The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 762 - Bomb Throwing At Home And Abroad

Episode Date: May 12, 2021

Israel breaks out into violence, Ted Cruz rips up the Corrupt Politicians Act, and Liz Cheney wins the coveted endorsement of OJ Simpson. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Israel and the Palestinian territories are going up in flames after years of relative peace during the Trump administration. But do not worry because President Biden has things under control. He has sent his spokesman out to kindly and politely tell people to please de-escalate. Since last week, he has directed his team to engage intensively with senior Israeli and Palestinian officials, as well as leaders throughout the Middle East. his team is communicating a clear and consistent message in support of de-escalation, and that is our primary focus. That's good.

That's what does it. That's what brings peace to the Middle East is a clear and consistent message from the team of the president to de-escalate, even though the president's own messaging on his support for Israel's enemies has been a little bit inconsistent, which has probably led us to this very, very moment. Probably not going to be able to breathe easy in that part of the world for a few years. years. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Nulls show. Welcome back to the show. My favorite comment yesterday is from Lisa Gentile as being heavily censored. That's the name. The comment is giving immoral people the liberty to act immorally makes the world a worse place. Yes, of course

that's true. It's not even liberty. The idea, this is just what the libs and the squishes say liberty is, where they say that, you know, if you don't allow transvestites to jiggle in front of babies and toddlers, you know, that's depriving America. of their liberty. You think, I don't think James Madison quite had that in mind when he was writing the Constitution. I'm not sure that's exactly what Thomas Jefferson was thinking about in the Declaration of Independence. People, they need to just relax a little bit, to have a little bit of prudence and see the world a little bit more clearly. One great way to relax, check out First Leaf. Who hasn't been there? You're standing in the wine aisle, you're staring at the shelves.

Do you want a California red? Maybe you want one from Oregon. Maybe you want some. something organic. Maybe you just want the one with a really nice label, but how do you know? What's going on? Thankfully, there's First Leaf, a better way to discover wine at a fraction of the price that you will find in a store. First Leaf is a fully customizable wine club, sends curated boxes of wine that are perfect for you. They've got more award-winning wine than anyone else. First Leaf works directly with the world's best wine makers, not only to find the best wines available, but to pass the savings on to you, saving you up to 60% off retail. I've been a member of multiple wine clubs. The only one I've ever really liked is First Leaf.

And I have subscribed for a very long time. Save time, money and stress with First Leaf, the Wine Club designed with you in mind. Join today, you will get six bottles of wine for, I kid you not, 2995, and free shipping. It's an insane deal. Head on over to tryfirstleaf.com slash Knowles. You will be hooked. It's just terrific stuff. Six bottles of wine for 2995, and free shipping at Tryfirstleaf.com slash Knowles. What is going on in Israel? I don't know. How much time do we have? We could be here for a very long time. A lot of news outlets are going really, really, really in depth on exactly what started the conflict. And the left wing outlets are saying the Israelis started this and the right wing outlets are saying it was the Palestinian Arabs and it was

because of this and it was because of that. And you could spend a whole lot of time going back through the millennia to find the origin of this particular conflict. For our purposes, what is relevant today is the timing. Why is this breaking out right now? Why were things relatively cool under the Trump administration? But now they've gotten a lot hotter under the Biden administration. It's because of two competing approaches to the Middle East. When John Kerry was Secretary of State before he was gallivanting all over the world trying to stop the sun monster, John Kerry said that there is no way to bring peace to the Middle East without first solving the Palestinian problem. What is the Palestinian problem. Well, you got this country, Israel, which is created in 1948, and you've got

Arabs that are in the region, and then you've got national borders being set all around, and then you've got this group of people that the other countries don't want, and that are holding out hope that they can get rid of Israel entirely, and this has created violence, and violence has ebbed and flowed over the years. Why, again, there is no reason to go any more in depth on that. That way lies madness. The thing that matters for us right now is why were things relatively peaceful under Trump and why are they getting more violent under Biden? Because Donald Trump sent a clear message. He said the United States is not going to tolerate attacks on the existence of Israel. We're not going to give money to people who hate us in the region and we're not

going to side with Iran. Why is this? Well, very famously, I remember seeing them when I was 11 years old. images on September 11th of Palestinian Arabs dancing in the streets. If you want the support of the United States, it's not a good idea to dance in the streets in celebration when the World Trade Center is attacked. So there are, but even beyond the Palestinian Arabs, there are lots of places in this region that don't like us very much, notably Iran. The Democrats' strategy on the Middle East was suck up to Iran and suck up to the Palestinian Arabs. And if you focus on the Palestinian issue, that will solve the Middle East. The right took a completely different approach. Donald Trump said, John Kerry, you're wrong. You don't need to solve this Palestinian issue.

You're not going to solve this Palestinian issue. So we're going to go directly to the actual nation states in the Middle East, because don't forget, Palestine is not a country. It's that country east of Wakanda and left of Narnia, right? It's not, there is no nation state there are called Palestine. So go to the other places and you'll get peace deals. This is what happened. And Iran is a big issue here. the Obama administration, Biden want to send pallets of cash to Iran, the Trump administration kills Iran's top general. Different friends, different allies, different approach to the Middle East. Which one worked out better? We have the data.

We've got the evidence. Things were much more stable, much more peaceful under Trump. But that is not stopping Democrats from going back to the same old failed strategy. Bernie Sanders tweets out, The United States must call for an immediate ceasefire and an end to provocative and illegal settlement activity. And we must also recommit to working with Israelis and Palestinians to finally end this conflict. I think most people are going to, first of all, they're going to read this tweet and see that Bernie Sanders is blaming Israel here, right? Okay.

But they're going to read this tweet and they're going to say, what do I care? What do I care as an American about Israel and, Palestine and the Middle East. Why do we have to be there at all? What is the point of this? Why is our foreign policy dominated by this one region of the world? And they have a good point. The American foreign policy should be pretty simple. Do what is in the interest of the United States. Right? Seems simple enough. Now, this gets complicated because we are involved in lots of world affairs and we have alliances and we are dependent on certain places and we, it matters to us if one power gets too big and we want to suppress other powers. So I'm not saying it's as simple

as put your head in the sand and hope that everything is okay in the Middle East. But if our foreign policy is to do what is in the interest of the United States, then it would seem very much to be in our interest to keep things relatively stable over there without having to send troops, without having to really get involved in any wars. When wars break out, people have to start taking sides, people have to start getting involved. And the fact is, the simple fact is, that the policy of legitimizing the Palestinian nation state led to more violence, dragged America into this issue much, much further. And the policy of basically ignoring the Palestinian claims for a nation state and just going

directly to our other friends and allies in the Middle East, going to other Arab states in the region and saying, hey, make peace, don't be a jerk, keep things calm, we're going to be back over here on the other side of the Atlantic. that seemed to work out pretty well. So perhaps we should do more of that. But of course, Joe Biden, the liberal establishment, the broad sort of liberal imperialist foreign policy types, they don't want that. They don't seem to want that at all. Big, big takeaway from what's going on in Israel right now. Very important to be able to defend yourself. It is pretty amazing to watch you're seeing rockets going into Israel. And then Israel just popping them off. It just doesn't matter.

Israel's Iron Dome strategy is pretty amazing. It's just they're a very well-defended country. Now, nations are not the only entities that have the right to defend themselves. Individuals have the right to defend themselves as well. Senator Cruz has made this point yesterday. Senator Cruz was in a hearing on gun control, and the libs were making such disingenuous arguments about how, look, we don't want to take your guns.

What we want to do is track your guns. guns. We want to know where they are, but we're not going to take them, but we want to know exactly what guns you have, but we're not going to come take them, and we need to know exactly where you have them, but we're definitely not going to go steal your guns. And Senator Cruz knocked that argument down. Democrats don't want to address the consistent, proven empirical failure of gun control laws. They don't work, and they make crime worse. But they also want to scapegoat law-abiding citizens. The hobbyists who make homemade guns who are not committing crimes.

They want to scapegoat them. But the real issue is in something Chairman Blumenthal made several references to. He referred to these guns as untraceable. And that term was meant to be ominous. That's what this is all about. The Democrats on this committee want to trace every firearm in America. They want a registry of every firearm in America. They want a government list of what guns.

guns they are? There are. Who owns them? How many they own them? And inevitably, when you see countries enact registries of firearms, the next step is confiscation. And numerous Democrats on this committee have advocated for confiscating firearms. Of course. This is obviously true. If you believe that Democrats want to trace your guns, they want to know exactly how many you have, they want to know exactly where you keep them, but they're not interested in taking them, then I have got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. So Senator Cruz hits that point. He also hit an important point at the top of that. I don't know if you caught it, which is he addressed this issue of the ghost guns. You're going to hear a lot about this on leftist media. They're going to

say that there's this issue of ghost guns. What are ghost guns? It's guns that people make themselves. And the ghost guns, they're a really big problem. We've got to stop the ghost guns. There is zero evidence that ghost guns are involved in crimes, ever. Here's who, for people, I suppose, who are not involved in firearms, who do not know people who are firearms hobbyists. The people who make ghost guns are kind of nerdy gun types who are just really interested in this, who in my experience, and I think the data bear this out,

are the most law-abiding people in the country on the issue of guns. They know exactly what the rules are, they follow them meticulously, they're very responsible with their firearms. And Cruz is saying this is a completely fake issue that Democrats are pushing because they want to take away your guns. I have to give Senator Cruz credit. I don't just say this because we co-host a podcast together, the verdict podcast.

We're going to have some new episodes of that coming out soon. I don't just say this because he is a friend of mine. He destroyed the libs yesterday. I don't know how else to put it. There were two hearings. There was the gun hearing. But then he also had to go in to talk about S-1 or H.R.1. It's the corrupt politicians act, that huge election power.

power grab that the Democrats are pushing right now. So he's going in between both of these hearings and just knocking down their arguments. It's very, very important because the Democrats have a lot of power right now. So the only power that we have as this legislation goes through is to expose every aspect. I think the Democrats want to pass this stuff without anybody seeing what's really in it. And Senator Cruz is spelling it all out right in front of them for the TV cameras to put a lot of political pressure because this is all going to come down to two senators, Joe Manchin and Kirsten Cinema, the two somewhat moderate Democrats who will decide whether or not to get rid of the filibuster, who will then, that decision will then decide whether or not we're going to have

a radically different political order. If you want to protect yourself from all these sorts of things, and most notably from people who are at your front door, you've got to check out ring. So much is going on at our front doors these days. Obviously, this is increased for me if someone's stopping by, if something's going on outdoors. Even if someone doesn't ring the bell, you will be able to see and speak to whoever's out there with Ring. Ring allows you to do that, whether you're in your office, whether you're in your bedroom, whether you are on the other side of the world. Ring has hassle-free, easy to install indoor and outdoor cameras. You will never miss a visitor. Some visitors will be welcome, some will be unwelcome, and it helps

for you to know. I really recommend it makes me feel safe. When I'm on the road, I know sweet little a leasing cute little junior protected, makes a great housewarming gift for my friends because it's super cool and great and not very expensive so you get credit for a good gift. You don't have to spend a lot. Don't wait. Get a special offer on the ring. Welcome kit at ring.com slash knolls. Comes with rings, video doorbell three and chime pro. The perfect way to start your ring experience. Go to ring.com slash knolls. What is that web address? That is ring.com slash knolls. Senator Cruz knocked down a lot of the gun arguments of the gun hearing. He then goes across the street, shows up to the corrupt politicians act hearing. This is a major, major power grab here. And the way it's

being pushed is it's a way to protect minority voters against the evil Jim Crow racist regulations such as requiring an ID to vote. Voter ID. That's good. That's what this law would do is say states are not not allowed to have voter ID laws. They're going to say states are not allowed to ban murderers from voting. States are not allowed to ban child rapists from voting. States are not, there's so much in this law. And Senator Cruz hit on, I think the part that politicians are most excited about, the law would give politicians a lot of money.

You know, as the American people think of needy populations in need of assistance, I have yet to encounter a single constituent in Texas or in any of our states that considers politicians anywhere near the top of the list. This bill, in addition to being the Corrupt Politicians Act, is also the Welfare for Politicians Act, because this bill creates a matching program for politicians, not just an even matching program, a six-to-one matching program of federal funds

flooding into federal elections. Your constituents, in every one of your states, I'd venture, do not want to give your campaigns, or my campaigns, millions of dollars of federal money. We don't need welfare for politicians, and I urge you to support Senator Blentz Amendment. That matching funds is pretty amazing. It's six to one. So it's six to one of donations under a certain amount of money. So six to one of small dollar donations. Senator Cruz did the math yesterday, and it turns out he would be the number one recipient in the Senate, or in that room,

rather, and he would receive $24 million from the government. But all of the, these guys would receive millions and millions of dollars. Does that seem like the sort of law that is above board, a law where the senators are legislating that they get millions and millions of dollars of your taxpayer money? I don't think so. He also went out and called the bill Jim Crow 2.0 and that's getting a lot of play because they're saying this is they're looking at it through a racial lens. But what was Jim Crow? Yes, Jim Crow had a racial component, obviously. But the purpose of Jim Crow was not just to be a meany to people of a different race. The purpose of Jim Crow was to keep Democrats in power. Democrats are the party of

Jim Crow. The point of it was to make sure that there was no threat to democratic political rule. And that is the point of the corrupt politicians act. And one other way they're doing it, it's not just that they're taking money, it's not just that they're from taxpayers, it's not just that they're enfranchising people who should not vote, it's not just that they're taking away voter ID measures. It's that they're also registering millions of illegal aliens to vote. If this law passes, millions and millions of illegal aliens will be registered to vote. And the Democrats are going to tell you that that is not the case, but there's a little hidden provision in that law that proves that that is exactly what they're doing and they know

that that's what they're doing. I believe it is the intent of this bill to register to vote millions of illegal aliens for the purpose of diluting the vote of American citizens and making it harder for the people to vote Democrats out of office. This bill right now automatically registers to vote anyone who interacts with the government. So if you get a welfare check, if you get an unemployment check, if you get a driver's license, you attend a public college or university, you're automatically registered to vote. Millions of illegal immigrants fall into those categories. If Democratic senators vote, as I think most people expect, against this amendment,

it makes clear that their objective is just what. any ordinary person reading the bill would think their objective is, which is to register millions of illegal immigrants, to vote illegally, because they believe it benefits them in a political and partisan manner. It obviously does benefit the Democrats in an illegal and partisan manner if illegal aliens get registered to vote. There are just a lot of polls on this that illegal aliens and particularly immigrants from Latin America vote overwhelmingly and identify overwhelmingly with the Democrats. That's just the way it is.

I know Ronald Reagan said that Hispanics are Republicans. They just don't know it yet. Well, we're still waiting. You know, that was, what, 1982 that he said that? And we're still waiting on it. It hasn't happened. Democrats know this and they're trying to exploit this. In the bill, the Democrats would give amnesty to illegal aliens for voting.

So the illegal aliens who do vote would not be held legally accountable for voting illegally. which is an admission that the law will register to vote millions of illegal aliens. If the law is not going to register millions of illegal aliens, then good. You don't need to worry about giving them amnesty when they vote. But they know what the effect of this is going to be, and they don't want to hold their own illegal voters accountable for doing their bidding. So they're going to let them off the hook as well. And then finally, finally in our fan girling here of Ted Cruz, I'm not, no one can ever tell

him that I was this nice to him on the show. But he did it. He was so great yesterday. He was like the only senator actually senatoring. There are a lot of senators go out there and they, what do they, they shake hands and they smile and they pat people on the back. But Senator Cruz was actually senatoring yesterday, introducing lots of amendments, knocking down the arguments in this bill, getting it all out there in public. And he ripped up the Democrats' ridiculous lie that they're not for defunding the police. You know, you and I are old enough to remember the past. year, more than a year, when Democrats have been shouting from the rooftops that they want to defund the police. Well, now they're trying to run away from that position, and because the left

controls the media and controls the institutions of communication and also now controls the government, they think that they're going to be able to get away with it. Cruz says, no. Before you leave, Senator Cruz, I might just take this occasion to correct a couple of the misrepresentations in what you just had. First of all, so far as I know, no member of this community, and members of the Senate on this side of the aisle are in favor of defunding the police. That is a massive distortion. You just said a moment ago that no Democrat favors abolishing the police. If that were the case, why did every single Democrat vote to confirm Vanita Gupta,

a nominee for the number three position of the Department of Justice, who said last year in writing, in written testimony, written testimony before this Senate advocated abolishing the police. And she was confirmed by one vote. Every single Democrat was the necessary vote to confirm a radical who advocated abolishing the police. And just this week, we're taking up Kristen Clark, another radical who has last year in testimony before the Senate advocated abolishing the police.

If you don't support abolishing the police, why do you keep voting for nominees who advocate abolishing the police? So totally knocks it down. I mean, you'd also just have to play clips of virtually every prominent Democratic politician either implying that they would go along with this defund the police nonsense or that they actually want to defund the police. And why do the Democrats want to defund the police? Rather, why do the leftist activists want to defund the police? Because the police are the physical representation of our system of justice here. And the left wants to totally upend our system of justice. They want to totally revolutionize it so that they can implement their own perverse

standards. A process that I described at length in my upcoming book, Speechless, Controlling Words, controlling minds, which is available now for pre-order. Pre-order is doing great. So you can pre-order it on Amazon, but you can also pre-order assigned first edition copy. The book is at the printer now. It is out of my hands. No more edits will be made, and it will be in your hands very soon, but only if you pre-order. The defund the police line has gained a lot of traction. You've got to give Colin Kaepernick credit. You do because what started with some jerk football player disrespecting our country and disrespecting the flag is now ending up in legislation. It's ending up being parroted by very prominent politicians, even if at this moment

they want to run away from it because crime is spiking. This has become mainstream. The Balls to defund the police have become mainstream. And a lot of it goes back to Colin Kaepernick, taking that knee, disrespecting the star-spangled banner. Well, Colin Kaepernick is back in the news because of what we are told as a grave injustice. Tim Tebow, a football player, former football player, former and future football player, is back in the NFL after many years away. But Colin Kaepernick just can't catch a break.

he's being persecuted for his skin color. He's being persecuted for the systemic historical oppression. He's actually being persecuted because he's a big jerk and people don't like him very much because he says things that are very offensive and wrong. But this story, I think, shows you. The Tebow-C-Coh-Cohparnik issue shows you the big divide in America and why we're really talking past one another and why there's unfortunate. very little hope of coming together until we can all get on the same page about what we even

believe in this world, about our place in this world, and our place in this country and who we are ourselves. Ben is going to be talking about how Joe Biden is Jimmy Carter's revenge. He is, it is weird. We got the gas shortages. We got problems in the Middle East. So you can go check that out on Ben's show. Also, you may have noticed that today our country is feeling less free. There's lockdowns. There's cancel culture. There's all this. kind of stuff. Well, I'm not the only one with a book out. Ben also has a book coming out, not so long after my book. So go check that out. The book is called The Authoritarian Moment. That's actually going to be my campaign slogan when I run. Knowles 2024, The Authoritarian

Moment. Go check out Ben's book as well. We'll be right back with a lot more. Tim Tebow gets to play in the NFL again. Colin Kaepernick does not. Tim Tebow is signed now with the Jaguars after being away from the NFL. I guess he's been away from playing in the regular season for nine years now, but he was briefly back in the NFL or something six years ago. I don't know, you can tell. I'm not the biggest football fan, which I think perhaps gives me a little more perspective on this thing, because there's an image that's going around the internet. It's Colin Kaepernick taking a knee, and it's Tim Tebow taking a knee. They both did the same thing on the field. So how come one of them gets to play again and one of them is not in the NFL?

Well, people will argue, well, Kaepernick's not that good at QB, and then people will argue with Tim Tebow is not that good, but actually Tim Tebow is going to play a different position now, and maybe Colin Kaepernick couldn't do that. The left is arguing that Tebow and Kaepernick are doing the same thing. They're both taking a knee on the field, and the only reason that Kaepernick is not allowed back in is because he's black and Tebow's white. The right is pointing out that, yes, physically, Tebow and Kaepernick do the same thing on the field. But the meaning of what they're doing is totally different. Tim Tebow is taking a knee in gratitude to God. That is, and this is not ambiguous. He's been very open about this. That is the meaning of

his, of this symbol of what he's doing. Kaepernick is taking a knee to disrespect the star spangled banner, which is the flag, which is the symbol of the whole country. And he pretended for a little bit that he was just protesting police brutality or whatever that is. But he's not because then when he became the face of Nike sneakers, he was able to nix a product that was going to come out with the Betsy Ross flag. So not just the current American flag, but the revolutionary American flag. I don't think police brutality was a big issue in 1776. But obviously the object of Colin Kaepernick's protest is not just the cops, you know, They beat up, what was that guy's name, Rodney King 30 years ago.

It's not just that. He's protesting the cops as a symbol of the justice system as a symbol of the country and his real issues with the country, which he says is systemically racist and intrinsically unjust. And that's why he wants a revolution. People like the guy who's humble and respectful and gives thanks to God. People don't like the jerk, spoiled brat Pinko, who hates his own country and therefore his countrymen. This is not complicated. These are totally different things. But in the left's confusion over what this symbol means, you see the source of so much of their confusion.

What the left is seeing here is only the physical. The left thinks that the physical predominates everything. So it's skin color, most notably, right? skin color is the reason that it's how we can explain everything in the entire world. It's just based on skin color and white supremacy. Or sex. You know, women are oppressed because of their physicality, because of their bodies. Or the transgender issue, which is that the physical is so important that even if someone believes on the deep metaphysical level that they're a woman and they think that their real body has no, nothing to do with who they really are. Right. So in that sense,

you have the denial of the physical, but you actually can become the other sex just by mutilating yourself and getting some surgeries or putting on a dress or some lipstick and stilettos. That if you do change the physical, then there is no question that that is who you really are. And you see that all this physical stuff in Kaepernick, but you see the metaphysical, you see the spiritual Antibo where he's down there and he's thanking God. This is a spiritual turn that has a physical term. physical representation. If we want to destroy our country, we can only focus on skin color and sex and resentment and pride. The deadly sins, vices, and the physical world, to the exclusion

of the spiritual. If we want to have a country, we can get rid of the resentment. We can get rid of the pride and we can embrace humility and gratitude. Gratitude to God, ultimately, but gratitude to our forefathers who gave us this country. Gratitude to the country itself, gratitude to our countrymen whom we live with. That's the way forward. And that's why people like Tebow enough to put him back in the NFL.

And even though I have no intention of ever watching him play, I am pleased to see that people are at least keeping that little bit of common sense. Speaking of being out of a job, Liz Cheney is about to lose her job. Liz Cheney is now going to be

recalled as the leader of the House Republican Conference. So it's not the top position in house leadership in the GOP, but it's still leadership. And finally, the actual Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, has pulled his support from her. She's about to get recalled. And so she took to the floor to whine about it. Today, we face a threat America has never seen before. A former president who provoked a violent attack on this capital in an effort to steal the election has resumed his aggressive effort to convince Americans that the election was stolen from him. He risks inciting further violence.

I am a conservative Republican, and the most conservative of conservative principles is reverence for the rule of law. The election is over. That is the rule of law. That is our constitutional process. This is not about policy. This is not about partisanship. This is about our duty as a law.

Americans. Remaining silent and ignoring the lie emboldens the liar. I will not participate in that. I will not sit back and watch in silence while others lead our party down a path that abandons the rule of law and joins the former president's crusade to undermine our democracy. St. Liz making her final stand, beginning with a lie. She's saying that President Trump incited of violent insurrection. You can play the clips from the day. President Trump, very clear. Be peaceful. Be peaceful. Don't be violent. Be peaceful. As for the insurrection. What did the insurrection amount to? It killed Capitol Police officers. No, it didn't. It didn't. That was a lie. That was a lie pushed by the mainstream media. Well, people did die that day. That's true. One of the Trump supporters died.

Was killed by Capitol Police. That's it. That's who died in the political violence. Well, they almost took over the government. No, they didn't. They didn't almost take over the government. Some guy stole Pelosi's podium and another guy in a horn helmet danced around on a desk. But there was never any moment at which the government was almost taken over. Am I saying that it's good to go and riot in the Capitol? No. People should be held responsible, of course. But Liz Cheney's claim here, this, we've never seen anything like this. The violent insurrection is just so disingenuous. It's so, I don't even want to accuse her of being disingenuous. here. Maybe she's just totally ignorant, but it's just wrong. Leftists burned

the country to the ground for eight months in 2020. They burned down government buildings, threatening the rule of law. They're openly calling to defund the police and abolish the police, threatening the rule of law. They burn down private businesses. They threaten individuals. You've got Joe Biden and Maxine Waters putting their thumb on the scales of justice, threatening the judiciary. Maxine Waters threatening more riots. If the judiciary doesn't give the mob with the mob wine, I just don't want to hear it. It's so preposterous.

And Liz Cheney say, I'm a conservative. I'm a conservative conservative. I'm the most conservative of conservative, conservative Republicans. And yet, I didn't vote for the Republican president. I tried to impeach him a couple times. Probably didn't vote for him the first time either. And I pretty much only talk to left-wing news outlets. And I back up left-wing talking points.

And I constantly throw my own party under the bus. But I'm very conservative, don't you see? I think the final nail in Liz's political coffin. She just won a not-so-coveted endorsement. She got the endorsement of, I kid you not, O.J. Simpson. Now, there's a clip. O.J. Simpson has actually a very funny Twitter feed where he posts videos of himself. I'm not going to play it.

And the reason that I'm not going to play O.J. Simpson's commentary on my show is that O.J. Simpson is a double murderer who got away with his crime. And I just can't bring myself to give this guy airtime and, and, you know, listen to him and look at him on TV. However, it is a telling circumstance that O.J. Simpson is endorsing Liz Cheney here. The rule of law. Liz Cheney standing up for the rule of law and defended by, oh, the most infamous murderer alive in our country right now. Yes, the rule of law. He endorsed Cheney. He said, it seems that the big truth and honesty seems to be the enemy of many of these Republican politicians. and Liz Cheney stands up for the truth. That's got her a lot of heat. She may lose her position in the party. She may even lose her career as a politician. But that is something to be admired.

Standing up for the truth, that's something I know her father wouldn't have done. So he doesn't, O.J. doesn't like Dick Cheney. But right now, I'm kind of a fan of Liz Cheney. This liberal talking point that you're hearing repeated not just by double murderers such as OJ Simpson, but you're hearing it from all the left wing talking heads and you're hearing it from Liz Cheney herself is so grating. I can't, I hate it. I hate it, which is that Liz Cheney and the Lincoln Project and George Bush, that's true conservatism. You hear this. People who come, generally speaking from the liberal wing of the Republican Party, that they're the true conservatives. I once had a waiter friend of mine who, we were pals, but he was extremely left wing and would get very

fired up. And he was very angry with me for supporting Trump. And he said, no, Michael, look, I support true conservatism. You know, guys like John McCain, let me tell you about true conservatism. And what it means to them, true conservatism for these people, is

basically just refers to feckless and basically liberal people. And the way they express themselves is that you'll hear it all the time from concerned trolls on the left who will say, look, I really want there to be a strong Republican Party. Look, I actually, look, I don't agree. Okay, I'm not saying I'm a conservative.

I don't agree, but I think it's very healthy for our country to have a strong conservative movement, but just not any of the guys who were effective. Yeah, no, but you know, Trump or Reagan, well, now they like Reagan because Reagan's dead. But when Reagan was around, they called him a Nazi and a white supremacist and all the stuff that they called Trump. You know, look, I support. I want, no, you don't want there to a strong conservative movement. You don't want there to be a strong Republican Party because you think they're wrong and you want to beat them. And that's fine. We do this on the right too. We will do this. We'll say, look, I think there should be a strong liberal faction in this country. But what the left is doing right now, that's not liberal. We do it all the time. You know, the libs say that's not true

conservatism. And then the conservatives say that's not true liberalism. But how about we stop pretending that we are the experts on our opponent's ideology? And, philosophy. How about we do that? You hear this talking point from a lot of people on the right, and I think it's kind of disingenuous. The left, they betrayed liberalism. They're actually, we're the real liberals and were the real conservatives and all the good stuff that anyone ever likes, that's us, and all the bad stuff, that's the other guy. No, I think that there's a strong argument to be made that the hard left is following liberalism to its logical conclusion. Maybe there were some perversions along the way, and that's fun. That's an interesting conversation. But

their liberals, their libs, their leftists, were conservatives. They don't get to define what conservatism is because they don't have our best interests at heart and they don't really know what they're talking about. And frankly, the same can be said of the other side too. I actually go into this argument at pretty great length in my upcoming book, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds, which is available now, by the way, for pre-order. Real conservatism. I was just watching, the view. I wasn't really watching the view, but I was watching a clip from the view. And Megan McCain was interviewing Stacey Abrams. And she showed us, Stacey Abrams did. Actually, Megan a little bit too, but Stacey Abrams showed us what real liberalism looks like.

U.S. economy only added 266,000 jobs last month, which was far less than the more than one million that was expected. It was so bad that there were reporters on air that had to double check the number to make sure they had actually read it correctly, not to mention that the fact that the fact that that all of the jobs went to men. Is this a clear indication that throwing money at this problem isn't working? Actually, I would see a different way. We know this is a complicated challenge, a pandemic that's affected the economy for women in devastating ways. And the notion that recovery would happen overnight is just unfounded.

Instead, what we're seeing are the combination of being able to survive the pandemic and start to build towards recovery. And I think that's why the American jobs plan and the American families, plan are both so incredibly important because it recognizes that the economy of care, which employs so many women, has got to be seen as an essential part of how we rebuild our economy and that it is insufficient for us to simply focus on the more traditional masculine areas of the economy, recognizing that we have to have women in every area, but that in particular, women have been hardest hit, and therefore we need intentional engagement and intervention to rebuild it back more solidly.

This is real radicalism. Notice what she says, the traditionally masculine areas of the economy. So I guess not childbirth, not tending a home, not raising a family. We're not focusing on that, right? No, that's not what Stacey means. Stacey says, we need women in every single segment of the economy. We need women firefighters. We need women special forces.

We need women all throughout the entire economy. Do you really believe that? Notice even Megan is accepting the liberal premise here even in the question. I'm sure a lot of conservatives would do it, but Megan is showing it here. She goes, this is outrageous. There aren't a lot of jobs, and all the jobs are going to men. So here's a real conservative point. What if women don't need to work in the same way that men need to work?

What if men and women's relation to the economy and to society and to the family and to themselves is different? You're not really allowed to say that. Megan McCain asks this question of Stacey Abrams Why is it You know how do we fix this economy Where all the jobs are going to men Now you'll hear a lot of conservative

Actually you heard Trump do this Trump would say Look we're so happy black unemployment Is at all time lows You say that's awesome And Hispanic unemployment is at all time lows Oh great that's cool And women's unemployment is at all time lows

And you say wait hold on a second First of all women have always been employed Women have always done a lot of things Raising a family is actually harder work than what men do. It's different, and I don't mean to diminish what we men do. Look, I go out to the salt mines every day and I talk about politics and own the lips. I'm not diminishing the value of that work, but I am just saying, I've seen sweet little Elisa do it. The woman hasn't slept in four months because she's up feeding the child, and we've only got one so far. Imagine when you've

got multiple kids. Imagine when you're tending a home. Imagine when you're doing all that sort of stuff in the home economy. To say nothing of what one does outside into the community more broadly. And that's even without taking into consideration formal employment in a job. Do we really believe as conservatives that women should need to work outside the home, that they need to, that it's a positive good and it's bad if they're not working outside the home? I don't believe that. For goodness sakes, Betty Friedan, one of the most famous feminists in American history, didn't even believe that. There's a very famous exchange where Betty Friedan was talking with Simone de Beauvoir,

both very prominent feminists, Beauvoir, I guess, a little more radical than Friedan. And Friedan said, look, if women want to work outside the home, that's fine. But if they want to stay in the home, that's fine, too. And Beauvoir said, no, no way. You can't give them that choice because if women have that choice, they'll stay home. They'll want to stay home. I can't tell you how many letters I get to this show in the mailbag saying,

hey, Michael, I'm in my third master's degree or whatever. And I'm, you know, I've got to go get this job. And my boyfriend, you know, he might move. but should I follow him? I really just want to raise a family and get married, but my whole society is telling me I've got to go work for some other guy at the widget factory in middle management until I'm 40 and then maybe I can have a kid. And you just think, stop listening to these idiots in the popular culture and in the academy and who are cultural revolutionaries who are trying to ruin your life. Don't do it. It's perfectly natural if you want to stay home, raise a family,

have children, tend to home. That's good. It's a good thing. Imagine. So we, little alice has been gone for the past few days. I'm living in squalor. I'm living like a pig and slop right now in my home because men and women are different. All right, enough of that. Speaking of women who are excellent, not just, you know, not just in the terms of the natural feminine, you know, virtues and women who, a woman who works from her home, but also a woman who has a lot of political power. The Queen of England. Queen of England read the Queen's speech. yesterday. And she really, I think, upset the libs because she sort of came out in support of voter ID. Legislation will be introduced to ensure the integrity of elections. My ministers will promote

the strength and integrity of the union. Okay. So she's reading, the thing is, she's not just reading her own words as though this were some creed decor that we need voter ID. She's reading the policies of the conservative, relatively conservative government that's there. But of course, it's common sense. Everyone supports voter ID. Majorities of every demographic support voter ID, but the Libs want to tell you it's Jim Crow 2.0. Completely ridiculous. And then when they can't defend that assertion, they'll go out and say that conservatives, they're not just racist, bigot, terrible people, they're traitors. President Biden said there's a mini revolution going on in a Republican, I mean, it's a mini-civil war going

in a Republican Party. Chuck, the Civil War is over. And the conservatives have lost, and they've lost they've lost a tribalists and they've lost a tribalist who want to promote a big lie. So we've got to break down what is the big lie? Because we talk about the big lie all the time, but what is fundamentally the big lie? The big lie is promoting something that undermines democracy that actually says that the will of the American people is sort of throughout the will of the American people and is fomenting sort of attacks on our government. Right now we're at sort of national, our greatest national security threats are actually from this fomenting of these. lies. So there becomes something, there's something bigger at stake here than just partisanship. You know, all this talk about Civil War. I think back, you know, Ulysses S. Grant at the start of

the Civil War said there are but two parties now, traders and patriots. I'm afraid, Chuck, that we're increasingly coming back to that time. I fear Cornell that myself. So ridiculous. If you didn't see this clip, the man who is speaking for most of that is a grown man wearing a pinstripe suit with peak collar and a purple shirt with a white collar and a very loud tie. And he's asking to be taken seriously on a news program. And he is being taken seriously by Chuck Todd on NBC when he says that the GOP, they're the party of traders because of the big lie and the will of the people. All I will say on this is, obviously, look, the election is what the election is. Joe Biden is the president of the United States. There's no, there's no denying that.

For Republicans who have concerns about voter integrity, it is not unreasonable to have questions about a process that involved the upending of major election integrity laws that involved the expansion of things like drop boxes or even Election Day itself that did not have the traditional safeguards. And that in some cases, in the case of Pennsylvania, notably, involved violating the state Constitution on election law. It's not unreasonable to have questions about that. You're not a traitor if you have questions about that. If anything, the people who keep pushing the big lie of the big lie or whatever, you know, the lie of the big lie and the Nazis and the traitors and

all this kind of ridiculous rhetoric from the left, if anything, their insane protestations of this make me very skeptical that they're particularly concerned about art democracy and voter ID and anything like that. The erosion of faith in our institutions is what is at the heart of this? This is why people keep questioning the elections. This is not something the Republicans started. This has been going on for a long time.

Don't forget the Democrats rather wouldn't accept the results of the 2000 election. The Democrats wouldn't accept the results of the 2016 election. And there were far fewer questions in those elections. Those years, 2016, were far less unusual than 2020. in large part because of the virus and the lockdowns and the upending of our economy and the changing of a lot of these laws. So this broader, forget about 2020 for a second, the broader problem of not having faith in the institutions, that's a real threat here. And when you look at other countries that descend into absolute chaos,

I'm thinking of our friends over in the Middle East right now, you do fear that a lot of this is because people do not have respect for the rule of law, do not have respect for national borders, do not have respect for the country itself. And you see those problems festering here and they are being encouraged almost exclusively by the left. Is there anything we can do about that or are we just going to descend into the norm for the rest of the world, which doesn't look so pretty? I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knolls show. See tomorrow. If you enjoyed this episode, 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 Wals Show. The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies, executive producer Jeremy Borey. Our technical director is Austin Stevens, supervising producers, Mathis Glover, and Robert Sterling, production manager, Pavel Vidowski, editor and associate producer, Danny Damiko, audio mixer, Mike Coramina, hair and makeup by Nika Geneva, and production coordinator, McKenna Waters. The Michael Null's show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2021. A New York Times writer provokes outrage among feminists after saying she's happy about being a mother. Pretty shocking stuff. Rand Paul and Dr. Fauci clash once again. The CDC director warns

about the unspecified dangers of summer camp for children. Another famous celebrity comes out against cancel culture and Hollywood fights the racism of the Golden Globes. How are the Golden Globes racist? Well, we'll try to figure that out today and much more on the Matt Wall Show.