece of... White folks, trash, white supremacy, white woman, white boy. Is there a black person around here?

What's a black person right here? Does he not exist? Hi, Robin. Hi, what's your name? I'm Matt. I just had to ask who you are because you have to be careful. Never be too careful. In theaters now, rated PG-3.

G13.