Ep. 1587 - Libs ATTACK Trump With Their October Surprise
48:25 Share

Let's be real, French fries are the only good tasting vegetable out there, but unfortunately they're not very healthy. Balance of Nature fruit and veggies are the most convenient way to get your daily intake of fruits and vegetables, you know, like the kind of vegetables that actually count. Balance of Nature uses an advanced cold vacuum process that encapsulates fruits and vegetables into whole food supplements without sacrificing their natural antioxidants.

The capsules are completely void of additives, fillers, extracts, synthetics, pesticides, or added sugar. The only thing at Balance of Nature fruit and veggie capsules are fruits and veggies. You need nutrients to function at your best each and every day. Balance of Nature helps you do just that. Go to balanceofnature.com and use promo code WIRE for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer, plus get a free bottle of fiber and spice. That's balanceofnature.com, promo code WIRE.

The Democrats launch an October surprise to try again to imprison Trump. Melania comes out in support of abortion and Kamala Harris loves, loves Doritos. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show.

Welcome back to the show. Usually at the top of the show, I tease a story, a really important story that will come up later on. But I've already teased it. The biggest story of the day. Kamala Harris loves Doritos.

There's so much more to say. First, though, text Knowles to 989898. Harris's economic plan is a disaster. Get ready for massive tax hikes, all so that she can add almost $2 trillion to a current $2 trillion deficit. You might be thinking it's time to make more of your savings tax-sheltered.

and inflation sheltered. This is where I trust Birch Gold Group to help. Birch Gold will assist you in converting an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold, and you don't pay a penny out of pocket. Just text the word NOLS to 989898. Get a free info kit on gold. There's no obligation, just information on fortifying your savings before the crazy really hits. As the exclusive gold partner of The Daily Wire for the past eight years, an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers, you can trust Birch Gold too. Right now,

Text Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to 989898 for your free info kit today. That is Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to 989898 today. I have a significant portion of my portfolio in gold, and I think a lot of people probably wish they had diversified into gold a little while sooner. So go check it out. Text Knowles to 989898 today. Of legitimately less significance than the Kamala Harris Dorito story is the new...

Biden prosecutor Jack Smith, October surprise against President Trump. Jack Smith, you remember him? He was the one who was prosecuting Trump over the doc of over trying to overthrow the election and the this and the that. He now has a new court filing that is supposed to, uh,

give some new life to his case. The Supreme Court came out and said that the president of the United States has substantial immunity when it comes to official acts that are committed in office. Smith comes out with a new court filing to say that Trump was not acting in his public official capacity. He was acting as a private person when he tried to deny the election and overthrow the results of the election. And okay, what does he say?

When the defendant lost the 2020 presidential election, he resorted to crimes to try to stay in office. With private co-conspirators, the defendant launched a series of increasingly desperate plans to overturn the legitimate results in seven states that he had lost. Okay, so how is this being reported? This is the headline you're going to see. This specific example is from NBC San Diego.

Make them right. Trump election case judge unseals special counsel motion on immunity. Make them riot. Wow. Trump said make them riot on January 6th, the worst day in the history of the world. Wow. That's pretty damning, isn't it? Well, until you read the actual text of the article, which says when the colleague said

I guess this is a campaign colleague, suggested that there was about to be unrest reminiscent of the Brooks Brothers riot during the Florida vote count in the 2000 election. The campaign employee responded, make them riot and do it, the motion alleges. Hold on. When I read that headline, it sounds like Donald Trump is saying, make them riot.

But then when I read the text of the article, which is referring to the actual motion filed by Jack Smith, it says it's just some random campaign employee. And by the way, when he's talking about a riot, is he talking about the kind of riot that you saw in Minneapolis or actually in the entire country during BLM when Kamala Harris was bailing the rioters out of jail and when staffers for Joe Biden were bailing the violent rioters out of jail? No, he's not talking about that kind of riot.

Was he talking about the kind of riots that were threatening Republican politicians and conservative judges for years and years and years during the Trump administration? No, he specifically is referring to the so-called Brooks Brothers riot, which occurred during the 2000 election when Democrats were trying to steal that one down in Florida. And the Brooks Brothers riot was all of these lawyers and campaign flacks who were showing up to try to stop the Democrats from stealing that election. So it was an ironic use of the term riot.

Let them riot. Is this going to move the needle one little bit? These guys are scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point. This doesn't change one single vote. But of course it doesn't because they tried to stop Trump from running. He ran anyway. They tried to kick him off the ballot. That didn't work. Then they tried to imprison him. That has not worked so far. Then they tried to murder him. That didn't work. That almost worked. Then they tried to...

Murder him again. And that didn't work. That didn't even come as close as it did the first time. And now they're trying to imprison him on the same case that was thrown out of court because a campaign staffer made a somewhat humorous comment about a fake riot that took place during another contested presidential election 20 years ago.

to show you that this isn't even all that unprecedented. The argument for the Donald Trump-led insurrection line of attack is that this was unprecedented, this threatened our whole republic. But then the evidence that they point to, some random low-level campaigner, shows you that this has happened before. And it's the Democrats who question the results of the election. Really, really weak stuff. But the libs are getting desperate. You might have seen a New York Times fact check

from the vice presidential debate. The libs are still licking their wounds because of how well this debate went for J.D. Vance. A much beloved member of my family is extremely left-wing. The way I knew that J.D. Vance completely crushed in that debate is that even this, maybe most left-wing member of my entire family, with whom I'm very close,

This family member had to admit to me, okay, J.D. Vance, he looked good. He talked pretty good up there. He did a good job. It was so incontrovertibly a win for J.D. Vance that the New York Times has taken to straight up lying. So here is the fact check from the New York Times. They introduce it. They say, Tim Walz and J.D. Vance sparred over domestic and foreign policy in the first and only vice presidential debate on Tuesday. Here's one of the claims we fact checked. And here's the claim from J.D. The statute you signed into law, talking to Tim Walz,

It says that a doctor who presides over an abortion where the baby survives, the doctor is under no obligation to provide life-saving care to a baby who survives a botched abortion. That was the claim from J.D. Vance. The rating from the New York Times, FALSE! All caps highlighted in yellow. Okay, how is it false? Here's the explanation.

Vance distorted Walz's repeal of a so-called born alive law that had been in effect in Minnesota since the 70s. That law required doctors to report when a live child was born as a result of an abortion and to provide all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice to care for that infant. So in other words, J.D. Vance was entirely correct. Everything J.D. Vance said was true. Nothing J.D. Vance said was

was not true, and the New York Times is admitting this. When I saw this, I thought, I must be missing something here. I must just be reading this wrong. J.D. says the statute you signed into law says that a doctor presides over an abortion where the baby survives. The doctor is under no obligation to provide life-saving care to a baby who survives a botched late-term abortion. And then they say, yeah, the law that he repealed required doctors to report when a live child was born as a result of an abortion and provide all reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice.

The New York Times, in the explanation of its fact check, is contradicting its own fact check. Why are they doing this? Because they've got nothing else.

This is one advantage of the libs having thrown the kitchen sink at Trump and Vance, too. This whole Vance is weird and making up stuff about his memoir and just going after him for complete nonsense. Keeping him really away from speaking to the public directly such that Democrat expectations were mismanaged. And when he did speak directly to the people, even many Democrats said, wow, this guy's pretty smart. This guy seems pretty normal.

It shows you they got nothing else. The New York Times, the people who run that outlet, they don't have low IQs, probably. I'm not saying they're the best educated people in the world, but I don't think they have low IQs. They're usually pretty clever and crafty. If they could figure out a way to not quite lie, but skirt the truth and mislead, I promise you they would do that. That's not what they're doing here. This actually is unusual for the New York Times.

to just outright lie, have a headline that is completely contradicted by the substance of the article. They're doing that because Trump and Vance are just that good. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to goodranchers.com slash Knowles. As we approach the upcoming election, let me remind you, your voice is not just heard at the ballot box every four years. You cast a vote every single day with your dollar. That is why I trust Good Ranchers.

For all my meat, it's time to say goodbye to mystery meat pumped full of who knows what from who knows where. With good ranchers sourcing all their meat exclusively from American farms, you're getting 100% American meat. No antibiotics, no added hormones, definitely no seed oils, just pure steakhouse quality cuts that'll make you wonder why you ever settled for less. Right now...

Good Ranchers is having a presidential promo. For a limited time, you can get a free add-on for a whole four years. That means when you subscribe to any of their boxes, you get to decide if you want extra plain chicken breasts, Angus ground beef, applewood smoked bacon, or wild-caught salmon in every order for four years. Now, if you want to taste how I eat,

You got to get the Michael Knowles custom Good Ranchers box. Go to goodranchers.com slash Knowles right now. Use promo code Knowles. You will get the presidential promo worth over $1,200. You will get 100% American meat, and you will get the Knowles box, so you get to eat like me, eating all that sweet, delicious, sweet little Alisa food. Goodranchers.com, American meat delivered.

Even more pathetic than the New York Times is CNN. Corey Lewandowski, who has been the campaign manager for Trump going all the way back to 2016, and then sometimes he's in, sometimes he's out, but he's still an extremely influential, serious figure within Trump world. He goes on CNN to act as a surrogate for Trump.

And while he's discussing one of the most important political issues, one of the most important failures of the Biden-Harris administration, CNN's Jim Acosta decides to tone police him on his pronunciation of words.

You know what I can say, Jim? I can say that 13,099 murders were led into this country. 16,000 rapists, 425,000 people in the last four years have been led into this country by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden's own Customs and Border Protection that are running around this country, Jim. The other thing, too, it's Kamala Harris. I don't know. Why do you guys say Kamala? It's Kamala Harris. I just...

Jim, we know that they're committing crimes against Americans. Why can't these individuals talk about the individuals who've been killed by illegal immigrants? 13,099 murderers have been led into this country by this administration's own accounting, and you guys don't want to talk about it. This sums it up for me. This clip, Jim Acosta is the consummate

Ron Burgundy, left wing, just read what's in the prompter and push the Democratic Party message reporter that I've ever seen. And he's interviewing Lewandowski and this sums it up. The Trump figure comes on and calls attention to an extremely serious, dangerous political problem. 13,000 murderers, convicted murderers have been permitted into the country.

Because of open borders policies, the kind that Kamala Harris has encouraged while she's borders are. And the Democrat rejoinder to that is, actually, it's pronounced Kamala. Excuse me? You said Kamala, but it's actually pronounced Kamalala. It's actually, the accent is supposed to be on the second and a half syllable. But you put it on the second and a quarter syllable, so-

Fact-checked, owned. Yeah, man, we're talking about all the murderers she let into the country and all the murders they're committing and all of the Americans being murdered by them. Yeah, yeah, we'll get to that ancillary and minor story in a moment. First, though, it's Hamala. It's more of like a it's not a car. It's a you're not pronouncing the Democrat nominees. Very unusual name.

exactly as I want you to. So let's focus on the real issues. That's what they do. You say, hey, some giant dude is getting naked in the girls changing room at the public pool. And I don't want my daughter to have to see that. What does the left say in response to that? They say, hey, she, the beautiful 46 year old trans woman is

is getting naked in front of your daughter at the public pool. That's what they say. It's all little word games, and it's all little word games in order to distract you, both through the euphemism itself and by diverting the conversation away from the real issues, which are important to people. I think people care when there are 13,000 convicted murderers just running around free. People who, even if they had not been convicted of a murder, have no right to be in this country. But certainly,

If they, on top of breaking our most basic laws, also are dangerous murderers, they should not be in the country either. Meanwhile, President Trump, taking a different approach here, just made big headlines that probably will rankle even some centrist Republicans. Trump said not only is he going to deport illegal aliens who have crossed the Rio Grande, Trump is also going to deport terrorists

the much-discussed Haitians who are in places like Springfield, Ohio, who are here on legal temporary status. Springfield is such a beautiful place. Have you seen what's happened to it? It's been overrun. You can't do that to people. They have to be removed. So you would revoke the temporary protected status? Absolutely, I'd revoke it, and I'd bring them back to their country. Absolutely, I'd revoke it.

Question, will you revoke the temporary legal status? Absolutely, I would revoke it and I'll bring them back to their country. This is going to send the left and the squishes up in arms. Okay, it's one thing to say you're going to deport illegal aliens. The left doesn't want you to do that. The left tried to hit J.D. Vance on this the other night at the debate. You're going to deport people who shouldn't be here? Even that is controversial. The left doesn't want you to deport anybody. And centrist Republicans don't really want you to deport even many of those illegal aliens.

But here Trump is going further. He's saying, I'm going to deport people who are here legally. This is shocking. How could he say that? Well, I don't know, because I think Trump is paying closer attention to the meaning of words, certainly than the left is. The Haitians are here with temporary legal status. The very fact that people would recoil at President Trump saying, OK, it's been long enough. We're going to send them back to their country.

shows you how dishonest, how deceptive a phrase like temporary legal status is. The Democrats use these little phrases because it, well, it's a euphemism and it softens the harshness of the reality, which is they're permanently importing these people into the country. And they know that the American people don't want

At any given clip, 300,000 people imported from a failed state with wide reports of cannibalism to just come into the country and be dropped in middle America, especially in swing states. They don't like that. But even if it's not a swing state, they just...

You don't want people who don't speak the language, who don't seem to have much aptitude for assimilation, who are going to crash cars into school buses and buildings, and who, whether they're eating the dogs and cats or not, are creating all sorts of social problems. You don't want that massive permanent influx. So the Democrats lie, and they say, no, no, no, they're not here permanently. We're giving them temporary protected status. But it's never temporary.

It's permanent. That's how you've gotten mass migration, which in the United States from 1965 to the present has been the largest movement of people in recorded history. And it's people into this country. So Trump there is very simply saying, I thought it's supposed to be temporary. Okay, well, if it's temporary, time's up. Time to go back now. Oh, you never thought we were going to send them back? Okay. Sounds like you've all been lying to the American people then. Absolutely sharp policy from Trump.

President Trump. Now, turning to less happy controversial views, major report out, major headlines. The first lady, former first lady, hopefully future first lady, Melania Trump, has a memoir coming out. And in this memoir, reportedly, she endorses abortion. And she passionately defends abortion, actually. This is from an exclusive excerpt given to The Guardian headline.

Melania Trump passionately defends abortion, writes an upcoming memoir exclusive. I've carried this belief with me throughout my entire adult life. What does she write? I obviously don't have a copy of the memoir. Apparently, the memoir is not too long. So the presence of this passionate defense of abortion is all the more conspicuous because it's relatively short. She writes, according to The Guardian,

It is imperative to guarantee that women have autonomy in deciding their preference of having children based on their own convictions, free from any intervention or pressure from the government. Why should anyone other than the woman herself have the power to determine what she does to her own body? A woman's fundamental right of individual liberty to her own life grants her the authority to terminate her pregnancy if she wishes, but

restricting a woman's right to choose whether to terminate an unwanted pregnancy is the same as denying her control over her own body i have carried this belief with me throughout my entire adult life that's going to be really shocking to a lot of certainly to pro-lifers and probably to many conservatives so there are a few explanations as to how this is you might say it's because uh

Melania comes from Slovenia. Slovenia has extraordinarily lax abortion laws. It permits abortion up to 28 weeks. Abortion is free. It's paid, but not free. Nothing's really free in this finite world. But it's paid for by the government. And minors don't even need parental permission to obtain an abortion. So, you know, she comes from a place that has very lax abortion laws. Now, Melania is also Catholic, and Catholicism has made clear that abortion is completely legal.

unacceptable. And it's not just one sin among many, but it's special. It's non-negotiable that the right to life is the right from which all the other rights flow. So you might say, okay, I don't know, maybe that explains it. You might say, some people will be tempted to say that this is strategic, that no matter how deeply pro-lifers

feel about abortion, no matter how philosophically and bioethically clear the issue of abortion is, and it is,

Uh, it politically, it's a tough issue for Republicans. And when it's gone up in ballot initiatives in recent years, we've lost. So we got this major win during the Trump years of the overruling of Roe v. Wade. But since then, uh, well, we had a major win from the Trump justices during, uh, for the overruling of Roe v. Wade. But since then it's become a tough political issue. So maybe this is 5D chess and the first lady is releasing her memoir, uh,

just before the campaign in order to blunt the attacks from Democrats that Trump is going to ban abortion nationwide. Maybe that's possible. I have a third theory, which I have not yet seen anyone mention. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to responsiblenman.com, code Knowles. Gentlemen, let's talk about something the libs don't want you to have. Robust, unapologetic health.

While they're busy pushing their soy-infused agenda, I've discovered a way to fortify ourselves against the tide of cultural decay. And that would be Responsible Man Vitamins. Responsible Man created the Emerson multivitamin for men who take their duties seriously. Not for the participation trophy crowd, okay?

Whoever writes this stuff needs a raise. This is a multivitamin packed with 33 key ingredients that support your immune system, sharpen your mind, keep your heart and muscles strong. Responsible Man is a Daily Wire Ventures company, so you know those vitamins are made right here in America. No Chinese vitamins. I don't want those disgusting Chinese vitamins. No outsourcing to countries that resent our beliefs. Just good American quality.

Because a strong America needs strong men, and strong men need these vitamins. Take advantage of Responsible Man's fall sale going on right now. Responsibleman.com. Use code NOLS, K-N-W-L-E-S, to check it for 50% off or just $19.99 for your first order. Hurry. This deal won't last long. Responsibleman.com. Code NOLS for 50% off. Do you hate America? Then don't get these vitamins. But if you are a virtuous and responsible person, go to responsibleman.com.

today, responsible man, be the man America needs. Why is Melania Trump coming out weeks before a major election in defense of abortion? Is it 5D chess? Is it her upbringing? Is it this? Is it that? I think this is totally to be expected because since abortion became a major public issue, every single Republican first lady has supported it. This is a sad, strange fact of history.

But don't forget, before the 1960s, abortion was not really a major public issue. Going back to the colonial days, when abortion was addressed by law, it was illegal. At the time, of course, abortion was surgically impossible and chemically dubious. But where it was addressed, it was illegal. By the turn of the 20th century, it was a felony in every single state. Then Margaret Sanger began her campaign for abortion and contraception and eugenics.

and that her organization turned into Planned Parenthood. And it got these wins here and there. It started to decriminalize abortion in certain places, but really that all exploded in the late 1960s. And then finally, it was codified. There was a license to abortion with Roe v. Wade in 1973. So it's really the late 60s or so, and we...

We had Republican president Dwight Eisenhower. VP was Richard Nixon. Then we had Democrat rule because Kennedy, rightly or wrongly, won the 1960 election. Then we had LBJ. And then we get a Republican again, Richard Nixon. That's really the first time that abortion is a major public issue while a Republican's in the White House. And Richard Nixon's wife was pro-abortion. And then...

There was a soft coup in our government and Richard Nixon was thrown out of the government. Jerry Ford was put in his place. Betty Ford supported abortion. Then you say, okay, well, Richard Nixon, he was a different kind of conservative. And Jerry Ford, he wasn't really all that conservative at all. But we finally got Ronald Reagan, right? The Gipper, the conservative standard bearer. We got a religious revival even coming on the right. This is great. Surely here, the first family is going to be totally pro-life, right?

No, Nancy Reagan supported legal abortion. And in fact, I think it was Don Regan's book, his political memoir, he recalled her saying that she didn't give a damn about the pro-lifers. She might have even used tougher language than that.

Regardless, she defended abortion. Then you get George H.W. Bush, Barbara Bush, pro-abortion. In fact, the Bush family broadly was pro-abortion. George H.W. Bush's father, Prescott Bush, Senator Bush, was, I think he was a donor to Planned Parenthood. He was a big supporter of Planned Parenthood. George H.W. Bush became pro-life just before he got on the 1980 ticket with Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan demanded he be pro-life, but the Bushes generally were not particularly pro-life.

Now, George W. Bush was more conservative in most ways than George H.W. Bush. However, George W. Bush's wife, Laura, was pro-abortion than Melania Trump. No surprise. It's weird because pro-life is strongly represented on the right, but not necessarily in the political class, not necessarily in the elected political class, I should say. And this is what's an important lesson for pro-lifers in all of this.

Melania Trump writes a memoir and says, I'm pro-abortion. Does that mean you're not going to vote for Trump? I don't know. She's the first lady. She's not the president. Trump's been a pro-life president. Been the most pro-life president in practical terms in my lifetime. But did Laura Bush being pro-abortion stop you from voting for George W. Bush? Did Barbara Bush? Did Nancy Reagan? No. I think you're probably still going to vote for Trump, even if you're pro-lifer. This is a reminder, though.

That pro-lifers are a true thoroughgoing pro-lifers are a distinct minority, not just in the country, even in the political class of the GOP.

The pro-lifers, we punch above our weight because we are well represented in the intellectual side of the conservative movement and in the activist side of the conservative movement. And there's overlap between the intellectual side and the activist side too, obviously. But there, there are conservatives who have a thoroughgoing, relatively coherent political view.

That is not represented in the elected class. And in part, I suspect that it's because that's not represented among the electorate, which means some people said the pro-life movement's over after Roe v. Wade. I think, no, things are just getting started. Now we've got to really start making arguments. Now we've really got to start pulling on heartstrings. Now we've got to really start showing people reality. Now we really have to start persuading people. Speaking of bewildering political rhetoric, we get to a really important story of the day. Kamala Harris,

loves Doritos. One of my guilty pleasures, especially when I'm on the road, are my Doritos. What flavor? Nacho. Old school, original. Come on. That's exactly right. Gotta have a napkin nearby. Kamala Harris is interviewing, I don't even know who these guys are, but they just seem so disgusted with her answer. Not because they don't like Doritos, but because it just seems so banal and inauthentic.

You see them there, this, oh yeah, your guilty pleasure is Doritos, the most focus-tested anodyne. Oh, that's your guilt. If she had said, my guilty pleasure, man, Marlboro Reds, you know, unfiltered Newports. That's my zen, you know, a little six-milli lip pilly. What's my guilty pleasure? A little cab sob at the end of the night. That's my guilty. What's my guilty pleasure? But it's nothing. It's the most anodyne. I like Doritos.

I like one of the most popular potato chips in the world. How do you do, fellow humans? It's so, ugh. I don't know which is worse. There are two ways to read this. And it actually does have political import. I'm not just joking about the Doritos. There's two ways to read this. The one way to read this is,

Kamala Harris is just reading polls. She's just a complete robot and she's focus testing everything, everything she says, every belief she holds, everything she wears, and even now every snack that she says she enjoys. The other way to read this is she really just is this banal. The other way to read this is when she speaks in totally meaningless platitudes about how much I love yellow school buses.

I love Venn diagrams. I like Doritos. You know, because with Doritos, you need a napkin because you get the covering on your fingers and you need to wipe it. The other possibility is that she just really is that flavorless.

That she, and I, maybe there's not even much of a difference between those two things. Maybe this woman's been in politics so long that she really is just an empty vessel. I mean, that is in part why Joe Biden picked her. In part, he picked her because he, he was boxed into a corner. He had to pick a black woman. There were only three choices and she was the only viable one. But in part, he picked her for the same reason the Democrats picked Joe Biden, which is they don't really have any beliefs of their own. They just, they, they lick their finger. They put it in the wind. They figure out which way the wind is blowing.

But I think this is why Trump is so effective and especially why he burst onto the scene in 2016. Contrary to the predictions of all the political class, he did really well because he reads as authentic. You might not like everything he believes. You might not even, I'm a huge Trump supporter and I've been a Trump supporter for a very long time. And there's some certain things he says or certain policies he advocates where I think, oh, no, no, I'm not, I don't totally agree with that. But I think, but at least I know where the guy stands. At least he's, at least he's authentic. And, and,

I can point to a policy of his and he'll probably stick with it, at least if it's one that he speaks about passionately. With Kamala Harris, she's reversed her positions on every policy. Joe Biden has reversed his positions on all sorts of policies. There's no human being there that I can hold on to. Her greatest...

Guilty pleasure is a Dorito. No one believes anything this woman says. This is also why I think the J.D. Vance debate was so damaging to Democrats, because they were hoping that they could make J.D. Vance into one of these just soulless political psychopaths who doesn't actually believe anything and who just ingests polling information and spits it out in a really uncanny way. But he isn't that guy. That's what they pretended that he was. But then when he spoke directly to the American people, people saw a guy who's extremely intelligent,

who's extremely educated, and who is sincere and normal and likable in a way that's really hard to fake. Now, speaking of the second family and authenticity, big story broke yesterday. Doug Emhoff, the second gentleman, would-be first gentleman, Kamala Harris's husband, has found himself at the center of a major sex scandal. Just days after MSNBC and Jen Psaki, the former spokesman for Joe Biden, announced

gave him this fluffy interview. There's also been an important part, an interesting part of how people have talked about your role here is how your role has reshaped the perception of masculinity. And I'm not sure you planned on that, but you are an incredibly supportive spouse. Has that been an evolution for you? And do you think that's part of the role you might play as first gentleman?

It's funny, I've started to think a lot about this. I've always been like this. My dad was like this. And to me, it's the right thing to do. So even if there weren't a sex scandal, well, there had already been the previous sex scandal, widely reported that Doug Emhoff impregnated his nanny while he was married, obviously with children. And there was some question as to

Whether the woman miscarried, whether, you know, there were a lot of questions that went along with that scandal in itself. But then that kind of went away, and the perception of Doug Emhoff went back to the classic, um,

new perception of masculinity, meaning not masculinity. It's sort of like politically correct means not correct, or undocumented American means not an American. Well, in this case, the new perception of masculinity means not masculinity. And so he's been mocked for this. But then a sex scandal came out that actually undermined the notion that this guy is a huge beta, namely that he's

This tryst with his nanny was not his only example of womanizing. And actually, the present scandal goes beyond womanizing. It gets pretty dark. There's an allegation here that he smacked a woman across the face and spun her around in a jealous rage. Not revealing private sins. This is just what's being reported. Who knows? It could be tabloid nonsense. But it puts...

Emhoff and Kamala in the Democrats in a really bad position, but it shows you a really important truth about the way in which liberals have tried to redefine masculinity. We'll get to that in one moment. First, though,

We are just 33 days away from the 2024 election. Now is the time to join Daily Wire Plus. Get 47% off with code FIGHT at dailywire.com slash subscribe. Daily Wire Plus gives you unlimited access to the truth with uncensored daily shows free from ads or moderators. Stay informed with live breaking news coverage and hard-hitting investigative journalism that the libs don't want to show you. Join the fight right now. Take advantage of 47% off new memberships.

That's dailyware.com slash subscribe. Use code FIGHT for your exclusive discount. My favorite comment yesterday comes from Real Member Berries, who says, thanks for summarizing this in three minutes. Thanks for summarizing this in three minutes. In 47 minutes, Michael, you're the best. You're very welcome. I tried to do that. I'm glad that I succeeded yesterday. The Libs are looking at this Doug Emhoff scandal.

as even some Republicans, I think, are looking at this as a contradiction between two. Hold on. Is Doug Emhoff this big beta soy boy, weak male, or is he some knuckle dragging, you know, Stanley Kowalski brute vis-a-vis women? And the secret is they're the same guy. Corporate wants you to show me the difference between these pictures. They're the same picture.

The new perception of masculinity that the liberals have been pushing for decades, it's not just Jen Psaki, it's not just Doug Emhoff, it's decades now. We've heard that traditional masculinity is toxic and we need men to be more sensitive and we need men to be more effeminate and we need men to be weaker and we need men to be more, I don't know, squishier and softer and more sympathetic or something. We've been told that'll be a really good thing.

Those are the guys. Those are the guys that smack their woman around in a jealous rage. Those are the guys that knock up the nanny because they have no discipline and clarity when it comes to the meaning of marriage. It's a fallen world. All sorts of people make mistakes. But those are the guys who are going to be much more inclined to do that. A man who acts more like a woman, a man who is not manly, is not going to be a better man. He's going to be the worst kind of man.

He's going to have all the worst attributes of a man with none of the good attributes of a man. Because manliness entails honor. It entails sacrifice. It entails leadership. It entails moral clarity. It entails virtue. The word virtue comes from the word vir. It comes from the word that means man. It entails restraint. It entails all these things.

And the kind of man that Jen Psaki and Libs of the World have been encouraging for decades now is a man who,

who doesn't have clarity. He just thinks it is what it is, man, and don't yuck my yum, and whatever people believe, there's no such thing as objective truth. It's a man who is not restrained. He's just going to do what he wants to do. He's got to pursue his true, authentic self, totally divorced from reason. It's not going to be a man who takes marriage seriously. He's not going to be monogamous. He's too progressive and forward-thinking for that.

He's going to be a man who's in touch with his emotions. The traditional man, the strong silent type, when he's feeling a case of the feels, he keeps his mouth shut and he does his job. And he processes his emotions in a traditional way that doesn't burden other people. The new modern male, he's really in touch with his feelings. Okay, well, if the story about Doug Emhoff is true, he was really in touch with his feelings when he was waiting out lines, smacking his girlfriend around. He was feeling a lot. He wasn't being very reasonable.

But he was giving free reign to his feelings. You want a society of feelings? That's what you get. That is the new perception of man. And I think when we actually get a look at these things, not papered over by the saccharine euphemisms of the left, but when we get to see these things in their reality, people aren't going to like it.

When we get past the euphemism of the dreamer, future undocumented American, and we see the reality of 13,000 convicted murderers who don't speak our language, who don't assimilate to our culture, who drive cars into school buses and buildings, and who maybe eat the dogs and the cats, the reality is a lot worse than the euphemism. Some of the people don't like it. You might say, oh, I want a new kind of man. Okay, well, that's your new kind of man. You like that? I don't think so. Is it any wonder, then, that Kamala Harris is struggling with men?

Democrats are freaking out over this. You don't need to take my word for it or Daily Wire's word for it or The Blaze or Fox News or anything else. Here's MSNBC on the man problem. But it's men. I mean, I think the real struggle for the Harris campaign is young men, older men, men of color, white men. That is the real struggle. Absolutely right. How's she going to fix that? She ain't going to fix it with Doug Emhoff.

She didn't go fix it with Tim Walls. Tim Walls coming out there. I mean, it was one of the clips that went viral from the campaign. I don't think we pulled it for the show today, where Tim Walls is trying to explain his lie about Tiananmen Square. He says, you know, I'm just kind of a knucklehead. You know me? In another clip, he goes, I'm just an old guy. I think, okay, you think you're being humble. True humility is a good thing.

I'm skeptical that that's true humility. I think that might be false modesty, which is really a species of pride. But regardless, whether it's sincere or artificial, you are running to be the vice president of the United States, one heartbeat away from the presidency. Take yourself seriously. Okay, have a little bit of sobriety. Have a little dignity. Have a little confidence. How about you act like a man?

How about you try that? You want to win male voters over? You want to win female voters over, for that matter, who are reasonable women? How about you act like a man when you are a man? That's going to be more effective. You know, on the debate prep, there's a story I really want to get to before we go today, which is J.D. Vance tweeted out yesterday that he was asked by a friend if he was nervous before he went up there for the debate. And he said, was I nervous? Yeah, on a scale of zero to zero.

10. I was about an 11. And he said, but one thing that calmed me down was a priest friend sent me this prayer. And it was a prayer that St. Thomas Aquinas apparently wrote. And I think it's a really good prayer to say, before a presidential debate, before you speak at the PTA meeting, before you speak in public,

I'd never heard this prayer before, even though my job is largely to speak in public. O ineffable Creator, who from the treasures of your wisdom have established three hierarchies of angels, have arrayed them in marvelous order above the fiery heavens, and have marshaled the legions of the universe with such artful skill. You are proclaimed the true font of light and wisdom, and the primal origin raised high beyond all things. Pour forth a ray of your brightness into the darkened places of my mind. Disperse from my soul the twofold darkness into which I was born, sin and ignorance."

You make eloquent the tongues of infants, refine my speech, and pour forth upon my lips the goodness of your blessing. Grant to me keenness of mind, capacity to remember, skill in learning, subtlety to interpret, and eloquence in speech. May you guide the beginning of my work, direct its progress, and bring it to completion. You who are true God and true man, who live and reign, world without end. Amen. I love this prayer. I think I will like to start saying this prayer. I like that...

Our vice presidential nominee is bringing up prayer in general, especially a prayer by St. Thomas Aquinas, who is one of the great geniuses ever to live. And as whose thinking has fallen away from popularity, our society has become much more degraded. So he's an important guiding light. But just prayer generally. I like that J.D. Vance is helping to normalize prayer again.

You don't want to be like a sounding gong. You know, you don't want to just be praying in a vain way that is for the entertainment or the deception of others. But you do want to pray. You want there to be an exterior aspect to your religion because we're incarnate creatures. So there has to be some exterior aspect to, well, basically everything as we move in time and space. But you want that to be reflective of an interior reality.

J.D. Vance converted some years ago, but this has been building now for some time. J.D. Vance mentioned our Lord during the debate. I don't think he did it in a pharisaical way at all. I think he just mentioned it. And I think this should be natural and this should be normalized. You can't be holy if you don't pray. You can't even be smart if you don't pray. You won't even be aware of your own limitations, which are significant. This kind of stuff

is help is personally helpful and i'm i suspect uh jd's prayer was answered before this debate which was the probably the greatest debate performance of my entire lifetime but just the fact that he says these things the more this is normalized the less bizarre it will seem when people mention prayer and god and and therefore the risk of sounding like a clanging gong or something of seeming like you're just doing it for show is greatly reduced because it's just the way that we speak

I mentioned yesterday that Mother Jones editor who became angry when a stewardess said, bless you, have a blessed day. That's something that's gone wrong politically in society for that to happen. We say, well, at least we still say, you see, you say, God bless you. We need prayer to be like that. We need to just be part of the language of the culture because the language colors the way we see the entire world. If we, if our country doesn't pray, then forget about advocating on this issue or that issue or this, that, or the other thing. It's not, you can't

rationally pay attention to all of those little aspects at a time. It's got to be in your bones. It's got to become a matter of virtue. You've got to be a country that is just fluent and habituated to this kind of stuff. I feel somewhat confident with this presidential ticket. We could get there if we win. It's Theology Thursday. The rest of the show continues now. You don't want to miss it. Become a member. Use code NOLSKIN at WLAS at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. ...

Republicans or Nazis, you cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people. Growing up, I never thought much about race. It never really seemed to matter that much, at least not to me. Am I racist? I would really appreciate it if you left. I'm trying to learn. I'm on this journey. I'm going to sort this out. I need to go deeper undercover.

Joining us now is Matt, certified DEI expert. Here's my certifications. What you're doing is you're stretching out of your whiteness. This is more for you than this for you. Is America inherently racist? The word inherent is challenging there. I'm going to rename the George Washington Monument to the George Floyd Monument. America is racist to its bones. So inherently. Yeah, this country is a piece of shit.

White. Folks. White. Trash. White supremacy. White woman. White boy. Is there a black person around here? There's a black person right here. Does he not exist? Hi, Robin. Hi. What's your name? I'm Matt. I just had to ask who you are because you have to be careful. Never be too careful. In theaters now. Rated PG-13.