The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 483 - The Pro-Life President

Episode Date: January 23, 2020

Yesterday, President Trump announced that he would become the first president in American history to attend and address the March For Life, which is taking place as we speak. We will examine how a man who once called himself “very pro-choice” became the most pro-life president in American history. Then, Democrat impeachment manager Adam Schiff accidentally explains why Democrats are so eager to oust Trump before November as the impeachment trial enters its agonizing second day. And Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for defamation because we’re living in the greatest timeline. If you like The Michael Knowles Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: KNOWLES and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at dailywire.com/Knowles Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Yesterday, President Trump announced that he would become the first president in American history to attend and address the March for Life, which is taking place as we speak. We will examine how a man who once called himself, quote, very pro-choice, became the most pro-life president in American history. Then Democrat impeachment manager Adam Schiff accidentally explains why Democrats are so eager to oust Trump before November as the impeachment trial enters its agonizing second day. Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for defamation because we are living in the greatest timeline. Finally, the mailbag, all that and more. I'm Michael Knowles, and this is the Michael

Nulls show. What a great day. It's the March for Life. This is going to be a huge, I'll use huge as a Trump word demonstration for life and for the preborn in Washington, D.C. And speaking of the president, he will become the first president to attend and address the March for Life. The March for Life began in 1974. That was the year after Roe v. Wade was decided and invented the fictitious constitutional right to kill your own child in the womb. And the March for Life has exploded in recent years. I mean, it is just, they call it the pro-life generation. I used to think that was wishful thinking. It's not. Every year, more and more people show up to the March for Life. And yet, for some reason, no U.S. President has ever attended. This has been going on since

1974. You've had a lot of Republican presidents since then. You had Richard Nixon, didn't attend. Jerry Ford didn't attend. You had the Democrat, Jimmy Carter, but you got to remember, Jimmy Carter was a very Christian evangelical, right? He was a social conservative in some ways, Democrat. He didn't show up. Ronald Reagan, the great conservative president, he didn't show up. Bill Clinton, no surprise there. Bush won, no, not really a surprise. surprise there. He and his family had supported Planned Parenthood, at least in the past. Then by the time he became vice president for Reagan, he came around to the pro-life side. George W. Bush was a very pro-life candidate. He did not attend the March for Life. Barack Obama obviously did not attend. Not until we got

to President Donald Trump. Do you have a president attending the March for Life? And this is very ironic because of all those candidates, President Trump in the past may have been the most outspoken in his support of abortion. When President Trump was considering running for president on the Reform Party ticket in the late 90s, he did an interview with NBC's Tim Russert, in which he described himself as a very pro-choice. Here is then-potential candidate Trump. Partial birth abortion, the eliminating of abortion in the third. third trimester, big issue in Washington. Would President Trump ban partial birth abortions? Well, look, I'm very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything

it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still, I just believe in choice. And again, it may be a little bit of a New York background because there is some different attitude in different parts of the country. And, you know, I was raised in New York and grew up and work and everything else in New York City. But I am strongly for choice, and yet I hate the concept of abortion. But you would not ban it. No. Keep in mind, by the way, they're not talking about abortion in the first trimester here or the

second trimester. They're talking about late-term partial birth abortion. This is when the baby looks exactly like a baby, and you kill it as he's coming out of his mother's womb. And President Trump says I would have kept that legal. That is a very, very pro-abortion position. Yet in the 90s, it was a popular position. And look, I come from New York.

I was in New York in the 90s. This was, I think, the mainstream idea. And actually, it was a former governor of New York, Mario Cuomo, who came up with the excuse President Trump is using there, which is I personally hate abortion, but publicly, I support abortion on demand without apology whenever you want. So people throw this in President Trump's face. I think the fact that Trump went from being very pro-choice to the most pro-life president ever illustrates a central truth.

of the pro-life movement. We'll get to that in a second. First, I got to thank our friends over at Lightstream. I have friends of mine, family members of mine, who run huge credit card balances, or even if they're running small credit card balances, they're paying huge interest rates. Don't do that. It is extremely dumb to throw that money away. I mean, it is actually like setting on fire when you're carrying these high interest credit card balances. You can pay off those high interest credit card balances and save money with a credit card consolidation loan from Lightstream. And this is the key, there are absolutely no fees. No fees. I know you don't believe that, but no application fee, no origination fee, no transaction fee, no prepayment penalties, no fees.

You right now, if you are carrying these high interest credit card balances, you are just throwing your money away. Do not do it. Right now, by the way, just for my listeners, you can apply now to get a special interest rate discount. The only way to get this discount is to go to lightstream.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. You know, we all talk about being fiscal conservatives over here. And just on a personal level, we don't want to throw our money away. Well, start that in your own behavior. Start that at home. Let me help you. That is L-I-G-H-T. S-T-R-E-A-M dot com slash Noles, K-N-N-W-L-E-S, lightstream.com slash Noles.

Subject to credit approval rate includes 0.5% auto-paid discount, terms and conditions apply and offers are subject to change without notice. Lightstream.com slash Noles for more information. So President Trump in the 90s says, I'm very pro-choice. I support partial birth abortion as a matter of the law, and I hate it personally, but I support it politically. A lot of people held that view.

I know a lot of people who held that view. Then he changed his mind. I think it is great when people change their mind on the question of abortion. I once defended abortion. I for years, when I was a teenager, when I was ignorant, more ignorant, I defended abortion. Then I realized abortion is indefensible. So now I'm pro-life. It actually happened in Washington, D.C. I had a conversation with a bioethic who was a

teacher of mine in a summer program, and she asked me my views on abortion, and I said, oh, I think it's fine, and I gave all these dumb arguments, and she shut down each and every one of them, and I had my eyes opened on the subject. I'm not the only one. Some of the most prominent voices in support of abortion have flipped and become some of the most prominent voices in support of life when they examined the evidence, when they saw the reality of abortion. I'm talking about Norma McCorvey, you might not recognize that name, but you would recognize her pseudonym, which is Jane Roe. The woman who was used by opportunistic lawyers in Roe v. Wade, the case that 47 years ago

invented the fictional constitutional right to abortion, that woman became one of the most prominent pro-life advocates in the country. She said that her participation in Roe v. Wade, her allowing herself to be used, by those predator lawyers was the biggest regret of her life. How about Dr. Bernard Nathanson? Dr. Bernard Nathanson was the founder of Nairal. That was the National Abortion Rights League. They've changed what the letters mean over the years,

but it remains the most prominent pro-abortion advocacy organization in the country, I suppose other than Planned Parenthood. That guy, co-founder of Nail, became a very prominent pro-life advocate because he saw the reality of abortion, and he also exposed a lot of the lies that the abortion industry tells you. Like, for instance, they would say before Roe versus Wade, 5,000 women a year were dying from back alley abortions. Turns out that's completely made up. As Bernard Nathanson said, that they plucked that number out of thin air. It just sounded good.

Actually, when you look at the numbers, you're talking about a couple dozen or a few dozen women who died from back alley abortions. and as a just a percentage of the abortion procedures done in states where abortion was legal and where it was illegal, it was no less safe than legal abortions at that time. It was just a complete lie peddled by the abortion industry. Dr. Bernard Aethenson became a huge pro-life advocate. Abby Johnson. Abby Johnson is the focus of that movie unplanned. Abby Johnson worked for Planned Parenthood. She was being promoted up the ranks.

Then she saw the reality of abortion. now she is a major pro-life advocate. We have changed our minds on that subject. It's important to be able to change your minds when new evidence presents itself in every single day the evidence becomes clearer on the side of life. You know, if we were to just lock ourselves in a box

and just think abstractly about abortion, still the arguments would be clearly on the side of life. Still, they would all be against abortion. But if you just lock your... yourself in a box and thought about it or had a philosophical debate over a couple drinks with a friend, maybe you could rationalize the case for abortion. It's very easy to rationalize things, right? But when you see a sonogram, when you see a 3D sonogram, which now are ubiquitous, virtually everybody can access them. You can see that it's not just a weird little gray

clump on a screen. It's a baby. From very early on, abortion and virtually every other Every single case stops a beating heart. Now, these are not exactly arguments. I mean, the arguments from fetal pain. We just heard the other day that babies as early as 13 weeks can feel pain. People used to think it was 24 or 26 weeks. Those are not really arguments. I mean, I don't think that the reason that we shouldn't kill babies is because they can feel pain.

I think the reason we shouldn't kill babies is that they're babies. I don't think the reason we shouldn't kill babies is because their faces look pretty cute. And they look like a two-year-old baby's face. I don't care how ugly their faces are. I don't think you should kill babies because they're babies. But the arguments are not enough. They're insufficient. You have to see it as well.

A picture is worth a thousand words, and I think that's what's happened to a lot of people who've changed their minds. And I can tell you people change their minds on pro-life because it's happened to my own experience. President Trump now has the strongest pro-life record of any president in American history. Most importantly, the judges.

He's appointed textualist original. journalist, conservative judges, judges who will push back on the ridiculous invention of a fictional right to abortion. Trump defunded Planned Parenthood to the tune of $60 million through Title 10. Now, obviously, Planned Parenthood receives upwards of $500 million from the federal government. So there's a long ways to go, but he's defunded over 10% of it through the mechanisms of the executive branch. You would need the Congress to defund the rest of it. He stopped taxpayer funding for abortion overseas, also known as the Mexico City policy. He reinstituted that.

He has allowed states to deprive Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funds. He's defunded other pro-abortion organizations, and now he's become the first president in U.S. history to attend and address the March for Life. That's a great record. That is something we should all get behind. And, you know, very often we hear critics of Trump on the left, and even some on the right, right, assail President Trump's character. I think that record on pro-life, on a central, crucial issue, an issue literally of life and death, speaks very well of his character. And I think he deserves

a lot of credit for it. I think it's courageous. I think there's a reason that previous Republican presidents have not gone as far as he has. And I think we should all tip our hats to him and thank him for his great support of life. other people not so supportive of life. For instance, at the New York Times, there is an op-ed by a writer in the New York Times, just one up yesterday on the anniversary of Roe versus Wade. The title is, I'll never be ashamed of my abortion.

Just from the title, something tells me this author is protesting a little bit too much. Something tells me the author maybe does regret her abortion and she's trying to insist that she doesn't, but let's see what she writes. She says, quote, I want my daughters to have the same agency over their bodies as I did. I'm worried. They won't.

I am a medium brown-skinned, neither rich dark chocolate nor creamy cafe-olet. I'm a B-cup and have, for a black girl, a barely there. But I have flat feet and oily skin and like so many American women of reproductive age, I've had an abortion. So obviously the first part of that is completely irrelevant, the color of her skin and her breast size and her butt and her feet and her, the oil on her skin. None of that is relevant. What she's trying to say is that these are all mundane sort of trivial characteristics. And likewise, I've had an abortion. And that's also irrelevant.

It doesn't really matter at all. I think part of this too is to check off some of the. intersectional boxes because the New York Times is obsessed with racial and sexual identity politics. But here's the money line. She says, I and I alone made the decision to terminate a pregnancy more than a decade ago so that I could be, the best mother I could be, to the two children I already had. This doesn't make any sense. Killing your children can never make you a good mother. I mean, it's not possible. I'm not saying this woman is the devil that she's the worst person ever.

She can never be forgiven for her sins. She could be forgiven for her sins, and she might have other fine attributes. But simply by definition, if you kill your children, that action cannot make you a better mother. Being a mother means nurturing your children. If you kill them, that is the opposite of being a good mother. Now, this is an argument you often hear from people. They say, look, I want to decide how many children I have. So if I've already got two children and then I get pregnant, I only want two children,

so I'm going to decide how many children I have. You lost the right to decide how many children you have when you had another child. The issue here isn't when you're going to give birth or anything like that. You already have the child. The only question is, do you kill the child, do you give the child away an adoption, or do you raise the child yourself? If this woman didn't want to raise another child, she could have just given it away for adoption. There are way, way, way more couples in the United States who want to adopt American children

than there are American babies out to be adopted. So she could have just done that. She didn't do that. She took the path of killing her child. It's a terrible thing. I'm sure she faces a lot of regret and a lot of shame about that. that we hear this a lot from people who were pro-abortion advocates and then became pro-life advocates. They talk about the guilt and how they were denying the guilt all the time.

So I actually have a lot of pity for the woman, but she's lying when she said she didn't have a choice. She's lying when she said it was about raising the children she already had rather than having to raise another child. And she's lying about killing children making you a good mother. It's just not possible. and the lies that go along with Roe versus Wade and abortion advocacy. Those lies have such pernicious effects, not just on the individual, not just on society, but on our whole legal system, on our whole politics. We'll see how in a second, the impeachment fight that we're in right now in many ways can be traced

right back to Roe versus Wade. We'll get to that in a second. First, I've got to thank our friends over at Rock Auto. I love Rock Auto.com. I like them from the very beginning just because they're a family business. Rock Auto.com has been serving auto parts customers online for 20 years. And when you think about the history of online, it's pretty much the whole time. You can go to rock auto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.

They've got everything from engine control modules and brake parts to tail lamps, motor oil, even new carpet. They've got it all. What I really like about Rock Auto is that even I can understand this website. Because here's what happens. Your car breaks down. This happened to me, I guess now about five, six months ago. Car breaks down. You go to the auto body shop. You say, okay, I need these parts. They never have the parts in. They just go online. They order the parts. And then they charge you a huge markup. You don't need to do that. You can go to rock auto.com. Their catalog is so easy to navigate. You can figure out exactly which parts you need for your car, whether that's your classic car, maybe that's your daily driver. Within just a few clicks, you can check it out. Very easy to navigate. Right. Now, head on over to rockauto.com. You can find all the parts available for your car or truck.

Most importantly, write Knowles, K&W, LES, in their how did you hear about us box, so they can know that we sent you? Rock Auto.com. AOC is pushing this kind of nonsense, these incoherent arguments about abortion. She tweeted out yesterday with regard to a visa issue from the Trump administration. Trump administration is complicating visas for pregnant women who are traveling here as part of the longstanding immigration fight, right? But it includes now pregnant women. She says pregnant women. This administration is now targeting pregnant women.

When you single out the most vulnerable, the cruelty is the point. Hashtag abolish ICE. Hashtag breakup, customs and order. protection. The most vulnerable. Why are pregnant women vulnerable? How are pregnant women vulnerable? Because what the left has been telling us for 50 years now is that pregnant women are no different than you and me. They've just got a little clump of cells in them. You know, I've got my appendix. Some people have had their appendix removed. Some people have a clump of cells, a fetus, an embryo, a zygote, they say.

The zygote is the very, very first stage of an embryo, and the baby is a zygote for about five seconds, but the pro-abortion people want to pretend that it's just this little microscopic clump of cells until a full nine months and then a baby pops out all fresh. That's what they say. It's totally, it doesn't matter. It's nothing.

It has no human dignity. It's no different than a polyp or a tumor or a parasite, parasite. That's the word that they often use. Well, okay, if it's just a, if it's just like a little polyp or something or a little appendage that you don't need, then why are pregnant women vulnerable?

They wouldn't be. The reason pregnant women are vulnerable is because they have a new life forming inside of them. That's the reason why throughout most of this country, if you murder a pregnant woman, you're charged with double homicide. Now, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense logically that if you murder a pregnant woman, you're charged with double homicide, but if that woman goes to the Planned Parenthood Clinic

and kills her own child, that's all well and good. And actually, it's a wonderful thing and you should shout your abortion and never regret it. Obviously, those two things can't be true at once. And so to resolve this cognitive dissonance in New York, what they're doing is passing radical abortion laws, like the one they passed just a couple years ago, which changes the penal code and says if you murder a pregnant woman, it's not double homicide. It's single homicide. They're trying to resolve this in their heads, but they're lagging in their arguments.

So AOC fell into this trap. She said, oh, the pregnant women are so vulnerable. Why are they vulnerable? They are only vulnerable if they've got a baby inside of them. And if they've got a baby inside of them, they should not be able to kill it. Roe v. Wade has far worse implications, not just on our argumentation, on these stupid, incoherent arguments. They've got terrible implications for our politics.

They've got terrible implications for our government. They've got terrible implications even for the impeachment trial. It's given us division, political uncertainty, and impeachment. How? How has Roe v. Wade given us impeachment? Because so much now of the presidential battles are about the judges. 2016, the single most important issue in 2016 was the replacement of Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. And the left wanted to replace him with a left-wing judge.

and the right wanted to replace him with a textualist judge. The court was almost perfectly balanced, and so it really mattered which way that was going to swing. Why did they care so much about the courts? Time and again, the left admits it. They say the reason that they care about the courts is abortion, is Roe versus Wade, because there is no constitutional argument for legal abortion everywhere.

show me in the Constitution where James Madison outlined the right to kill your own child. It simply does not exist. And now even left-wing legal scholars barely pretend that this exists. Often they'll admit it doesn't exist. But it was very important for the Supreme Court to decide this, to invent this legal right to abortion. Well, it's caused a lot of division now. It's caused a lot of anxiety because we're no longer arguing about what the Constitution says. We're no longer arguing about a reasonable and objective interpretation of the Constitution. We're just arguing about how to push our own personal interests. You know, Antonin Scalia, I got to meet him twice before he died, which was probably the coolest experience I've ever had in politics.

And he had this category, which was SBC. He said certain things can be stupid but constitutional. Certain laws can be stupid but constitutional. The Constitution does not address every problem. Not everything hateful or odious or wonderful and beautiful is addressed by some provision of the Constitution. And a key example of this would be abortion. The Constitution does not outlaw abortion. Likewise, the Constitution does not create some legal right to abortion.

It's simply not addressed. And it was a question left to the States. If the question had been left to the states, you might have seen a greater liberalization of abortion laws. And then I suspect as sonogram technology got better, you would probably see a greater restriction on abortion. And probably New York would have abortion and probably Alabama wouldn't have abortion. That would be a much healthier state for the country. We could then go fight for pro-life in New York specifically. It would make it much easier.

And you would not be in a situation where the left is so desperate to maintain their right to kill babies that they're willing to throw out the duly elected president for it. that is how deep the rot runs on impeachment by the way we have a little bit to cover on impeachment the the rot of impeachment is spreading out to the presidential race it's spreading out all throughout the senate and the media aren't helping it either we will get to that in just one moment we will get to the greatest news story of the day telsie gabbard suing hillary clinton for defamation and we will get to president trump's excellent comments on the environment we will get to the mailbag But first, I have got to thank our friends over at First Leaf.

Oh, how I love First Leaf, a sponsor near and dear to my heart. First Leaf will send you excellent wine. Wines often that you've never heard about, wines that you wouldn't have been able to pick out in a store. How do you get started? So I got started with First Leaf. I took a wine quiz to assess my exact wine drinking preferences. Whether that means sweetness, style, how adventurous I am, I put this all. into the computer, right? And so First Leaf takes that into consideration, but they also don't

totally believe me because, I don't know, I can't really describe my palate that well. So they create this introductory six pack of wine for me, all for just 2995 total. This is six bottles of wine for 2995. These wines usually sell for at least $20 each. They send it to me and I try them. And I say, okay, well, you know, that's a really good wine. I really, really like that. That one's okay. maybe I wouldn't do any more of those. That's fine. And then you go online and you rate them. And based on your ratings, First Leaf gets much, much more specific on your taste. And they start sending you the next shipment. Look, First Leaf sends out more than 17,000 unique shipments of wine every month. They know what they're doing because everyone's tastes are different.

I try this second batch. It's unbelievable. So that's where my freebie was supposed to run out. But I couldn't give it up. So I now get this every month and it's fabulous. And I just love it. And you're going to love it too. Sign up with my link. And you will get an exclusive intro offer, six bottles of wine for 2995 plus free shipping. Go to tryfirstleaf.com slash knolls. Six bottles of wine for only 2995 plus free shipping at tryfirstleaf.com slash knolls. On to impeachment. Joe Biden thinks that impeachment is going to make Trump harder to beat in November. This is according to comments he made it a campaign stop just the other day. Many people when they look at impeachment are suggesting that Joe Biden is the great

beneficiary of impeachment, right? Because you've got Liz Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders are all stuck in the Senate during the impeachment trial. Joe Biden's out there in Iowa campaigning. Now we're something like 15 days out from the Iowa caucus. Actually, Joe Biden might get hurt by impeachment. This might backfire on him because Hunter Biden might get dragged before the Senate. You know, I'm doing a new podcast with Ted Cruz that is coming out every single night, Senator Cruz is going to leave the Capitol after the impeachment trial, head on over to our studios here in Washington, D.C., and then he's going to break down for us exactly what happened. Last night, and you can check this out on the second episode, a verdict with Ted Cruz.

It's out now. Senator Cruz pointed out that this all might backfire. The House Democrats may have opened themselves up to a major, major problem for Joe Biden in the impeachment. So none of these Democratic presidential candidates are really doing very well here. Nevertheless, Adam Schiff, who is the leader of the House impeachment circus, he accidentally yesterday explained why the Democrats are still really pushing for impeachment. He said the reason is they just don't think they can win it in November. The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box,

for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won. All right, that's what he says. We can't be assured that the vote would be legitimate. Look, if we took, we would take it to the ballot box, but, you know, then Trump might win. And of course, he wouldn't win fairly. I mean, no Republican could ever ever win fairly, but still, he might win, and we can't take that chance. So we want to remove him from office now before it's too late. Give me a break.

It shows you a little bit about liberalism here. The Harvard law professor, Adrian Vermewell, posted this yesterday on Twitter. Progressivism, liberalism, just assumes that by definition, it can never lose fair and square. Because progressivism says there is a clear path to progress, there's a clear place we're going, if you stop progress, if you halt progress, that is by definition wrong and unjust and unfair. And so it's always got to be a stolen election. That's why Al Gore, he couldn't possibly have fairly lost in 2000. That's why you wouldn't give up the election.

Hillary Clinton in 2016, same thing. She lost. She lost the electoral vote clearly. And yet, she refused to concede the election for hours and hours. She wouldn't even show up on election night because it's not possible to lose fair and square, according to progressivism. The media aren't helping this either. They're actually further confusing this.

Joe Lockhart, who is a CNN contributor and former press secretary for President Bill Clinton, he posted on Twitter a completely fabricated conversation, totally fabricated conversation. He says, quote, overheard convoy between two Republican senators who only watch Fox News. Is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server. If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up Schiff's Creek. Let's say shift.

He said a different word. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence. That got 8,000 retweets, 31,000 likes on Twitter. Then afterward, Lockhart says, okay, maybe I made up the convo. But you know that's exactly what they're thinking. So he just admits, I totally made that up. I was totally fictitious. That second tweet got 800 retweets and 8.5,000 likes.

There were an order of magnitude more retweets to the fake news than there was to the correction, to the admission that that was not true. We've got to get to Tulsi suing Hillary, which is just so, so great. We'll get to an important line from Trump on the environment, and then we'll get to the mailback. But first, before all of that, I've got to tell you about Paint Your Life, which I absolutely love. If you want to give a meaningful gift, go to Paint Your Life.com. What is Paint Your Life? You can have an original painting of yourself, your kids, your family, a place that you all love, a favorite pet.

You can have an original painting made at a price that you can afford. And that's at Paint Your Life.com. I want to be clear, this is not some computerized gimmick. This is a true painting done by hand by a world-class artist, all created from a favorite photo. It makes the perfect gift for any holiday. I was a little skeptical. I didn't think you could get a really good painting like this through an online vendor. So for my stepbrother's wedding, I decided to try it out on him.

I uploaded one of his wedding photos. You get to pick the artist. You get to work with the artist throughout the process. You get to see a bunch of different updates. If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded. So I get the painting. I look at it. It's absolutely beautiful. Absolutely beautiful. I mean, unbelievable work and I'm already planning to use them again for more paintings. It's just so, so cool. Right now is a limited time offer. You can get 30% off your painting. That is 30% off,

3-0 and free shipping to get this special offer text Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L to 64,000. You will not regret it. Michael to 64,000, text M-I-C-H-A-E-L to 64,000. All right. before we get into the mailbag, before we get into Tulsi, before we get into a great environmental speech the President Trump just gave that no one's talking about. I've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube. We're talking about pro-life today, obviously, for the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and for the March for Life.

While the pro-abortion activists are shouting their abortions on national TV and referring to pre-born babies as parasites, pro-lifers are fighting back. All of us here at the Daily Wire have spoken out for life. Last year, Ben Shapiro addressed a crowd of 100,000 at the March for Life in Washington, D.C. Our advertisers, as a result of those actions, were targeted by left-wing fake media watchdogs and operatives, and we lost a lot of revenue from that.

This is a constant battle to protect pro-life advocacy from the forces of abortion. Another group that has experienced, this is live action. Live action is one of the most important voices in the pro-life movement. They have helped to expose Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics for the horrific crimes they commit. Pro-abortion activists have targeted. live action and censored them on social media platforms when they don't succeed in kicking them off altogether. That's why our DailyWire members are so important. Your membership helps keep our cameras on. It keeps our microphones turned up, even when the left is pressuring our sponsors.

You can keep the pro-life message from being canceled from now until January 31st. A portion of any DailyWire.com membership will be donated to live action with the promo code, live action. Join Dailywire.com. Make your ProLife Voice heard. Head on over. We'll be right back with a lot more. I don't know if you remember this, but a little while ago, Hillary Clinton accused Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard of being a Russian asset, being a Russian stooge. Here's Hillary Clinton. I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third party. candidate. She's the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. They being Vladimir Putin and the Russians. And just in case you were

unclear of whether she's really talking about Tulsi Gabbard, because Clinton doesn't refer to her by name, Hillary Clinton's spokesman came on later, was asked specifically, are you talking about Tulsi Gabbard? And he confirmed that in no uncertain terms. He said, said if the nesting doll fits. Okay, so now Tulsi Gabbard, not going to take it lying down. She's not going to take it like Jeffrey Epstein did. Reportedly, no, I don't, I'm kidding. Or am I? I don't know. Tulsi Gabbard is suing Hillary Clinton for defamation over her remarks about this Russian asset accusation. Tulsi Gabbard's lawyers are saying that Clinton's comments smeared her political and personal reputation. Quote, Tulsi Gabbard is a loyal American

civil servant who has also dedicated her life to protecting the safety of all Americans absolutely true you got to remember Tulsa Gabbard's put on a uniform Tulsa Gabbard has served in the US military the smear from Hillary was totally expected when you look at the Clinton's political history but it was still so so wrong I love that she's fighting back this reminds me of the Nick Sandman Covington kids lawsuit against the press who baselessly smeared them as racists and bigots for wearing a maga hat I wish Tulsi Gabbard very well. I don't think Tulsi Gabbard should ever be president. I don't think she should get

anywhere near the Oval Office, but I really, really like that the infighting among Democrats is now so intense that you've got a presidential candidate suing the former presidential nominee for millions and millions and millions of dollars. That is just too sweet. Before we go, I want to highlight something that President Trump said at Davos. He was at the World Economic Forum. A group of all of these kind of crazy Western elites, businessmen, politicians, they all gather and talk about how wonderful they are and why they should all run our lives. And President Trump was there. He gave a speech about how America's come back and how he got the last laugh here on the World Economic Forum. He also gave a speech about the environment. Environmentalism, climate change, hysteria has become

the most famous religious issue of the left. The left speaks of it in religious terms, right? They talk about the end of days, the world is all ending in 12 years or 18 months, if you ask some of those politicians and public figures. They talk about how you need to confess your climate sins. I mean, NBC News set up a website that was a confessional for all of your sins against the environment. You can even buy indulgences in the form of carbon tax credit. It has a full religious system to it, this environmentalism. And President Trump totally put the kibosh on it. He exposed it for what it was, and he said,

we are charting a different course in America. Here's President Trump. But to embrace the possibilities of tomorrow, we must reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse. They are the heirs of yesterday's foolish fortune tellers, and I have them and you have them, and we all have them. And they want to see us too badly,

but we don't let that happen. They predicted an overpopulation crisis in the 1960s, mass starvation in the 70s, and an end of oil in the 1990s. These alarmists always demand the same thing, absolute power to dominate, transform, and control every aspect of our lives. We will never let radical socialists destroy our economy wreck our country or eradicate our liberty. America will always be the proud, strong, and unyielding bastion of freedom. Great, great speech, and I encourage you to watch the whole thing. What Trump points out explicitly is that these environmental doomsdayers always get their predictions perfectly wrong.

They get their priorities perfectly wrong. And we see that today. You know, the New York Times clamoring, on a daily basis, with hysterical predictions about global warming, how we have to stop using plastic straws or else the world is going to end. Hysterical stuff. And in that very same paper,

they'll talk about how we have to kill babies and we should never regret killing babies. They cry, they sob, they weep if you accidentally put too much salt in the water for the Delta smelt in California. They're so furious. They're rending their garments. if you use a plastic straw

because they're afraid of the sun monster, if you put a little carbon dioxide into the air, if you cut down a tree, they will cry. And they will celebrate when you kill a million babies a year in the United States alone. They care more about the rocks than about human beings. This is perennial with the left. The left always says they love humanity,

but they don't seem to like individual humans, all that very much. They don't seem to have a whole lot of compassion for the individual human whose life is about to be snuffed out in his mother's womb. Those are two completely opposite ways of viewing the world. One version in which we prioritize trees and little fish and rocks over human beings. And one in which we say man has inherent dignity and we should respect that dignity. And we should take care of our environment in so much as we're stewards of our, environment and in so much as that would be pleasing and beneficial to human beings. Do you want a

worldview focused on the trees and on the rocks, or do you want a worldview that elevates and respects human beings? That's the choice. You got the left on one hand. You got the right on the other. And the current right-wing leader in the United States, President Trump, is making that very clear and he's going to make it clear today at the March for Life. Let's get into the mailbag in our remaining time from Jason. Hi, Michael. A few months ago, I definitely made a mistake, especially because I'm Catholic, resulting in my girlfriend's pregnancy. Ah, I think I know what mistake you're talking about. She and I are both pro-life, and despite being 17 and 18, I know she won't abort the child. About two weeks after finding out, she left me. Wants nothing to do with me, including refusing

to contact me and giving updates about the child. I'm graduated, not in college. I'm currently working into a decent financial lifestyle, but for all I know, my ex could already have an adoption plan set up. I don't know. What advice do you have for me? Thanks. Love the show. Jason. Okay, you're in a tough spot. I'm not going to minimize that. Obviously, it's very hard to imagine that there's a perfect solution to all of this. However, you should rest easy. You should lie back and relax. You should be so happy that it does not seem like you're going to make this huge mistake of killing your child, that you will regret for the rest of your life, and that you your ex-girlfriend will regret for the rest of her life. Now, you've got to own your mistakes.

You, along with pretty much every other teenager in America, had some sexual experiences before marriage, right? That happens all the time. You're not the only one that that's happened to. And there are consequences for that. One of the consequences is your girlfriend gets pregnant. Now, I guess in a perfect world, you guys would get married and raise the kid. But maybe that's not going to happen. I mean, she's she's got the right not to marry you. She could do that. That's one of the risks you run with sex outside of marriage. Now, if she gives the child away for adoption, that's going to take away a lot of your rights. If she decides to raise the child herself, you will very likely have more rights. So you'll have to try to discuss that with her. Now, she might not want to talk to you right now.

She might be under a lot of pressure. I suspect she is. She's 17 years old and she's pregnant. So I would have some empathy for her there, or at least some sympathy, rather, because she's in an emotionally very difficult spot. And already you two have made the single most important choice you can, which is not to kill the child. If that is all you get out of this and she gives the child away for adoption or she raises it on her own or she raises it with a stepfather, you could still rest easy. what I would recommend is give her a little bit of time, be respectful, she's in just as much stress as you are, she's in probably a lot more stress than you are, and then try to discuss what will happen into the future. And you need to be willing to accept the prospect that your child is given away for adoption.

Or if you would prefer to raise the child yourself, you have to make that argument to her. You don't have a ton of rights in this situation. That's one of the consequences of your actions, and you'll have to live with that. But I think once the emotion of the situation has died down a little bit, you may be able to speak this with her. You just have to do it respectfully. You have to do it responsibly,

acknowledging that some of this is your fault. Some of the problems that you're having here are your fault, and you should do it with hope, and you should do it at least joyful in the knowledge that your child is not going to be killed. from Joshua. Michael, as a well-dressed fellow yourself, what are your thoughts on the three-piece suit?

Is it too much for an attorney? Thanks for your wisdom. I love the three-piece suit, but it depends how you wear it. You don't want to end up in one of these my cousin Vinny kind of situations. You look ridiculous or like you're some dandy from the 19th century.

But if you wear a modest three-piece suit that isn't, you know, wouldn't fit in, on like Liberace playing in Las Vegas or something, then I think it can work very well. When you wear the three-piece suit, I would recommend do not button the jacket. I think that the waistcoat being buttoned and the jacket being open is a much nicer look. It's a little more casual. It's a little easier to pull off today. But I'm a big fan of it.

Absolutely. Go for it. People dress like slubs all over this country. You could bring a little class. From Dylan, dear Michael, do you believe that the left has become so radical that are millions of Democrats who will vote for Trump in 2020. I always hear vote blue no matter who, yet I've seen people in my personal life, such as my mom, who's a Democrat stating that she will most likely vote for Trump in 2020,

just because of how the Democrats have acted in the past three to four years. Do you think she is the exception or the norm? Thanks for everything. I think there are a lot of Democrats who could vote for Trump because Trump is not a normal Republican. I mean, he's a guy who in the 90s said, I'm very, very pro-choice because I'm from New York. right he's a guy who supported democratic politicians he's a guy who talks differently than other republicans and he's a guy who on substantive policy matters has behaved in a different way from

other republicans in the way he talks about economics and the way he talks about trade deficits and the way he talks about tariffs the way he talks about foreign policy so certainly they could get democrats i think part of the reason democrats and normal left-winger maybe that's a contradiction in terms, people who are typically left wing, could go over to the Republican side this time, is in part because of Trump. He is a unique candidate. But I think in part, it's actually beyond these practical political issues, and it comes down to things like Democrats won't admit that there are only two biological sexes. Democrats had a whole debate over LGBTQ issues in which they pretended that men can be women. Julian Castro, a Democratic presidential candidate,

endorsed abortion rights not only for women, but for men, trans women, you know, men who now pretend to be women. That's probably a little bit too far. And I think in particular in some of these states that President Trump needs to win, some of the states that are going to decide the election, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, these are places that are pretty normal. You know, they're not as radical as Los Angeles or New York City. And so those social questions are really going to matter. That radicalism is not going to play very well in those places. And I think it gives Trump a big advantage, and it's going to give him advantage by taking votes from Democrats

and centrist voters and independent voters. From Margot, hey Michael, in light of your show theme from earlier this week about wanting royalty without the responsibility, I was thinking that idea could also be connected with abortion. Most of the time abortion goes back to wanting the pleasure of sex without the responsibility of parenthood. What are your thoughts, and is it possible to convince leftists that taking responsibility is a good thing? Keep the great shows coming as you get closer to 500 episodes.

Thank you very much, Margo. Yes, of course. I mean, of course, people, the reason you have sex outside of marriage is because sex is extremely fun, and marriage requires accountability and responsibility and duty and obligation, and people want to have fun, and they don't want to lock themselves down. It's perfectly understandable. Totally get it. However, people are falling into a very easy temptation,

which is to believe that duty is unpleasant, that obligation is unpleasant, that if we were free from our jobs and our obligations and the things we have to do for our loved ones and our families, if we could just do whatever the hell we want it all day long, we would be so happy and live such a good life. just BS. The playwright George Bernard Shaw said that hell is the place where you've got nothing to do but amuse yourself. And that's true. When people don't have anything to do, when they don't

have any obligations, when they don't have any demands on them, they get depressed. You know, I waited for a long time to get married, considering I met my wife when we were like 10 years old. And then I waited until my late 20s to get married. Because in this culture, especially where I come from New York and I live in Los Angeles. I was just always told, oh, don't get married until you're in your 30s. Try not to get married until you're 40 or even later. That'll be so much better. You just focus only on you and don't tie yourself down and don't have any commitments and your life will be a lot better. And I realize that's just completely untrue. I wish I'd gotten married earlier because you find meaning in your life precisely through obligation, precisely through

duty. When you just pursue your own desires and appetites all day long, that doesn't leave you feeling very satisfied. It's actually insatiable. You're not going to think, gosh, I lived a great life. I'm glad I did whatever I wanted. You actually find meaning in life through obligation and duty. And it's always going to be a temptation just to pursue your own selfish desires. But if you want to live a good life and be pleased with yourself in the end, pleased with how you lived it, it's going to be through responsibility. And speaking of meaning, you know, I'm leaving you now for the weekend. This We'll be back on the Michael Null's show on Monday. But I'm not leaving you completely without any content

because we've got the first episode out now of my new show with Prager You, which called The Book Club, and the book that we will be examining is Man's Search for Meaning. A really important book, so go check that out. That's by Victor Frankel, and it's going to be Dennis Prager and I discussing that.

So you can find that at Prager You. And then I've got another show that is going to be coming out every single night now through impeachment, which is the Ted Cruz podcast, verdict with Ted Cruz. I will be there joining the senator every single night we'll be breaking down impeachment. That includes tonight and tomorrow and every day that there is a hearing on that. And of course, you can check out the last few episodes of the final season of Another Kingdom.

This three-season long journey, Andrew Claven's narrative podcast that I think is just absolutely terrific stuff. And I'm so glad I had the privilege to read it all these years. So you can check that out. That's a lot of content for this weekend. And if somehow you make it through all that, And I'll see you back here on Monday. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knolls show. See you soon. If you enjoyed this episode, and frankly, even if you didn't, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe. We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever else you listen to podcasts.

Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, the Andrew Claven Show, and the Matt Wall Show. The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies. Director Mike Joyner, executive producer Jeremy Boring, senior producer Jonathan Hay, supervising producers, Mathis Glover, and Robert Sterling, technical producer Austin Stevens, assistant director, Pavel Wadowski, editor and associate producer Danny Demiko, audio mixer, Robin Fenderson, hair and makeup, Jesua Olvera, production assistants, McKenna Waters, and Ryan Love. The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.

For facts over feelings aren't offended by the brutal truth and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle. Well, tune in to the Ben Shapiro show. We'll get a whole lot of that and much more. See you there.