Ep. 1676 - Trans Monkeys Explained in 5 Minutes

Building a business may feel like a big jump, but OnDeck small business loans can help keep you afloat.

With lines of credit up to $100,000 and term loans up to $250,000, OnDeck lets you choose the loan that's right for your business.

As a top-rated online small business lender, OnDeck's team of loan advisors can help you find the right business loan to fit your needs.

Visit OnDeck.com for more information.

Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota.
All loans and amounts subject to lender approval. A big day for bioethics.
The House Oversight Committee discovers that Dr. Fauci spent $241 million of your taxpayer dollars transing monkeys and other animals.
Dr. Deborah Birx, you remember she was the scarf lady during

the COVID lockdowns. She finally admits that they all lied to you about the COVID vaccines,

I guess better late than never. And President Trump signs an executive order vastly expanding

in vitro fertilization. I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show.
Speaking of bioethics and new laws and regulations, the Ohio legislature is considering banning all sex not intended for procreation. But there is a little catch that the Democrats snuck in there.
Finally, the solution to your weight management woes has arrived. Henry Meds offers access to compounded GLP-1 medications from the comfort of your home.
The healthcare providers at Henry Meds make access to weight management treatments fast, easy, and affordable. After starting this journey, uncompounded sumaglutide from Henry Meds, I'm down 85 pounds.
This journey has been life-changing. Go to henrymeds.com slash Pandora to start your weight management journey today.
That's henrymeds.com slash Pandora. Results may vary.
Not all patients are eligible. Compounded medications are not FDA approved.
Consult a healthcare provider to determine if treatment is right for you. $241 million.
This thanks to Eli Crane and the House Oversight Committee. Discovering thanks to a testimony specifically from the Senior Vice President of Advocacy and Public Policy at White Coast Waste Project.
This is Justin Goodman. On the $241 million that Dr.
Fauci greenlit to transvarious animals. These cases, they're involved mice, rats, monkeys who are being surgically mutilated and subjected to hormone therapies to mimic female to male or male to female gender transitions, gender affirming hormone therapies, and then looking at the biological, psychological, and physiological effects of the gender transitions, looking at the effects of taking vaccines after you've transitioned these animals from male to female or female to male, looking at the size of their genitals changing after you've put them on estrogen or testosterone therapies to transition them.
And in the case that the chairwoman, the example the chairwoman gave, there was a $1.1 million grant to give female lab rats testosterone to mimic transgender male humans and then overdose them with this party drug to see if animals who were taking test, female animals taking testosterone were more likely to overdose on the sex party drug than animals who are not taking testosterone. Okay, so there are a few layers there, just in case you missed it.
The public health officials in the United States, notably Dr. Fauci, greenlit all of this money, hundreds of millions of dollars,

to trans different animals, monkeys and other animals. But it didn't stop there.
Then they transed a bunch of different animals and gave them hardcore party drugs to see if the transed animals reacted in a more severe way to the hardcore party drugs. And the immediate conservative reaction to this is going to be that this is a clear example of government waste.
And what a stupid, feckless, wasteful use of money. That's not the real story here.
You have to ask yourself. People like Dr.
Fauci, they might be wrong about everything. They might be malicious.
They might be just a generally malignant kind of force in public life, but they're not stupid, actually. A lot of them are pretty clever.
A lot of them are really good at wielding power. Dr.
Fauci became the most powerful politician in America for years. So they got a couple brain cells to rub together.
Why are they doing this?

There is, in fact, a medical argument and a political argument for running these kinds of studies in a permissive society. The reason they're doing this is not to figure out if monkeys want to go trans.
It's because human beings have gone trans increasingly in recent years. And so they are testing the effects of transgender procedures and even the effects of hardcore party drugs that sexually deviant people often engage in on the sexually deviant monkeys that are supposed to simulate sexually deviant human people.
That's what it's for. They are tested, just like the same reason they do all sorts of other medical tests on animals, is to explore what these things look like in human beings.
And we live in a really permissive society that tolerates hardcore party drugs, that tolerates transing people and all sorts of other weird sexual behaviors. So it actually does stand to reason that we would test out the medical effects of these things on animals.
The problem is we shouldn't be so permissive. If we were not such a permissive society in recent decades, really beginning in the 1960s but exploding in recent years, if we were not this permissive, we wouldn't have to blow $241 million testing out the effects of bizarre hormone therapies and hardcore party drugs on monkeys.
Because we wouldn't have to worry about the public health effects of that on human beings. It makes sense that we're doing these studies, given our political insanity.
But there's a simple, much more cost-effective way to deal with these problems that's actually much more conducive to human flourishing. And that's to say, no, you don't get to do the hardcore party drugs.
No, you don't get to go on cross-sex hormones. No, you don't get to chop your body up.
No, we're not going to tolerate all of this extreme sexual deviancy. Just act normal.
It'll be better for the taxpayer dollars, it'll be better for the monkeys, and it will be better for the people too. Now, speaking of our public health officials coming clean with some of their dubious spending, Dr.
Deborah Birx, Dr. Scarf herself, one of the faces of the American response to the coronavirus pandemic, and at this point, what, five years ago, Dr.
Birx has come out and admitted not only did the COVID vaccines not prevent infection, as we were told they did, they were never designed to prevent infection. It's not just that the vaccines failed to do what they were supposed to do.
What Dr. Birx, one of the top authorities on COVID is now admitting is, yeah, they were never supposed to do that in the first place.
The public health officials, we all just kind of lied to you. That is not what the COVID vaccine was designed to do.
It wasn't designed against infection. And if you look at the vaccine hesitancy rates, they've doubled since COVID.
So we have to start addressing these things. We can't just ignore them.
Let me ask you, let me ask you, Deborah, given that you were the face of COVID from the Trump presidency at the time, do you share, this doctor who I was with, do you share the concerns about the longer term negative impact of some of the COVID vaccines? The messenger RMA vaccine should have been rolled out for the people that were at risk for severe disease, because that's what the vaccine was developed for. But when we say that we're following the science and the data, we need to follow the science and the data.
And the science and the data said people primarily over 65 or people with significant comorbidities were at risk for severe disease. Those are the individuals that should have been immunized first.
And we should have put our science behind our immunization schedule and protected those most at risk. Okay, so I'm glad to hear this now, but I don't even know if I should believe this now.
I guess I knew the whole time that the COVID vaccines were not going to prevent infection. People with common sense knew that.
No one really trusted Fauci by the time these vaccines came out. But really, I have no reason to even trust Dr.
Birx at this point when she's admitting that they were all lying five years ago, because she's admitting that they were liars. And I love the way she phrases this.
She goes, you know, the real tragedy here is that now we weren't following

the science, okay? And that means that people are distrusting the public health officials.

I don't know that that's the big, I don't think the big tragedy is we don't trust Dr. Fauci

anymore. I think the big tragedy is people were forced, were mandated by the government in many

cases to take a dangerous drug that for some people was needlessly dangerous against their will, against the medical literature. In some cases, people died.
In some cases, people got blood clots or myocarditis and died for no reason whatsoever. That's the issue.
It's the great Norm Macdonald joke. He says, people say that the problem with Bill Cosby, that the worst thing was the hypocrisy.
I don't think it was the worst thing. I think the worst thing was the raping.
I think hypocrisy was pretty low on the list, actually. That's how I feel here.
Yeah, the distrust of the NIH now. I guess that's a problem.
But I think it's more the people getting myocarditis and blood clots and dying. To me, that's the bigger problem.
It is difficult to overstate what an admission this is. People lost their jobs.
They were forced out of their careers. In some cases, they were just mandated to get it.
We were told, well, you know what? I actually have the clip. The clips were scrubbed from the internet largely, but in an earlier show years ago now at this point, I was able to bring them back together.
And then I actually had to go back to my show to even find the compilation. This is what we were told by all the geniuses back during COVID.
You're okay. You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.
These vaccines are highly, highly effective. Vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick.
They're really, really good against variants. Everyone who takes the vaccine is not just protecting themselves, but reducing their transmission to other people and allowing society to get back to normal.
Get your first shot. And when you're due for your second, get your second shot.
A key goal is to stop the transmission, to get the immunity levels up so that you get almost no infection going on whatsoever. When people are vaccinated, they can feel safe that they are not going to get infected.
Okay, are all of those people just the stupidest people in the country? Are they all just completely brain dead? Some of them are smarter than others, fair enough. But a number of people there are reasonably intelligent.
A number of people there, including Dr. Fauci, and Bill Gates.
Bill Gates is a pretty smart guy. These are people who ostensibly were in the know.
But Dr. Birx just told, and Dr.
Birx is not some kook, fringe, conspiracy. She was one of them.
She was one of the faces. One of probably the top three faces of coronavirus.
And she just said, yeah, the vaccine was never supposed to prevent infection. So what conclusion am I supposed to come to other than they lied to you.
They lied to you. They forced you to take a dangerous drug needlessly or to lose your careers and your livelihood.
And is it any wonder that everyone is now cheering on Elon Musk and the House Oversight Committee and the Trump administration broadly when they go in and ruthlessly gut these agencies. That should be no surprise whatsoever.
The people, it's not just the NIH, it's not just the Fauci's of the world, it's USAID, it's the IRS, it's so much of the federal apparatus. These people who are losing their jobs now, these people who are losing their power now, and whose demise the American people are applauding, those people have no one to blame but themselves.
There's so much more to say first, though. Go to helixsleep.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-L-E-S.
I didn't appreciate, when I was in my 20s, I was a bachelor, I did not appreciate how much of a difference a quality mattress can make. Okay, now I'm a little bit more serious about my sleep because I have three young children and I need my sleep.
Okay, what makes Helix different is their personalized approach. They take the time to match you with the perfect mattress for your specific needs.
I have had my Helix for four, almost five years now. It is magnificent.
And speaking of my little kids, I'm such a good father that I actually gave to my boy, my eldest, when he moved from his crib to his first bed, he got a Helix mattress. Okay.
Now that, I hope I'm not spoiling him. You should spoil yourself.
If you're ready to take advantage of the Helix President's Day sale, right now, our listeners can get the absolute best deal that you will find online. Okay, maybe you've looked at their website elsewhere.
You can go right now to helixsleep.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E- free dream pillows with mattress purchase plus free bedding bundle with any lux or elite mattress order. That is helixsleep.com slash Knowles Canada WLES for 27% off site-wide plus two free dream pillows with mattress purchase plus free bedding bundle with any lux or elite mattress order.
Speaking of bioethics, a little bit of bad news. The Trump administration thus far has been basically one relentless roller coaster of joy and triumph.
The Trump administration thus far, all the executive orders, a little bit of legislation they were able to get through, Congress, the foreign initiatives, the government efficiency initiatives, everything has just been amazing. Exceeded my wildest expectations, and I already had very high expectations for the administration.
However, it is impossible for an administration to bat a thousand all of the time. And so they just hit their first hiccup, an announcement yesterday that the White House is pushing an executive order to vastly expand in vitro fertilization.
Here's the announcement. And it's not even President Trump making the announcement.
This is President Trump introducing a member of the staff to make the announcement on behalf of the administration. Explain what we did.
Thank you. Good afternoon, y'all.
A short while ago, President Trump signed three items. The first is an executive order relating to the affordability and availability of in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments.
These are treatments that have become unaffordable for many Americans or have been unaffordable for many Americans. And the executive order is a directive to the Domestic Policy Council to examine ways to make IVF and other fertility treatments more affordable for more Americans.
There you go. And you see he moves on.
So already right off the top, what this tells me is this IVFEO is not a top priority for President Trump, nor should it be. Certainly it should not be.
Trump himself is not even making the announcement. He has a deputy making the announcement.
And even when the staff member comes out, he doesn't say, this is the big day. All right, we're finally fulfilling our grand promise on in vitro fertilization.
No one voted for Trump for in vitro fertilization. He says, okay, we got a few things that we did.
One is on IVF. Then we're moving on to number two, number three.
This is bad. I'm not going to

sugarcoat it in any way. IVF is really bad.
And it seems good to some people at first glance

because kids are good and because infertility is very, very difficult to deal with. My wife and I

dealt with it for a couple of years when we were first married, trying to have our first kid.

I can empathize with you. I know how bad it is.
And kids are always good. But good ends do not justify immoral means, okay? And the reality of IVF is, just as a practical matter, it immediately increases the number of abortions by many multiples, if not by orders of magnitude, okay? Because the way in vitro fertilization really works, not in the brochures and the advertisements they give you in the fertility clinic, but in reality, the way that IVF works in practice is, multiple human beings are created.
I'll just take you through IVF. They procure semen from men through a disgraceful and embarrassing and intrinsically disordered act that we don't need to talk too much about.
So right off the bat, not a reputable procedure. Not the sort of thing you write home to granny about.
Then they procure the eggs from the woman through a terribly invasive and painful procedure. They get that from the women.
And then they create multiple human beings. Could be three, could be five, could be 10, could be 15 human beings.
They just make all these embryos. And then they start to test them.
All right, do you want a boy? Do you want a girl? Ah, this one might not have the perfect genetics. Okay, well, you know what? We're going to pick two or three or four, and we're going to implant them.
Then, if too many of them take, they will kill some of them through abortion. They have all sorts of euphemisms to describe a reduction of the embryos, but what it comes down to is abortion.
They'll kill some of them. For the ones that do take, they might be born, though the odds of success are actually very low.
It's a very expensive procedure. It's a very painful emotional and physically procedure.
And the odds of it actually working are relatively low. Then you still have all these human beings in a petri dish.
Those human beings, your kids, are just being put into a freezer indefinitely or until later on down the road when they will be destroyed and killed. So right off the bat, if IVF is to be expanded, unfortunately, we will go from having the most pro-life administration ever in American history, bar none, to the most radically pro-abortion administration ever.
And I think it will be unintentional. I don't even blame Trump or many of the White House staff personally for this.
That's just what's going to happen. Most people don't know how IVF really works, but that will increase the abortion rate dramatically, unimaginably, because we don't know how widespread this would be.
On top of that, that's not even the essential reason that IVF is so wrong. The essential reason that IVF is so wrong is that in procreation, the only people who can be said to have ultimate legitimate rights are the children, the right of a child to be the product of the specific conjugal act of his mother and father joined together in a lifelong marriage.
If we're speaking philosophically and ethically here, those are the people who have rights. Parents do not have the right to procure a child.
Children are goods, they're a gift from God, they're wonderful, but you don't have a right to a child like you have the right to go purchase a handbag. Now, where the rubber meets the road here is that by establishing the domination of science and technology over the origin and destiny of human life, what IVF does is sets up these hideous scenarios where, as is being litigated right now, you sometimes have the case of the scientist in the laboratory accidentally mixing up the sperm and the egg.
So you create a human being from the genetics of a man and a woman who might not have ever met each other. Now you've got a child who not only will not know his natural mother and father, but who in principle basically can't know his natural mother and father.
The mother and father probably don't even know each other. Now, sometimes the babies are created from the right sperm and egg, but they're implanted in the wrong wombs.
And then even the babies will be raised for some period of time by the wrong parents before this is sorted out. These are all real cases that have been litigated just in recent years.
On top of that, you have a study that came out that showed that kids who are born via surrogacy, which often attends to the IVF procedure, are significantly more likely to experience antisocial behavior, depression, and anxiety by the age of seven. So just the surrogacy alone creates major problems.
On top of that, the IVF and surrogacy incentivize single parents to intentionally create children with the express intent of denying that child his natural mother or father. On top of that, the IVF procedure permits homosexual couples to intentionally create children in order to deprive those children of their natural mother and father.
I could go on and on. We could be here for hours discussing the many, many evils that attend to IVF.
That most people don't think of because all they know is their friend or their cousin or even their own kid was born via IVF and they didn't really give it a lot of serious bioethical thought and they just don't want to hear about it. They don't want to think about it.
It's okay. You can love your kid or your cousin or your friend born via IVF and not embrace, in principle, this relatively novel technology that is just not ethically defensible.
So those are all the moral arguments for why this is a bad idea to expand. There is a political side of it too, though, which I think a lot of, some people are just not appreciating on the Republican side of the aisle right now.
Namely, you are going to alienate a lot of your base. The pro-life movement is not for this.
The Catholics have been opposed to this for decades. The Southern Baptists, the largest Protestant denomination in the country, is opposed to IVF, articulated that view just about a year ago.
This is not only morally a big problem, this is politically a big issue. There is very little political upside in this for the Trump administration.
The Trump administration is not going to get credit from the people who love IVF. All those liberals and leftists are still going to hate Trump.
But he's going to lose a lot of support from some of his most important supporters. And just on the ethical and moral side of it, it's just not worth it.
So I actually, in some ways, appreciate the way that this was rolled out. Wasn't rolled out by Trump himself, not with the big signing in front of all the cameras.
It was just a staff member who brought it up among other EOs. And it's really just instructing a council to look into ways to reduce costs.
So it's so removed, it seems to me, this is coming from someone who is as supportive of President Trump as it is possible to be. And that has been true for almost a decade now.
Someone very much with the interests of this administration at heart, you can scrap it. Just scrap it, slow walk it, have this domestic policy council, write up some report in six or eight months, and then just forget about it.
Ethically, morally, this is not a good idea. It's going to become a worse and worse idea over time as people become aware of the bioethical problems with IVF.
But just politically, the juice is not worth the squeeze. You get basically no upside, and you get a lot of political downside.
It's okay. There's no knock.
It happens to everyone. This means that the Trump admin in its first three weeks is batting 999 instead of 1,000.
Okay. That's fine.
People will look past that. There will be plenty of grace, especially for how great things are.
Scrap it. This is not, it is not worth it.
There's so much more to say. First, though, go to preborn.com slash Knowles.
In today's fast-moving news cycle, there's an important issue often gets overlooked. Supporting expecting mothers facing difficult decisions.
While the world focuses on trending stories, there are women in our own communities who need support and guidance during one of life's most challenging moments. Preborn's nationwide network of clinics works directly with women who are considering their pregnancy options.
Through compassionate care and comprehensive support services, including ultrasounds that allow women to see and hear their developing baby's heartbeat, Preborn helps women make informed decisions about their pregnancies. Experience shows that women who receive these services are much more likely to continue their pregnancies.
The impact of this support extends beyond the immediate moment, creating positive changes that can span generations. A monthly donation of just $28 can make a significant difference in providing these essential services.
To support the cause, you can dial pound 250, say keyword baby, or go to preborn.com slash Knowles. I personally support this organization.
I strongly encourage you to give whatever you can. I think they do phenomenal work.
Go to preborn.com slash K-N-O-W-L-E-S.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff, all around MAGA legend, Stephen Miller, just appeared on CNN to defend the administration's policies broadly, to defend the deportations, which is an area of policy strength for Stephen Miller, and just generally to destroy the network on which Mr. Miller was a guest.
You mentioned yesterday, and you mentioned again here, illegal immigrants who are getting child tax credits. Are you looking for that information in the IRS data? Any time a crime is committed, of course there should be an investigation.
Is it your position that if somebody who is here criminally is stealing taxpayer dollars? The federal government will find every illegal alien who is stealing American taxpayer dollars and that's what Americans is that I don't even fathom that was your question it's a simple question anyone that information in the IRS data here that with law IRS investigators find illegal aliens stealing taxpayer money of course they'll be referred to to ICE. Of course it'll be referred to Homeland Security investigations.
That CNN, which is endlessly talked about the importance of democracy and the rule of law, would say that no class in this country should be above the law, least of all illegal aliens who've trespassed on our territory. Stephen, I'm just asking, I wanted to get your position on some things.
CNN's not taking a position. No, no, they're just the facts, Jack.
Straight down the middle. Objective, neutral, centrist.
I don't think so. Stephen Miller goes on.
He says, oh, yeah, yeah, I think you might be a little bit biased, CNN. CNN just comes off looking so out of touch here to me.
Because you can tell from the beginning of her line of questioning, she says, so as the Trump team looks into the IRS data, are they going to refer those data to law enforcement, specifically with child tax credits? Ah, see, what she's doing here is she's trying to paint the deportations as a matter of deporting the doe-eyed sweet little dreamers. But that's not who President Trump has been deporting.
President Trump has prioritized deporting face tattooed Mexican gangsters and Trende Aragua criminals from Venezuela and murderers and rapists and all these terrible people. It's not the doe-eyed little dreamers.
The dreamers, by the way, are like 43 at this point. Okay, so that's what she's trying to get at.

Oh, is it the child tax credit?

And Stephen Miller, he says,

yeah, we're looking at,

of course we're looking at IRS data.

We're the government now.

You know, we're allowed to look at the government data and we're looking at it for evidence of crimes.

Crimes committed by people

who have no right to be in this country in the first place.

Crimes committed by people who are stealing taxpayer dollars. And yeah, we're referring that to law enforcement.
She goes, oh yeah. Yeah, that's a simple question.
You refer that to law enforcement, huh? He goes, yeah. So it's actually a pretty honest debate.
Despite how dishonest the media want to be, it's actually a pretty honest debate. Should we tolerate the presence of 11 to 16 million

foreign nationals in our country illegally, or should we not? That was on the ballot in November. The people voted.
The majority of Americans voted to deport them. 46% of Hispanics voted to deport them.
Most people voted for that. Well, should we consider illegal immigrants to be criminals? That was on the ballot in November.
It was a fair fight. Whatever you want to say about Donald Trump, you can't say he hid the ball.
What CNN fails to understand, they still haven't learned this lesson from November, is mass deportations are a mainstream majority public opinion issue right now.

I wouldn't have guessed it five years ago.

So in some ways, I'm just as surprised as CNN is.

But that is a fact.

They have not made sense of it.

It seems so, so out of touch.

The liberals, the establishment generally, are just, they just seem out of touch. I don't know if it's because Trump won the popular vote.
I don't know if it's because his first few weeks in office have been so exciting and have led to good approval ratings and good ratings, not just on Trump's approval broadly, but on the things that he's actually doing and the fact that he's fulfilling his campaign promises. That's even according to liberal polls.
But it just seems out of touch. Like this establishment lawyer out of San Antonio who just went viral for his appearance on a podcast explaining how he loved sending his kids to private school, but he doesn't want poor kids to have the same opportunity that he had.
My wife and I are both.

My wife's a physician.

I'm a lawyer, obviously, and we're both products of public school education.

When we moved into the San Antonio ISD boundary,

our local schools just weren't performing,

so we opted to go private and eventually into the archdiocese schools here in San Antonio.

We paid a lot of money. We didn't ask anyone to supplement that or to help pay for that.
That was a personal decision that my wife and I did. And our kids were well-educated.
Okay, this just comes off so terribly. And I feel for this guy.
In fact, I think this guy's a Republican. I looked him up, did a little cursory search.
I think he's a Republican, kind of chamber of commerce type. At least that's what was popping up in some of the San Antonio records.
And he doesn't hear how this sounds. Because also, it doesn't sound like he's a billionaire.
He's in the upper middle class. He's a lawyer.
His wife's a physician. I mean, it's not easy to send kids to private school, even if you've got a good salary and you've got a good professional job.
And so he's saying, look, we did it. We scrimped and we saved and we sacrificed in some ways.
We sent our kids to private school. And we didn't ask anyone to help us out with that.
We didn't ask for school vouchers or school choice. But the effect that he's saying is, look, the public schools were failing.
We weren't going to send our precious kids to those public schools. We were going to do whatever we had to do to send them to private school.
But people who aren't doctors and physicians, they don't get to send their kids to the good private schools. Why not? Why not? All school choice does is just recognize that a lot of schools are failing and give parents an option to maybe at least have a chance of getting their kids out of those failing schools and getting them to places that are going to teach them.
Now, there have been plenty of conservatives excoriating this guy for his commentary and for how out of touch he sounds. However, he raises a good point here.
He raises a good point that conservatives need to take seriously. He shows that school choice really cannot be the end goal for conservatives.
So I think it's a good strategy. I think it's a good defensive posture.
I think it's a good intermediate step to help us get a foothold after the left totally dominated education. But it can't be the end goal.
And here's why. He says, look, we weren't asking people to pay for our kids to go to the Catholic school.
I don't expect that. And I think what he's insinuating here is he doesn't want to pay for other people's kids to go to some school that he disapproves of.
Think about this. We're all for a school choice and taking some of that public money and sending it so a kid can go to a Catholic school or some other kind of school.
But would we be just as copacetic about it if taxpayer dollars were being used for school choice coupons to send kids to the trans, furry, Antifa academy instead of the local parochial school? We said, look, it's school choice. You can send your kid to whatever school he wants.
Okay, so maybe you want to send your kid to the local Catholic school. I want to send my kid to Antifa terrorist sexual deviant school.
You know, we just have choice, right? No. I would object to that.
You would object to that too. Now, I guess really the trans-furry Antifa school, we just call that public school these days.
But still, in principle, we would say, no, no, no, it shouldn't be just a free-for-all. There have to be some standards, even just for accreditation, even just to figure out what kinds of schools would qualify for the coupons.
Even for homeschool pods, there are going to be some regulations. But then that brings us all the way back to say, okay, well, if we're insisting upon certain standards and certain regulations and certain criteria to qualify for public dollars in any way, whether through coupons or direct funding, well, then aren't we just back to public school? Isn't that just what public school is? Aren't we back, that is to say, to the real battle that the left has engaged in, that the right has run from? Namely, we should not concede the public schools to the left.
We should go in and assert our right to form those curricula and to set those standards. The mistake that we made in the middle of the 20th century was conceding the big institutions to the left, saying, no, whatever, we're going to privatize everything, go over to our own little ghettos.
No, no, no. What if we just keep up the fight? Good.
Let's get our school choice for now. Let's get our bearing.
Let's be on solid ground. But then let's go back.
Let's take those public schools back. Let's kick the nonsense out of the classrooms.
Let's ban the left-wing crazy ideologies from the classrooms. Let's bring back normal, important aspects of education, like the Bible, for instance, which was kicked out in the middle of the 20th century.
It's not possible to be an educated person without learning about the Bible. Let's bring that back in.
Let's bring some normality back into the classroom. Let's kick the crazy books out of it.
Let's really engage in that fight. I understand this lawyer's sense totally out of touch, but he's raising a good point that conservatives need to take very, very seriously.
Did you know 39% of teen drivers admit to texting while driving? Even scarier, those who text are more likely to speed and run red lights. Shockingly, 94% know it's dangerous, but do it anyway.
As a parent, you can't always be in the car, but you can stay connected to their safety with Greenlight Infinity's driving reports. Monitor their driving habits, see if they're using their phone, speeding, and more.
These reports provide real data for meaningful conversations about safety. Plus, with weekly updates, you can track their progress over time.
Help keep your teens safe. Sign up for Greenlight Infinity at greenlight.com slash podcast.
You know, if you were with us for election night or for the inauguration, you know Daily Wire doesn't just show up. We take over.
And we plan to do just that this week at CPAC. Join me, along with Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Andrew Klavan, Jeremy Boring, live Thursday night, February 20th, streaming on Daily Wire Plus.
Because we will be speaking. I'm going to be giving a speech, regular old main stage speech.
Ben is giving a speech. I think Matt is giving a speech.
He's a little curmudgeonly, but I think they managed to drag him out. But then we're all going to be together for Daily Wire backstage later that night.
Don't just watch CPAC. Be part of it.
We'll be taking your questions live Thursday night, February 20th on Daily Wire+. My favorite comment yesterday is from WillhoffTaken8543 who says, I'm from Germany and your show is a more important news source to me than our state media.
Thank you for your work, Michael. I appreciate that.
Love Germany, love Europe, and I know we have a lot of listeners and viewers throughout Europe. In fact, when I was in Hungary a year or two ago, I ran into one of the viewers from Germany, nice young lad, who brought me a delicious cigar from Italy.
And so I know it's tough out there and it's very difficult to find conservative news sources in Europe because of all the issues that J.D. Vance was raising at the Munich Security Conference, namely that the right is suppressed by the governments in Europe.
And Trump's coming out and saying, you know, look, we got a new sheriff in town. We're not going to tolerate that.
We're certainly not going to underrate that. So I'm glad that many of you are tuning in here to the Michael Knowles show and to the Daily Wire.
That's great. And hopefully in Europe, there are going to be some more sources that are cropping up soon.
But keep tuning into my show anyway. Now, speaking of controversial legislation, This is a doozy.
This is a real weird doozy. Some Ohio legislators are proposing a law that would ban all intercourse that is not intended to create a baby, with some exceptions.
And that's where actually this legislation starts to fall about, in their own words. Sponsored by Democratic state representatives Anita Somani and OBGYN from Dublin and Tristan Rader of Lakewood.
The whole entire point of this bill is to call out the hypocrisy of particularly the state legislature when they bring forward bills to

regulate women's bodies. Now there are exceptions to the proposed law which include sperm donation, contraception, and members of the LGBTQ community.
Men face a maximum $10,000 fine after the third offense if they have sex with a woman without the intention of conceiving a child. Okay how can you get it? Even the

lawmaker, these ridiculous liberals

behind this bill, they admit, no, we're just trying to make a point on hypocrisy. So they're not really trying to get this passed.
And they're right not to try to get this passed, not even because of the top line purpose of the law, but because of all of these exceptions. They say, you men, you're trying to stop women

from murdering their children. Oh, yeah, you hypocrites.
Well, we're going to stop you

from sleeping with ladies if you don't intend to have a baby. How do you like that?

Life, I think they're calling it the life begins at erection law, or conception begins at erection Act. Except they don't really mean that.
Because you just heard the three exceptions. They said, well, the people who are going to be exempt from the $10,000 fines are sperm donors, members of the LGBT community.
And what was the third one? Oh, people who do things alone. You know, what Woody Allen called sex with someone you love.
This is a family show, so I have to speak in euphemisms. In other words, the bill specifically targets heterosexual couples who are not intending, how do you even capture intent in the law? It's very difficult to conceive

a child. But they exempt, they specifically protect homosexuals, wankers, and people who are selling their children for profit.
That's another, this euphemism, sperm donation. Well, sometimes they donate it.
Sometimes it's free. I don't know, they just have a kink or something.
But sometimes they actually receive payment for this supposed donation, which is selling your children.

It's selling your future children.

It's obviously the sperm is not children, but that sperm is used by disreputable and unethical scientists to create children with the intent of depriving them of one of their natural parents.

So you're just selling your kids for like a hundred bucks a shot. So people who are engaging in very sus behaviors, they're the ones who are exempted.
So then the law is really, truly just discriminating against normal heterosexual people. Not good.
Not good. It doesn't even prove the point that they're trying to make.
Because frankly, look, I would oppose this bill generally because I, following St. Thomas Aquinas, believe that we should not ban everything that is a vice or that is sinful.
Because people just are at different levels of virtue in society. Not everyone is a walking saint, okay? And we can't expect that of people because if you hold society to far too high a standard, it could crack.
This is one of the arguments against prohibiting prostitution in all cases is that society might become so convulsed by lust because the many people in the society are already living in a habit of vice. And so you have to draw people toward virtue in a way that is gradual and sustainable.
You have to kind of meet people where they are. So I would oppose this legislation generally.
But in an ideal world, if you told me we were going to ban all kinds of weird sex stuff and just have good normal sex stuff that would lead to people having big flourishing families and everything. I'd be all for it in principle in an ideal world.
But not with these exceptions. You're totally giving up the game here, man.
What a bunch of wankers. Literally, that's what they're protecting here.
The Ohio Democrats are not sending their best. Now, speaking of sexual politics, the United States Army has announced it will no longer hire self-identified transgenders.
This is the Army's words. They posted this to X.
The U.S. Army will no longer allow transgender individuals to join the military and will stop performing or facilitating procedures associated with gender transition for service members.
Stay tuned for more details. If you're frustrated with your taxpayer dollars transing monkeys, imagine how frustrated one should be that your taxpayer dollars are transing the troops.
I don't want to spend my money on that. That's insane.
That doesn't help military fitness or readiness. It's not good for anybody.
The monkeys, whatever, you write it off as a medical experiment, but this is insane. Obviously, a step in the right direction for the U.S.
Army. They're not saying we're going to ban all the trans-identifying people just yet.
They're saying we're going to stop hiring them, and then we'll see if there's another shoe to drop here. When the left loses its mind over this, just remember, trans-identifying people were banned from military service, full stop, until June of 2016.
That is, Barack Obama got elected in 2008. Even Barack Obama, one of the most progressive left-wing presidents we've ever had, in 2009, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and half of the final, the eighth year of his presidency, was fully on board with banning trans-identifying people from the military.
Of course, they are not mentally fit to be in the military.

They don't understand the basics of their own identity or reality. That is not going to be great for military readiness.
To say nothing of the physical debilitations that they intentionally give themselves on your taxpayer dime. This is no knock on anybody.
I hope they

get the psychological and spiritual help that they need, but they do not belong in the military.

And this is going to be, this is, mark my words, this is going to be portrayed as

shocking, extreme, the rise of fascism, authoritarianism. Barack Obama, in the final

year of his presidency, presided over a military that banned trans-identifying people from it. This is just a restoration of normal, which is the description, it's probably the best description you have of the vast majority of what President Trump has done so far.
There's a shocking headline, speaking of men and women, I don't have time to get to it today, but a shocking headline. Washington Post.
Men may be more romantic than women, experts say. We'll get to that shocking intuition, I guess, tomorrow.
We don't have time right now. No member block.
The studio is shut down today because of three little snowflakes.

I don't know.

They're very cautious.

They're afraid for the staff.

They don't want the staff to crash their cars.

For me, I'd send them out on the icy roads.

I don't care.

I want that show in studio every day.

I want to talk to the beautiful member room segmentum, the Chem Lulachem, through my iPad.

But I've been stymied for today.

Let's hope we have better luck tomorrow.

I'm Michael Knowles.

This is The Michael Knowles Show.

See you then.