The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 889 - The Knockdown Blow To Biden's Vax Mandate

Episode Date: November 18, 2021

OSHA suspends enforcement of Biden’s vaccine mandate after Daily Wire sues, prosecutors in the Rittenhouse case get caught withholding evidence from the defense, and a Republican congressman gets censured for a spicy tweet. Andrew Klavan's latest novel When Christmas Comes is now available on Amazon. Order in time for Christmas: https://utm.io/udW6u Read the Daily Wire’s bombshell Loudoun County exposé here: https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says | Support the Daily Wire’s investigative journalism for only $4/month — use discount code REALNEWS for 25% off your membership: https://utm.io/udQ0u My new book ’Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds,’ is now available wherever books are sold. Grab your copy today here: https://utm.io/udtMJ  Subscribe to Morning Wire, Daily Wire’s new morning news podcast, and get the facts first on the news you need to know: https://utm.io/udyIF Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

All anyone wants to talk about is the Kyle Rittenhouse trial and the lynch mob forming around the written house trial and the fate of Kenosha, Wisconsin when the verdict finally comes down. And we will get to all of that because there are lots of new developments that make an already inept and corrupt prosecution look even worse. But before we do, we've got to take a break to toast some rare good news. OSHA, the government. an agency that Joe Biden is wielding to make everyone take the Fauci-Occi. OSHA has just announced that it will stop enforcing Joe Biden's illegal vaccine mandate as a result of lawsuits. Most notably, the lawsuit brought by yours truly here at the Daily

Wire, which we were able to bring thanks to the support of you, of every single one of you who have come out and helped us and signed the petition and listened and subscribed. So, for for those who have not been following the developments, Joe Biden issued the mandate, then we sued him. Then a federal court told the government to stop enforcing the mandate. Then Joe Biden told the government to ignore the court. Then, this is the crucial part, we kept suing them.

And then the government agency folded like a cheap suit, at least for now. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show. my favorite comment yesterday from old-schooled, who said the one upside of the supply chain issue is that shelves are sitting mostly empty for when the verdict is read. That's true. That will reduce the early Black Friday shopping that goes on, the cashless payment-free shopping that is almost certain to go on in Kenosha from the mostly peaceful looters. When you are holiday shopping,

When you are just shopping for yourself, something you really want to focus on is getting a good night sleep. And if you want a wonderful, magnificent night's sleep, you got to check out Helix. It's been a long day. It's been a long month. It's been a long year or a year and a half. And when you're just so exhausted, I'm telling you, one of the great consolations in the world is just flopping onto your Helix mattress when you get home. Helix sleep has a quiz that takes just two minutes to complete matches your body type and sleep preferences to the perfect mattress for you. Why would you buy a mattress made for someone else? With Helix, you're getting a mattress that you know will be perfect for the way you sleep. They've got soft, medium, and firm mattresses.

Mattress is great for cooling you down if you sleep hot, great for spinal alignment to prevent morning aches and pains. Even a Helix plus mattress for plus size sleepers. So, if you're looking for a mattress, you take the quiz, you order the mattress you're matched to. The mattress comes right to your door, ship for free. They got a 10-year warranty. You get to try it yourself for 100 nights risk-free. They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it, but you are going to love it. They've got great financing options, flexible payment plans.

So a great night of sleep is never far away. Helix is offering up to $200 off all mattress orders and two free pillows for our listeners at helixleep.com slash knolls. That's $200 bucks off and two free pillows at helixlecksleckslip.com slash knolls. big win for us on this OSHA ruling, OSHA now holding off on the Fauci-Aouchi. You do not take the Fauci-Ochi. If you don't want to, do not feel pressured to take the Fauci-Ochi until this litigation is resolved. Even the government agency backed down.

You've got to push back on these people, folks, because we have a corrupt government. And you're seeing that play out very clearly in Kenosha. So if you've been following the trial, and I know you have because we have been covering it pretty closely on this show, you'll know that the prosecution has flopped every single step of the way. Everything that we were told by the media about Kyle Rittenhouse, about Kenosha, about the shooting, basically everything we were told was BS. All of the arguments that the prosecution made fell flat. All of the evidence was on Kyle Rittenhouse's side and the side of his self-defense claims. and none of the evidence was on the prosecution side. A lot of it came down to footage from the night. There were a lot of cameras out there,

and apparently law enforcement had a drone going over and was able to view what was going on, and who shot when and who turned when and who turned where. So take a look at the footage that the defense had, the Kyle Rittenhouse team had, compared to the footage that the person, prosecution had. You can, if you're, if you're just listening right now, I will describe to you the difference. It's pretty, pretty clear. The defense had very, very blurry, grainy footage.

It looks like it was taken on a flip phone from, I don't know, 2002. The prosecution had crystal clear, high definition, incredible footage where you could make out every little detail. It's not even close. And you can just look at the size of the files. The defense had video that was 3.6 megabytes. The prosecution had video that was 11.2 megabytes. So you're talking about three times the quality for the prosecution as for the defense. So what happened?

Well, when this was brought up, the prosecution made this argument that said, no, look, all we did, we just copied the file. We gave, look, we gave the defense the same file. And look, if there was a problem with the quality of the footage, you know, the crucial evidence in this case, it's just because the defense teams, you know, their cell phones were wrong or their computers were messed up. But it's not because we didn't do anything. We're not hiding evidence. It's something on your end. You had the exact same file. Now, here's how the defense proved that was complete BS.

Every other piece of evidence from the state prime lab in this situation has been provided to us via Dropbox. Dropbox provides an exact forensic copy of what they have. The file title name in this situation should have been exactly the same as the one provided to the state if it was the exact same copy. The file name was nowhere near similar. There's no way that what ADA Krause is saying is true because the file name would not have changed if my computer was compressing anything. It was a different file that we were provided from what was provided to the state.

She's got these guys dead to rights. I never want to attribute to malice, that which is equally explained by stupidity. And the prosecution has demonstrated a lot of stupidity in this case. The arguments they're making where they say that if you arm yourself, you lose the right to sell. defense, of course, that's preposterous. If arming yourself would lose you your right to self-defense, then there simply is no right to self-defense. The prosecution, lifting up an AR-15 in a courtroom, swinging it around the courtroom, finger on the trigger, I mean, just pure stupidity. So I'm not denying that they could have been stupid enough, not to realize what they did. But this

required an intentional action. You would have had to go in there. You would have had to reduce the quality of the video, and you would have had to change the file name. So this can't be just a problem of copy, paste, whoops, it read differently on a different computer. The prosecution provided the defense with a different file, a file that was much lower quality, a file to put them at a real disadvantage for the crucial evidence in the case. case. And these guys are corrupt. Okay? It's as simple as that. They are corrupt. They might also be stupid. They might also be ignorant. They might also be incompetent. But I'm seeing malice. I am seeing corruption here. And I think we all are. Well, why did they do it? Why did they do? Whatever happened,

and now this is what's delaying the verdict, is now you're going to hear testimony about the file. However this happened, why would the prosecution have done it? Because all of their art. arguments were weak. We didn't get to this clip the other day. I want to play it, just to remind you of the weakness of the prosecution's argument. One of their closing arguments was that Kyle Rittenhouse had no right to shoot back at the people who were trying to kill him, some of whom had guns, because everybody takes a beating sometimes. These minor injuries we've heard the defendant have, again, Mr. Richards misstated the stand. standard. It is not could have caused great bodily harm or death. It is not likely to have caused

great bodily harm or death. It is imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. Where is that when you get a couple scrapes? Everybody takes a beating sometimes, right? Sometimes you get in a scuffle and maybe you do get hurt a little bit. That doesn't mean you get to start plugging people with your full metal jacket AR-15 rounds and no bullets are not bullets. And no bullets are not bullets. I think he's trying to make an argument that the AR-15 is a more powerful weapon than the handgun that the people trying to kill Kyle Rittenhouse had. But first of all, I don't think that's a great defense either.

If someone's coming at you with a gun threatening to kill you and telling you explicitly they're going to kill you, you can only shoot back with a gun of equal or lesser lethality. I don't remember that provision of the law. I don't remember the everybody takes a beating sometimes provision of the law. Do you, did you see that anywhere in the Second Amendment? The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed so long as they take a beating sometimes. But after one or two beatings, then you're allowed to fight back.

But only with a nine mill. You're not allowed to fight back with two, two, three. you're not that you that would be I don't think so I think that's pretty pretty weak yes it's true people people take a beating every now and again you know if you if you went to public school presumably at some point someone punched you right at some point you got into a fight at some but that that's true it is not incumbent upon you if you are in a riot situation with people explicitly threatening to kill you who are walking up to you with skateboards and with guns It is not your responsibility to take the beating.

What? Kyle Rittenhouse only got a couple scrapes on him. He wasn't at imminent risk of grave bodily injury or death. No, he was. He only got a couple scrapes on him because he defended himself successfully. You don't need to wait until they break your arm to, or shoot you in the head to shoot back. You have the right to defend yourself. And I suspect even this incompetent prosecution, I suspect they know that.

And I suspect they know that their case was nothing and that this never should have been brought to trial in the first place. And so they tried to cheat. You can see this picture that we're painting for you here, this picture of what's actually going on in the courthouse. If you want a beautiful picture, not an ugly picture, but a beautiful picture, I would recommend you check out, paint your life. Probably the single most special gift that you can give to a loved one this Christmas season or even your number one loved one, you in many cases. Would be paint your life. I love it. I have paint your life work hanging on my walls. I've given it to friends and family. The way it works is you take a photo or maybe more than one photo of a loved one, of a special place, of a pet. You send it in their world-class artists will paint a hand-painted

painting from that photo or those photos. It is really, really high quality. I was skeptical of it. So the first one I did, I made it, it was going to be a gift for my stepbrother. And then I saw the final product. I said, oh my gosh, this is world-class art. The price is really, really, really reasonable, and it really helps beautify your home. At Paint YourLife.com, there's no risk. If you don't love the final painting, your money's refunded, guaranteed right now as a limited offer, get 20% off your painting. Hurry up and go get it right now, 20% off, plus free shipping. To get this special offer, text the word Michael to 64,000. That's M-I-C-H-A-E-L to 64,000. Text Michael to 64, to 64,000. Paint Your Life, celebrate the moments that matter. Most

Terms Apply. Available at Paint Your Life.com. that is Michael texted to 64,000. Because of the corruption, because of the shenanigans, because of the dirty tricks that the prosecution played where they gave the defense lower quality evidence than they had, the defense has filed a motion for a mistrial, a mistrial with prejudice. What is a mistrial with prejudice? Does not mean that the mistrial is a white supremacist. does not mean that what it means is the case is dismissed and the state can't bring it again.

So if this were granted, Kyle gets off the hook and he can't be brought up again. We're not going to have another written house trial next year. Unless there's rioting and unless Kyle goes and tries to protect his community and property and then, you know, unless someone tries to kill him again and then he shoots them back, then I guess we'll be stuck in that cycle and we'll go right back. But as of right now, the defense is trying to get this mistrial with prejudice. The video footage has been at the center of this case, says the defense. The failure to provide the same quality footage in this particular case is intentional and

clearly prejudice is the defendant. So I agree with that. I think that's probably true. But my first reaction when I heard that they were going for a mistrial was why. All of the evidence is on your side, none of the evidence is on the state side. It's clear as day. people have been following this case from the beginning, the prosecution's got nothing.

Why would you go for a mistrial when you can win outright? If I were on this jury and I've been paying pretty close attention to this trial, it's not even close. So why not try to win outright? Well, the answer is that there are other factors at play here beyond the evidence. The jury is afraid for their lives, as they rightly should be. So they're getting a ton of political pressure, including from the president of the United States.

it's Joe Biden, doing the same thing that Biden did in other trials, George Floyd, for instance. But beyond that, if you're a juror on this, if you're a juror in this trial, you know that if you don't throw this kid to the wolves and lock them up and throw away the key, then you are going to be harassed. You're going to be doxed. They're going to be riots. They're going to burn your community down. the left has already said they're doing that. They're marching outside the courthouse right now saying, shut it down. If Kenosha don't get it, shut it down.

What does shut it down mean? It means do the same thing that they did the last time that caused the trial in the first place, namely burn down the city, attack people, steal things. And you can get any information you want these days. So you really think the identity of these jurors is going to be protected? No way. and you really think the violent leftist mob, the lynch mob that's outside going for Kyle Rittenhouse, you think they're not going to attack these jurors? No, they will. And so I get it. The right thing to do in this case

would be to acquit Kyle of all the charges. But I like to think if I were on the jury that I would do that. But what if you were on the jury? What if you have young kids? You have a wife that you love. What if you've got a nice house? Do you really want to ruin your life? Do you really want to ruin your life? Do you really want to to put all of that at risk, because our systems right now are not sturdy, because the left is undermining our entire system of justice? No. I think the defense believes that although all the evidence is on their side, if everything were functioning as it should, Kyle would be acquitted, but I think they're afraid the jury's going to go wobbly because of the threats. And so they're going to try to go for a mistrial. Fair enough. Speaking of threats, Nancy Pelosi just sent

a Republican representative, Paul Gosar. So it's a party-line vote and they're censuring Paul Gosar because he sent out some spicy tweets or something. You know, he did the sort of thing that Dems do all the time, but he did it and he's a Republican, so they're going to censure him. Lauren Bobert, another firebrand, conservative member of Congress, came out in defense of Congressman Gosar. Democrat policies are so pathetic and have done so poorly that the left has nothing else to do patrol the internet looking for ways to get offended and then try to target members and strip them of their committees. This is a dumb waste of the House's time. But since the speaker has designated

the floor to discuss members inappropriate actions, shall we? The Jihad Squad member from Minnesota has paid her husband and not her brother husband, the other one, over a million dollars in campaign funds. This member is allowed on the Foreign Affairs Committee while praising terrorists. A Democrat chairwoman incited further violence in the streets outside of a courthouse and then the cherry on top. My colleague and three-month presidential candidate from California who is on the Intelligence Committee slept with Fang Fang, a Chinese spy. Let me say that again. A member of Congress who receives classified briefings. was sleeping with the enemy. This is unacceptable.

I love it. I love it. Jihad squad member Ilhan Omar was illegally or certainly crookedly paying off her husband. Not her brother husband, by the way, the other husband. Oh my gosh. Stop it. Stop. They're already dead. Stop it. Don't keep kicking them while they're down. Eric Swalwell was sleeping with Fang Fang, a Chinese spy. She's never denied. God, I love it. There are going to be very sophisticated Republicans who are at very prestigious think tanks and dodgy, dusty institutions. They're going to say, this is not right. This is not. No, don't do this. We're better than that. Don't know. Don't make all these jokes about all these

degenerate Democrat members of Congress. It's so, no, I think it's funny. It's funny. It's just, it's jokes. And the jokes have a basis in reality, because Ilhan Omar really does have a kind of of strange personal history and she actually has praised terrorists and laughed and said 9-11 is some people did something. Ha ha ha ha. And she says, Al-Qaeda. And she kind of giggles and laughs. On camera, we have all of this. It's Eric Swalver really did sleep with a Chinese spy that actually did happen. So, basis in reality, it's funny. The attacks on Republican members of Congress like Paul goes are completely disingenuous. It's a complete double standard. And we should mock them relentlessly. Just there's a little rhetorical lesson.

in this that Lauren Bobert is teaching us, if she had been timid and said, you know, Ilhan Omar, I'm not sure she's very loyal to this country. I'm not, I just think the way she's talked about some foreign terror groups, it's not, if you went into that kind of an attack with that timidity of a kind of old dusty Republican, you would get an avalanche of accusations of racism and xenophobia and Islamophobia and phobia phobia phobia.

yeah, and you would be, and then you'd be buried in that. But if you come out and say, yeah, she's a member of the jihad squad and she loves al-Qaeda, there's nothing, you can't, there's nothing to come back at that with. You're so confident. You're so, it's like when you're trying to talk to a girl, when you're a teenager, you're trying to pick up a girl in high school or something. You can, if you go really timid and she'd be, she'd be, hey, um, hi there, Shela, would you like to maybe go to the prom with me sometime I'm going to like you for a bit?

Then you're going to seem weak and you're going to get pulled over. But if you go and you say, hey, cutie, you're great. I really like you a lot. Let's go. You and me, let's go to the prom together. You're just going to seem more confident. And the lesson that's true of your interpersonal life, your lesson that's true of just personal social relations, that's also true in politics. And the other lesson from this is we've got to do to the Democrats what they are doing to us.

Nothing, I'm not saying we do something that is immoral or unjust, but as a matter of procedural politics, let's do the same thing. Nancy Pelosi is going to use a party line vote to strip Republicans of their committees. Okay, well, let's just do that to them. Next time, the minute that Republicans have the House, which could be sooner than the Democrats expect, let's strip Ilhan Omar of her committees. Let's strip Rashida Taleb and AOC and all the rest of these radical. Let's strip Eric's Wohlwell for sure of his committees. Let's do it.

Why not? They're doing it to us. and the left responds to force. They respond to confidence. They respond to strength. Okay. And so, let's use

our political force. Let's strip them of their committees. Let's mock them on the floor of the House. Well done, Lauren Boberg. There are a lot of problems going on caused by bad politicians in this country. Notably, are gas prices going up,

which is why I would recommend you to check out, get upside. Gas is very expensive, thanks to our friends in Washington, D.C., among other people. And so I'm going to save you money at the gas pump. Every time you go, you can thank me later. It's all that really thanks to get upside. Our listeners are making up to 25 cents for every single gallon of gas, every single time they fill up.

Just download the free Get Upside app in the App Store or Google Play right now. Use promo code NOLS, K&W, LES, get a bonus 25 cents per gallon on your first fill-up, up to 50 cents cash back. Do not pay full price at the pump anymore. Get cash back using Get Upside. Download the app for free. Use promo code Knowles, K&WLES, to get up to 50 cents per gallon cash back on your first tank. People who are driving a lot are making as much as $2 to $300 a month in cash back. There's no cash. There's only cash. It goes straight to your bank account or if you prefer PayPal or an e-gift card for Amazon or other brands. Super easy. Right now, save up to 50 cents per gallon on your first tank. That is code.

Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S at the free Get Upside app. In some of the biggest news, I mentioned this a little bit at the top of the show that we have received since filing our lawsuit, the Biden administration has announced that it's suspending the mandate. It has to, even OSHA, not just Joe Biden, but OSHA itself. The fight is just getting started right now. So we've still got a long way to go before we win. Sign our petition against Joe Biden's vaccine mandate over at DailyWire. dot com slash do not comply. We've had over 600,000 people sign the petition. The more signatures we get, the louder the message. That is why we're aiming to get to one million signatures. Head on over to

dailywire.com slash do not comply to sign the petition today. We'll be right back with a lot more. We've got some great news from the cancel culture. Usually cancel culture only brings us bad news where people who contradict leftist orthodoxy have their lives ruined because of some tweet they sent 10 years ago or some email they sent 15 years ago. But here, today, we've got some good news from the cancel culture. That pedophile defending professor that we played on the show a couple of days ago, Alan Walker is a professor at Old Dominion University. He was the one who's trying to destigmatize pedophilia, change the term pedophile to minor attracted persons, and normalize sexual attraction to kids. He has been placed on leave.

So he has written about this in a book. He's given presentations about why we basically need to be nicer to pedophiles and destigmatize them. And he has been placed on leave. Now, I know some right-winger, some conservatives say the cancel culture is always bad and we don't want to cancel and the left cancels and we don't cancel. That is not my position. I wrote an entire book about how that's not my position. My position is that cancel culture can be a very good thing. It's not about do you cancel or do you not cancel. It's about what do you cancel. All cultures are going to cancel some things. Pedophiles, for instance. I think it's good to cancel pedophiles. I think it's bad to cancel Christians. Okay, I think those are different things. And so it's not just the form that matters, it's the substance. What are you actually advocating?

Why are you being canceled? And so I am thrilled that this guy is getting canceled. Now, here's his defense, which was sent out in a statement from the university. Quote, I want to be clear, child sexual abuse is morally wrong and an inexcusable crime. As an assistant professor of sociology and criminal justice, the goal of my research is to prevent crime. My work is informed by my past experience

and advocacy as a social worker counseling victims. I embarked on this research in hopes of gaining understanding of a group that previously had not been studied in order to identify ways to protect children. So first of all, pedophiles have been studied before. You're not quite so groundbreaking as you think you are, Mr. Walker. But also, you didn't embark on the research just to gain understanding to, say, punish these people more.

You said you wanted to destigmatize pedophiles. That's why you wanted to change the term from pedophile, which has a bad connotation. You know, it's a neutral term in and of itself. It just refers to having a liking for, an attraction for two children. But it's got a stigma because the thing itself is evil. And so, you know, obviously the word gains the ugliness of the reality of it. And you said you want to take that away and call the minor attracted persons and maps. And that would be wrong.

So this guy, Walker, is obviously very confused. I think he calls himself non-binary, so he doesn't know his own sex, and he's a very confused person, obviously. But his argument is I'm not advocating that we abuse children. I'm saying that we destigmatize the idea of having a sexual desire for children. But that's wrong too. Okay. It's important to recognize, yes, obviously it's wrong to abuse the children. It is also wrong to have sexual desire for children.

The desire itself is also wrong. And it's very difficult for people in our modern hippie-dippy society to understand that. Because what we are told today is that desire is never wrong. It's just your actions that are wrong. So if you're a pedophile, a minor attracted person to use this guy's crazy language, then it's wrong if you abuse kids, but it's not wrong if you think about sleeping with a child. It's not because that's just your desire. It's just in your head. And you have total autonomy over your mind and your body. And you can do whatever you want as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. And you have self-ownership and no desires can be wrong, right? Especially if you're born this way. Right? If the pedophile is born this way, let's say that that's the case. Let's just go with that premise. Then certainly the desire can't be wrong. That's a very liberal idea. And some people on the right believe, that kind of thing too. The kind of pro-drug, pro-sleep-around, pro-do whatever you want right,

they believe that too. As long as it's consensual, it's totally fun. The problem with pedophilia is it's not consensual. The desire is also wrong, too. The conservative view of this is that the desire is wrong as well, and it must be stigmatized. It is rightly stigmatized. And moreover, that we can shape our desires. This is a real sticking point for some people, but you actually can shape your desires. I'm not saying you have total control over your desires, but you can shape them.

Addicts know this. When an addict starts out, he doesn't have a penchant for heroin. He doesn't, but he takes the first drug, whatever, he's probably at some kind of gateway drug and then he gets into the heroin, and then all of a sudden his desires turn, toward the heroin. And at a certain point, depending on how bad the addiction gets,

especially with a hard drug like heroin, all of his desires are oriented toward the heroin. Then if he goes through a process of rehabilitation and recovery, what is that doing? What that does is turns your desire away from the heroin. A lot of rock stars will say this. They'll say, you know, back in the 80s, I was totally addicted to heroin. Now I'm totally addicted to working out or something. Right now I'm addicted to exercise. You kind of turn that. And ultimately, the place you want to turn your desires is toward God. Not just your actions, not just your behaviors, but even your very desire. What is it that you're thinking about when you put your head on your pillow at night? All right. And that, it's not a very liberal idea. It's not, it doesn't mean you have

total emancipation and total liberation, total control over your body and whatever you want to do is okay. It's saying, no, it's not. Even that desire that you can't totally control, that is wrong. So not only can you not act on it, but you've got to work to try to transform that desire in any way you can. And you're probably going to fail a lot, and maybe you're never going to totally do that, but you've got to work on that as well. Speaking of morality, Nancy Pelosi has moral lessons for all of us. Isn't that rich? Nancy Pelosi is insisting that if we don't back her global warming agenda, that we are violating the moral imperative to take care of the Earth. Over about

half a trillion dollars in this legislation to protect the planet. It's a health issue, clean air, clean water for our children. It's a jobs issue, making America preeminent and good paying green jobs.

You know all of the challenge of natural disasters springing from the climate crisis. And it is a moral issue if you believe as I do that this is God's creation and we have a moral obligation. It would be good to be good.

stewards. But even if you don't share that view religiously, we all share it morally that we have a responsibility to future generations. Nancy Pelosi is a little confused. She says, even if you don't believe it religiously, we all believe it morally. But of course, our moral views are synonymous with our religious views. So she's making a distinction that doesn't really exist. And she says, look, we've got an obligation, moral, religious, profound obligation, to be stewards of God's creation. I agree with that. People are maybe disagreeing with Nancy Pelosi, or I'm not disagreeing with her in principle. I totally agree with that.

She's absolutely right. The problem is that Nancy Pelosi does not agree with that. She doesn't really believe that. If she really believed that, she would oppose abortion. We are stewards of God's creation. Yeah, we are. And we need to be very nice to the rabbits, and the sheep, even the trees, and the fish.

And so on the polar bears. And we need to be good. And just the clouds and the ozone. And we've got to be good stewards of all. We've got to care and not harm any of these things. But we can vacuum up a human baby, and that's a wonderful thing. That's something to celebrate. We can't disturb the patterns of the clouds and the way that the gentle, fragile,

ecosystem and the Delta smelt. We can't touch the delta smelt. But we can chop up a little baby to the tune of a million of them a year. Is that really? Is that true? Is that how that works? I don't think that's true. Because there is an order to creation and there are some things are higher in creation than others. And Nancy Pelosi is admitting that herself. If it's true that we have a special responsibility to be stewards of creation. It's because we have dominion over the whole rest of the creation, over the earth and the birds of the trees and the fowl and the fish of the sea, because we are higher than them. And so it is very disordered to say we need to take care of the Delta smelt, but we have the right to chop up little innocent human babies. That doesn't make any sense at all. Some conservatives

go way too far in their reaction against this kind of thing. And I understand it's because it's so disingenuous, but they'll say we have no obligations to take care of the environment. We have no, let's just knock it all down and put up a bunch of factories and make a bunch of widgets. No, I don't think that's true either. We do, we do have an obligation to do that. But Nancy Pelosi's understanding of that moral obligation is completely flipped on its head. The Delta smelt are everything in human babies, according to her, are nothing. Really for them, for the left climate change, global warming, global cooling, whatever, is just an excuse to take more political power.

Chuck Schumer admitted this just a couple days ago. Last year with COVID was awful. But in a few years, because of climate change, each year will be worse than COVID, and each year will be worse than the next if we don't do anything about it. Well, this year, it's been tough, you know? But you thought you were coming out of that now? You thought that we were finally going to restore normal order to society?

no, no, it's only going to get worse. And it's not going to get worse because of some virus that we can kind of measure. It's going to be because of the sun monster. And it's not going to be anything that's happening right now, but it's because of things that could happen in 10 years unless you do exactly what we say and give us all your money and give us all your rights and just let us upend the political order. He's sort of right. He's sort of right. If his argument is, you thought COVID was bad, just wait until global warming. He's sort of right, though not in the way that he thinks he is. Because the biggest issue with COVID was not the virus. It was the lockdown. Viruses exist. Dines. D germs exist. There's nothing really new about that. And if COVID was a little

more virulent than some other viruses and diseases, though a lot less virulent than many others as well, then, okay, that's a natural fact of life. What was different about COVID is that we shut down all of society over it and lost all of our political rights and power and closed churches and allowed these psychos in Washington to to become much more powerful than they already were and disrupt the supply chains and kick people out of work and we're still giving them a lot of power. That's what our lawsuit against the Biden administration right now is really fighting against. It was it was the lockdowns. And so what the left is trying to do now is go from the COVID justification.

to the global warming justification and keep the same kind of lockdown policies. They're totally changing the rationale for their political power grab, but they're trying to keep the exact same power grab. Maybe we ought to have learned a lesson from COVID, not the lesson Chuck Schumer thinks we learned. He thinks the lesson we learned is we better give them all the power. We better not mess around with them. We better give them whatever they want.

I think the lesson is, no, don't give them an inch. Don't give them an inch because there are much bigger public health threats than the Wuhan virus. There are much bigger public health threats than the sun monster. Here's one. For the first time ever last year, the Associated Press is reporting from public health officials in the U.S. that 100,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in one year. just one year. The number jumped 30% in one year.

Why is that? What changed? Was it just because, was it the weather that changed? Was it just random? Or was it maybe because we threw a lot of people out of work? We kicked people out of their churches. We wouldn't let people see their friends and family members. We locked them all up with nothing to do.

Idle hands are the devil's playground. We have given. given these pharmaceutical companies and drug cartels on the southern border, carte blanche to do whatever they want. And now a lot of people died. Maybe it has something to do with that. Maybe, you know, we talk about how some of the COVID numbers are inflated because for parts of the lockdowns, if you got shot in the head,

but you tested positive for COVID, that was a COVID death. So the official statistics are difficult to believe. A lot of us think the official, the real number is significantly lower, but then maybe we need to add 100,000 here, or at least some portion of that here, because those deaths, seems to me, would be exacerbated, would be encouraged by the lockdown policies that the public health geniuses tell us were going to save all of our lives. This was the big problem with allowing Dr. Fauci and Dr. Scarf to run all those White House press conferences.

You remember in the early days of COVID, back in those Halcyon-Trump, years, Trump would hold the press conferences and he would be flanked by all the public health officials and they would, you know, Fouchy would get up and he'd say, you say, go, don't wear the mask. Oh, actually, do wear the mask. Oh, whatever I say is gospel truth. And he'd go up and then Dr. Scarf would say whatever she was going to say. And then that jerk surgeon general would get up and say what he was going to say. And it was all the public health people. And the mistake there was not even necessarily that he held the press conferences, not even necessarily that those knuckleheads talked. It was that they were the only people speaking. But the country is not just run by egghead epidemiologists,

and it should not be at least. Trump also probably should have had an economist get up there and speak. Trump also probably should have had a national security figure get up there and speak. Trump also should have probably had a constitutional expert get up there and speak. Trump also could have had an historian get up there and speak to talk about the norms in this country, any other number of people because politics is an art of balancing competing interests.

And yes, it's true that if Dr. Fauci were given all of the political power in the country, I guess he sort of has been, then he would view every public matter through the lens of epidemiology. Even to the destruction of

businesses, to destruction of civil liberties, to the destruction of churches to the destruction of interpersonal relationships and traditions. And ironically, even the public health. Because if you're only focused on eradicating one virus, maybe you're ignoring the deaths of despair they're going on, suicides and drug overdoses too. You need to balance these things. You can't just give some egghead expert specialist control over your whole country. Speaking of following the science, Jedediah, Bila, from Fox News, was just brought on to the view. So she was from a sort of center-right news outlet, was brought onto this left-wing news outlet.

And she was just there to plug her book, but she was asked about COVID. They wouldn't let her go into the studio because she refused to take the Fauci out. They made a big deal about this. And then they railroaded her because she was stating perfectly true things about the virus. RBC Training Ground has discovered potential in over 20,000 Canadian athletes and county. Your story could be next. If you've got the drive, they'll help you find your path to the Olympics. Let's see what you've got. Sign up for free at rBC training ground.ca. Let's address the elephant in the room because you were supposed to join us in the studios weeks ago.

But you couldn't because ABC has a very strict policy. You can't get into this building unless you're fully vaccinated. Everybody in this room knows that and is vaccinated. But you made a conscious decision not to get the vaccine. I have a medical exemption to the vaccine that's been written by my, infectious disease vaccinated specialist in New York City that's been co-signed by three other doctors. I'm not a candidate for this vaccine. I also have sky high, multi-tiered, multifaceted, natural immunity very, very high. That has also been proven. It has been shown and it is substantiated by letters from these doctors.

So for me, personally, this vaccine poses a greater risk than a benefit. But the vaccine does not prevent you from getting COVID and does not prevent you from transmitting COVID. Gallagia, we have seen that. That's not so. Come on. You've been at Fox TV. I just don't understand why you would choose to prioritize your personal freedom over health and safety of others.

I just really don't think that we should allow this kind of misinformation on our website. So Jedediah is obviously right, and the cackling hens over the viewer are not just rude and not just unprofessional. I suppose their professional job actually is to shut up conservative, so there you go. I guess they're being very professional.

But they're also wrong here. They're also just, what Jedediah said is absolutely true. The CDC admits that about transmission of the virus and contracting the virus even after the vaccine. The CDC admits that. So what they're saying, what she's saying is absolutely right. Then what cackling hen number two, I don't know her name on the view said over there, is I don't know why you're, why you're prioritizing your personal freedom over my safety. Jedediah is not.

What she said was she's prioritizing her safety. over perhaps your safety, although the point she's making also is that the vaccinated people can still transmit the virus as the CDC acknowledged at the end of July, which was their argument for why vaccinated people still need to wear the masks and socially distance and all that other nonsense. So it's not even a battle between my freedom and our safety. It's a contest between my safety and, oh, and that's it. And no one else's safety because the threat, to other people's safety is not really going to change. And if the vaccine is so effective at preventing you, the recipient from hospitalization and death, then you don't need to worry about what someone else

is doing necessarily. But then they cut off her mic. They cut off her mic. They say, you've been at Fox News too long, or you're too conservative or something. The woman is reciting lines from the CDC, from the scientists, from the public health experts. But they contradict the left's political narrative, and so they're going to cut it off. And I think the crucial thing about this clip is when they cut her mic off. When she brings those facts, when she brings that science, they cut it off, and they can cut it off. And yes, you know, you're talking about Fox News. It's kind of a center-right news outlet. There are some conservative outlets out there on alternative media. Obviously, we're a very large platform here at The Daily Wire. But for the left,

it's not just a handful like we have on the right. It's ABC, NBC, CBS, New York Times, this, that, the other thing. It's the whole blob. And so they can cut you off. And for most people, you're just going to hear the cackling hands and you're not going to hear the science. This is why, really getting back to the written house case, this is why the central question that's affecting the verdict, it's affecting all of this trial, is not so much the evidence, but the media as the judge lambasted the for just two days ago. Some of the things that have been said too, I guess I'll comment on that too. These are five very reputable competent attorneys that I've practiced with for years. And I think it's shameful some of the things that are being done to these people. And when I talked about problems with the media when this trial started, started, that's, they're there in part, not fully, but in part, because of grossly irresponsible handling of what comes out of this trial.

I will tell you this, and I'm going to think long and hard about live television of a trial again next time. I don't know. I've always been a firm believer in it because I think the people should be able to see what's going on, but what I see what's being done is really quite frightening. Frightening, that's the right word for it. That is the right word. this verdict is not just about what Kyle Rittenhouse did. This verdict is not just about our right

to self-defense. This verdict will also express how much control the media have over shaping our entire society. Are we going to be run by a court of law or the court of public opinion shaped by the dishonest media? I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Nulls 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 Walls Show. The Michael Noles show is produced by Ben Davies, executive producer Jeremy Boring. Our technical director

is Austin Stevens, supervising producer Mathis Glover, production manager, Pavel Vidovsky, editor and associate producer Danny D'Amico, Associate producer Justine Turley, audio mixer Mike Coramina, and hair and makeup by Cherokee Hart. Michael Nol's show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2021. John Bickley here, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief.

Wake up every morning with our new show, Morning Wire. On today's episode, the Kyle Rittenhouse defense team files for a mistrial, OSHA suspends its employer vaccine mandate, and a defendant takes the stand in the Amad, Arbery case. Join us and get the facts first on the news you need to know with our show, Morning Wire.