Ep. 1811 - Libs Demand ‘Sympathy For The Stabbers’ After Charlotte Train Murder

the wake of the horrific murder of Irina Zarutska by the career criminal with 14 prior arrests, the mainstream left, not the extremists, not the fringe, the most mainstream kind of left-wing voice on the most mainstream left-wing network is furious

that you don't have sufficient sympathy for the murderer.

We don't know why that man did what he did.

We don't know how to deal with people who were hurting in the way this man was hurting.

Hurt people, hurt people.

Hurt people,

hurt people.

Won't somebody please think of the stabbers?

I'm Michael Knowles.

This is the Michael Knowles Show.

Welcome back to the show.

Israel has blown up another country.

This time, I shouldn't laugh about it.

What are you going to do?

You're going to laugh or cry, I guess.

Israel hit Qatar.

Qatar, which is a U.S.

ally, hit Qatar and blew up a bunch of Hamas guys.

I guess that's fine.

Ostensibly while they were negotiating to accept a Trump ceasefire deal.

And, well, that's the official story anyway.

And everybody officially is shocked and dismayed and condemning of the attack.

And yet, I think if you read in between the lines, I think the real story is quite different.

We'll get to that momentarily.

First, I want to tell you about Birch Gold.

Tex Knowles to 98, 98, 98.

When inflation jumps, when you hear the national debt is over $37 trillion, do you ever think maybe now would be a good time to buy some gold?

Whether it's a hedge against inflation, peace of mind during global instability, or just for sensible diversification, Birch Gold Group believes every American should own physical gold.

So they created something special.

Until September 30th, if you are a first-time gold buyer, Birch Gold is offering a rebate of up to $10,000 in free metals on qualifying purchases to claim eligibility and start the process.

Request an info kit now.

You know, I'm a little bit of a gold bug, have a little bit of gold in my portfolio.

And boy, oh boy, have I been happy about that, especially this past week, really?

I mean, I always am, but you've just seen it ramp up the past year, year and a half.

So, anyway, if you're interested in getting some more information, text Knowles, KNWLES 298-9898.

Birch Gold can help you roll an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold, and you're still eligible for the rebate in free metals up to 10 grand.

Join their tens of thousands of happy customers and make right now your first time to buy gold.

Take advantage of that rebate up to $10,000 when you buy by September 30th.

Text my name Knowles to 98.98.98.

Claim your eligibility today.

That is Knowles, KNWLES

98, 98.

Hurt people, hurt people.

Hey, hey, top left-wing pundit on the main left-wing news outlet.

What is your reaction to the career criminal who jumped up randomly and started stabbing this white woman in the throat?

And then

I think said something about got that white girl or got that white woman.

I think we heard that was going around the internet.

I think that's real.

And then the people around her did absolutely nothing for a minute, minute and a half, and then she died.

What's your take on that?

Her people, hurt people, you know, that's just how it goes.

Her people, hurt people.

Got it.

Got it.

Let's go back just a few years.

When George Floyd died, when the George Floyd resisted arrest and then the police officer subdued him and then he died during the arrest.

The police officer was arrested.

Police officer was put on trial.

Here is what Van Jones had to say about the supposed perpetrator, you know, actually the police officer in this case, Derek Chauvin.

Here's what he had to say about him

and all the police officers around him.

The idea that you could have a lynching, you could have an officer lynch a man.

You know, that's that was a lynching.

Not one minute, not two minutes, not three minutes, six, seven, eight minutes, depriving someone of oxygen in a spectacle in front of the whole community.

That was a lynching.

You could have that lynching and have not just the officer do it, but to have three other police officers there and do nothing to intervene and in fact defend it.

You could then give 87th degree murder.

I've never heard of third degree murder.

I'm an attorney.

I'm in my 50s.

I've never heard of third degree murder.

You can give a third degree murder charge in that, not arrest the other officers, and we're all going to say thank you very much and go back to what we were doing.

You actually incited people.

But what if he was hurting?

Hold on, Van, Van, hold on.

What if Derek Chauvin was hurting?

The hurt people hurt people, you know?

Come on, where's your sympathy?

Aren't we, we're supposed to, now in that case, by the way, he calls it a lynching.

Derek Chauvin was an officer of the law who tried to arrest George Floyd, who had just committed a crime, who had committed a lot of crimes in his life.

And George Floyd just consistently resisted arrest the whole time and was super high on fentanyl.

And the officer just subdued him following a lot of ordinary police training.

And Van Jones's response was one, to say that it was murder, say it was a lynching, not to have any sympathy for who knows.

Derek Chauvin might have, he might have stubbed his toe that morning.

He might have, his dad might not have hugged him when he was a kid.

Hurt people hurt people.

Not only to go after him, but to demand that he be imprisoned, effectively effectively for life,

and to demand that all of the police officers who might have even been in his vicinity be punished.

But then when it's a

14-prior arrest, career criminal, lunatic, vagrant, and he stabs this poor little Ukrainian woman on the train, just out of the blue.

You say, I'm not going to show the pictures.

I'm not going to show the pictures.

I'm not going to show the video.

The look of horror and shock on her face when this happens, he walks around and no one on the train does anything for a minute, minute and a half.

Well, that's hurt people, hurt people.

Mind you, mind you,

I'm not even just focusing on Van Jones's emotion or the lack of emotion or the lack of emotion of the mainstream left.

Forget about their emotion.

Their policies are responsible for this.

The mainstream left, which has said we need to go soft on crime, which has said we need to be tough on cops, we need to punish cops for doing their job, which has said we need to abolish prisons, which is said, said we need to decriminalize deviant activity, which is said we need to

stop arresting the mentally ill, stop arresting the homeless.

I mean, I could go on with this litany all day.

The left established the conditions in which this sort of crime occurs and then ignores the crime when it happens.

Whatever happened to, we need to do something.

Remember that, you know, whenever there's a shooting or any kind of incident that's convenient for the left, we need to do something.

Damn your thoughts and prayers.

I don't want to hear it.

We're not even getting thoughts and prayers from Van Jones.

We're getting platitudes from like Oprah or something.

I don't know.

Where is that quote from?

I think it's from a pastor in the 50s, actually, or a high school principal or something.

Hurt people, hurt people.

Whatever it is, just frivolous nonsense.

That's not even a thought and prayer.

It's not even a thought.

What about we need to do something?

Because I tell you how you could stop this sort of thing.

If someone gets arrested 14 times, you're out.

You're out.

No more.

You don't.

Either you stay in prison forever or

you're out or you're really out.

That seems like a good idea, right?

Maybe when people do get arrested, we don't let them out on bail and bond.

Maybe when people are living on the streets, we don't just let them do that.

Maybe we arrest them and we either force them to go to a shelter or we force them to go to an insane asylum or we force them to go to jail.

Or maybe we just do what we've done more or less forever by enforcing the law.

We could do that.

The left doesn't want us to do that.

The Van Joneses don't want us to do that.

All of this is so predictable.

I think that's what people are frustrated by.

You see all these people saying, I'm just sick of this.

I'm sick of seeing this.

I'm so, it's so exhausting.

Part of what's exhausting about it is it's so predictable.

In this case, like literally 14 times, there are 14 mugshots of this guy you can find on the internet.

You didn't think like after the 11th time, maybe maybe we just take him out of society?

No, we can't do that because that would be wrong.

That would be, that would be prejudicial.

That would be biased.

That would be

this stuff is predictable.

And I know at a deeper level,

part of the reason that people don't want to recognize patterns of crime, for instance, or any other kind of pattern, is that we don't want to be unfair to the individual.

And that's actually a decent impulse.

We feel that if you recognize predictable patterns in anything, not even just in crime, in anything, and you act upon those predictions, that that's going to somehow undermine people's free will.

This is actually a long-standing problem of human nature and of theology and all the rest of it.

But just because something is predictable doesn't mean that it undermines free will.

Just because you know that

Just because you know that when you flip a coin 500 times, statistically,

250, those are going to be heads, 250, those are going to be tails, does not mean that you know with certainty that anytime you flip a coin, it's going to be heads or tails.

Like you get to the 499th flip, you're now about to flip the 500th time, you've had one more head than tails.

You're not going to bet the farm on tails.

Let's say it's got to come up tails.

It's not true.

Any coin flip could be either one of those.

But in the aggregate, it's going to be 50-50.

You can predict things and you can act based on those predictions.

We know which neighborhoods the crime takes place in.

We know how to stop crime.

You put more cops on the beat.

You arrest more people.

You don't let people out on bail and bond, willy-nilly.

When people commit crimes many, many times, you just lock them up forever, at least.

We know how to do that.

That doesn't necessarily compromise people's free will.

That doesn't target people unfairly or unnecessarily.

It's just that's that's just called common sense.

People are predictable because we have human nature.

And we can predict what people in the aggregate do because we have reason.

And also people have free will and need to have their rights respected and protect.

But

at a certain point,

when we use our reason

prudentially,

we actually can prevent these crimes.

We used to do that.

It's a recent phenomenon.

It's really a post-George Floyd phenomenon that we've said cops are bad and criminals need to be able to do whatever they want.

This is what happens.

Hurt people, hurt people.

Not good enough for me.

Run on that.

Tell the Democrats to run on that.

On the rampant crime going all over around the country, poor innocent little women being stabbed in the neck on trains.

No one does anything.

Go run on that.

Your answer is hurt people, hurt people.

We're going to win

every single house of government, and then I hope we do something when we have that.

Now,

speaking of law and order,

the media are terrified that the right is going to do something about it because we do currently have power.

We'll get to that in one second.

First, though,

I want you to send me your voicemailbag questions.

You know, some people are very confused.

How do I send a message in?

How do I send a voicemailbag?

It's very simple.

You go to dailywire.com, you click watch, you click the Michael Knowles show, then you click send in a mailbag question,

and it's going to open up an email.

You can either write your mailbag question in, or I prefer the voicemail bags.

So you record it on your phone, however, you record your audio, whether it's your camera, whether it's your voice memo, however you do it on your computer with a phonograph.

I don't know.

Then you attach it.

Now, please, I implore you,

keep it to 30 seconds, a minute at most, a minute at most.

It's very sweet.

You send it, but sometimes you send me your memoir.

Sometimes you send me your

three-hour saga about, I can't air that.

You got 30 seconds, okay?

Please.

Well, at least at the very most a minute.

And then I'll get to hear your mellifluous voice and I will answer your burning questions on Friday.

You know the story.

You know the story about what happened on that train in Charlotte.

The story is not that a career criminal predictably stabbed a poor Ukrainian refugee in the neck and she bled out more or less without any help.

The story is not even

that hurt people hurt people.

The story is

that a stabbing fuels MAGA's crime message.

Stabbing fuels MAGA's crime message.

This is a version of Republicans pounce.

You know Republicans pounce.

I don't know, for the younger people in the audience not as familiar with this.

Whenever there's a Republican scandal, the story is the Republican scandal.

Whenever there's a Democrat scandal, the story is how Republicans are overreacting to the Democrat scandal.

That's how it goes.

So this is it.

That's the story, right?

The stabbing video fuels MAGA's crime message.

What is MAGA's crime message?

MAGA's crime message is we need to get tougher on crime, that the criminals are committing crimes.

I guess that's the message.

And we should stop that.

Why is the video

fueling MAGA's crime message?

Is it because the video is

revealing something about the reality of our criminal justice system, about our society?

And that reality corresponds to the MAGA crime message?

It's not even the worst headline in the world because the headline basically says, hey, Republicans are right.

Hey, evidence shows that what Republicans are saying is correct.

We don't quite want to admit that, so we'll just say it's this, it's a highly selectively edited video or something.

This reality very unfairly is backing up what Trump and the Republicans are saying.

Yeah.

Yeah.

But the thing is, we know.

We knew

before the stabbing, before this awful stabbing that was totally predictable and preventable.

Not totally preventable, but pretty preventable.

We knew that before.

That's one of the reasons we voted for Trump.

That's the thing.

And now we're seeing more proof of that.

Trump ran on fixing crime.

Trump ran on law and order.

That's what we voted for.

We know that.

So they're going to try to make it a black versus white issue.

They're going to really try to lean into race on this.

Don't forget Trump won more, a greater percentage of the black male vote than any Republican in my lifetime.

Let's not forget that Trump won 46% of Hispanics.

Let's not forget that.

There is certainly a racial aspect to this because

on the exceedingly rare occasion when a white person kills a black person, it becomes an international news story for like 18 months.

And on the much more frequent occasion that it's a black person killing a white person, it's buried by the media if they can succeed in burying it.

So there is a racial aspect to it.

There's no question about it.

But the left is going to try to use that to advance their race hustler message.

I don't think anybody's having that anymore,

including black people, including Hispanic people,

including everyone.

Now, speaking of law enforcement and racial profiling, the Supreme Court reportedly is going to permit racial profiling, sort of, kind of, in limited instances, but not quite really.

What's the story?

Supreme Court on Monday

overturned a federal judge's order that said that federal agents in LA

could not stop people and question them based on, in part, their race.

And the Supreme Court overrules that.

This is probably not the last word on this issue.

It's going to be litigated more and more and more.

But at least for now, the ICE agents are allowed to racially profile.

What does that mean?

What does that mean?

What were the ICE agents doing in California?

The ICE agents had been stopping people and briefly questioning them

based on one to four factors or a combination of all four.

Race and ethnicity, language, language spoken and accent,

location,

where they were picked up, and type of work they were doing.

And the left said that's completely unacceptable.

That's illegal, undermines civil rights, unconstitutional.

The federal agents have a job.

The federal agents have this job to get rid of people who are not supposed to be here, foreign nationals who are here illegally.

And the left says you're not allowed to consider whether or not they're foreign.

You're not allowed to consider whether or not they look foreign, whether or not they look like all the other foreigners, whether or not they sound foreign.

They speak a foreign language.

They go to the places that the foreign people go and they do the kind of work that the foreign people do.

You're not allowed to consider any of that.

But otherwise, good luck.

So you see, the argument that they're not allowed to profile based on language or looks or anything like that, location, the argument is just another way of saying you're not allowed to deport the foreigners.

You won the popular vote in November based on a promise to deport the foreigners, the illegal alien foreigners.

There are plenty of other foreigners who are here legally that we can't deport.

But you won election largely on that.

The federal law says you're supposed to deport these illegal aliens, but we're not going to let you.

You're not allowed to do that

because the things that you would have to do to do that are illegal and unconstitutional and violate civil rights.

Is that true?

Can that be true?

Can it be true that you're not allowed to profile when you're looking for criminals?

That cannot possibly be true because the entire job of law enforcement is to profile.

The entire job of law enforcement is to distinguish between the criminals and the innocent.

That's the job.

That's what you're hired to do.

And when you distinguish between people,

you profile them.

You look around, sometimes even without rational processing, just on gut reaction, instinct based on years of experience.

You look around and you say, okay, that guy has all the features of criminals and that person does not.

And so I'm going to not just immediately throw the person in the clink, but I'm going to now go and question that person

because he looks like the criminals.

He talks like the criminals.

He's doing the things the criminals do in the places that the criminals are.

Hey, are you a criminal?

Now, if the guy, you go up to the guy, who looks like an illegal alien, face-tatted trendwa gangbanger.

If a cop went up to that guy and said, hey, are you a trende Aragua gangbanger?

And the guy said, what are you talking about, sir?

I don't understand what the problem is.

I'm here.

I'm just here on my student visa from Oxford.

Oh, you're wondering about the face tattoos.

Yes, that was a crazy little night at the pub.

The old bird and the baby, you know, the fellow.

Okay, sorry, sir.

I didn't.

I guess I was mistaken.

Appearances can be deceiving sometimes, but usually they're not.

Usually appearances are not deceiving.

Usually appearances are helpful.

They point us to things.

Most of the time, the face tattooed, Venezuelan-looking guy with the thick accent who doesn't speak any English, who's hanging out in the trap house,

usually that guy just is the illegal alien.

You have to profile.

To say stop profiling is to say

stop enforcing the law.

Stop being cops.

To say stop profiling is to say, hey,

Irina Zarutskas are going to multiply all around the country.

There's going to be an Irina Zarutska in the news every single day because we're going to let the criminals run roughshot over the...

Do you want that?

That's the alternative.

It's that or profiling.

What's your choice?

I think most people have made their choice.

And I think most people are right.

Now,

there's a lot more going on, specifically involving deportations, specifically involving law enforcement, all the way to President Trump declaring war on a major American city.

First, though, I want to tell you about Bolin Branch.

Go to Bolinbranch.com/slash Knowles.

Do you know that feeling when you invest in something truly well-made?

Like those leather boots that only get more comfortable with each wear.

That solid wood table that'll outlast three apartments.

Well, that is what I have discovered and you will discover with Bolin Branch sheets.

They are crafted with that same philosophy of lasting quality.

While most bedding deteriorates, these sheets get better and softer wash after wash, making them one of those rare purchases that keeps rewarding you long after you've made it.

What sets sets them apart is they're 100% organic cotton in this breathable, durable weave that you can feel the quality of immediately.

You truly can feel the difference compared with your everyday box store sheets that feel like they're made of sandpaper or tissues.

It's really, it's just Bolin Branch is amazing.

I've slept on them for years and I just got a nice new beautiful waffle blanket that my kids really like.

I got another one of those from Bolin Branch.

I just love them.

I mean, they're just, they're the greatest.

They back it all up with a 30-night worry-free guarantee.

So you can try it all risk-free.

See for yourself why they're built to last.

Feel the difference that an extraordinary night's sleep can make with Bolin Branch.

Get 15% off plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at Bolinbranch.com slash Knolls.

That's Bolin Branch, B-O-L-L-A-N-D-Branch.com slash Knowles.

Canada Bearly has to save 15% and unlock free shipping.

Exclusions apply.

This is a story from a few days ago, but I really want to get to it at least briefly because it

tells you something about political tactics and the squishes hate this stuff and the squishes are wrong and Trump is right.

Trump tweets out a few days ago, I love the smell of deportations in the morning.

Chicago is about to find out why it's called the Department of War and then three helicopters and it's a picture of Trump.

Like he says chaipocalypse now.

It's the president with shades on.

City burning in the background.

That's aggressive.

It's pretty aggressive.

You know, Trump renamed the Defense Department Department of War.

He's now treating Chicago as Vietnam, and he's going to drop napalm all over it or something.

That's great.

The White House tweeted it out, too.

Chicago better to find out.

Trump was then asked about this at the White House.

Here's what he had to say.

Why are you the Department of Defense?

Listen.

Be quiet.

Listen.

You don't listen.

You never listen.

That's why you're second grade.

We're not going to war.

We're going to clean up our cities.

We're going to clean them up so they don't kill five people every weekend.

That's not war.

That's common sense.

Perfect answer, perfect answer, and perfect exchange, and perfect setup is really what this is about.

Trump and the White House tweet this out, and it's crazy and over-the-top and obvious bait.

Then the media take the bait.

And then he sounds reasonable.

People ask, is it really necessary for Trump to say these things to talk about declaring war on Chicago?

And does he really have to do that?

And does he really, isn't it just that so unpresidential?

Yes, he does.

He does have to do it.

Because when he trolls and

when he puts that little bait out there, then it leads the media to come ask, is this really necessary?

Is this you're going to declare war?

He says, hold on, hold on.

Knock it off.

You're second rate.

He puts her in her place, which looks great and establishes authority.

And most people want because the media lie because

they look at career criminal lunatics stabbing people and they say, hurt people, hurt people.

We're We're so sick of these guys.

And Trump says, put he says, you're second rate.

He puts her in her place and he says, we're not declaring war.

Where'd you get that from?

Your tweet, sir.

Never mind.

Where'd you get that from?

We're not declaring war.

It's called enforcing the law.

It's called common sense.

So he, because the media don't want to pay attention to these things, crime in Chicago, most people have no idea how many people are murdered every single weekend in Chicago.

It's shocking.

Because most people don't see the incidents like you saw in Charlotte with Irina Zarutska.

Because you don't see that, Trump has to figure out a way to make the media show people that.

That's what he does.

That's what all of this stuff is about.

And it works.

It's totally politically effective.

And the squishes who want to whine about whether or not it's presidential, they just don't get it.

They're just not going to make it.

He gets the attention, and then they make him look reasonable.

That's smart.

Now,

a lot of the Chicago operation is going to be about deportations.

That's where a lot of the focus lies, and it needs to lie because we don't know how many of these people are in the country.

Conservative estimates say 11 million to 16 million people.

We don't know.

There have been a lot of self-deportations.

Trump's critics don't want to give him credit for that, but there have been at least 1.6 million of these illegal aliens who have left the country just in the last seven, eight months.

So it's pretty impressive, but there's a lot of ways to go.

Some members of Congress, especially this Democrat Congress lady, Yasamin Ansari,

see no distinction between the illegal aliens and their own actual constituents.

So I didn't realize this was such a controversy until the right-wing media started attacking me for using the word.

So I googled the word constituent.

The definition of constituent is somebody who is part of a community.

It doesn't matter what their legal status is.

If somebody is an asylum seeker, if somebody has a green card, if somebody is a U.S.

citizen, if somebody

lives in the community, I represent them.

Constituent does not mean voter.

I don't care if these, if none of these individuals can vote for me.

I don't give a shit.

I care about making sure that the United States government with our taxpayer dollars is treating human beings with dignity and respect.

Oh my goodness, we're not going to make it.

We're not going to, if this is the caliber of legislator, we're not going to make it.

First of all,

this is a little bit separate.

Whenever you're having a debate with your friends or your coworkers or your family, or if you're on TV, please, please, please don't pull the,

actually, you know, Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines criminal as

actually,

you know, I look.

It's so embarrassing what she just said.

She said, you know, they were accusing me of prioritizing foreign criminals over my own constituents.

So you know what I did?

You know what I did?

I I googled the word constituent.

Oh, my goodness, gracious.

Oh, my goodness.

You're a member of Congress.

You don't know the meaning of the word constituent.

No, we're not going to make it.

These people, this ain't the Continental Congress anymore, folks.

These are not.

I don't think that, yes, Meen Ansari could have written the Federalist Papers.

I don't know that she has a decent grasp on the English language.

She had to Google the word constituent.

Constituents

are,

that's one of the like five words you need to know if you are a member of Congress.

You need to know the word law.

Do you know what law means?

It's an ordinance of reason for the common good by him who has care of the community and promulgated.

Do you know that one?

Okay, well, that's a freebie for yes, mean, and sorry.

You need to know law.

You need to know vote.

You don't vote.

You know what?

That's where you put the thing in the box.

That's what you used to do.

Now you just go into

computers that might be able to be hacked.

Anyway, that's a separate topic.

And constituent.

That's the people that you represent.

And she goes, I googled it.

You're not going to believe what this means.

No, I will believe it because I know what the word constituent means.

No, you're not going to believe this, Michael.

I googled it and it says a member of a community.

So there, so there, owned conservatives.

It just means a member of a community.

Yes.

Follow-up question:

What's the community?

What's the community?

She thinks this is an own.

She thinks she,

what's the community?

Community refers to that which is in common, that which is public, that which, what is the,

are the illegal aliens properly part of the community?

If I fly, well, we're about to get to Israel blowing up Qatar.

If I just flew into Qatar, I've been to Qatar.

I was in the Doha airport for nine hours one time.

Am I part of the Qatari community?

Well, I'm there for nine hours.

I was waiting for my next flight.

I smoked a cigar in the airport.

I had a glass of scotch.

I ate some nice little Qatari food in the lounge.

Did that make me part of the Qatari community, the Doha community?

No.

I was there.

I was physically present there, but I was in no way part of their community.

An illegal alien who comes here, an economic migrant, likely came here in recent years when Joe Biden threw open the doors and millions of illegal aliens came every year.

That person

might physically be in this lady's district.

That person might even count for the purposes of the U.S.

Census and congressional apportionment, which is not based on citizenship, but just based on warm bodies.

But that person is not part of the community.

That person doesn't share the legal responsibilities of being part of the community.

That person, not all of them at least, that person does not

share the language of the community, does not share the traditions of the community, does not respect the laws the community does.

This person's not part of it.

What does, that's going to be my next movie.

That can be my follow-up to Matt's movies.

That'll be my big hit movie.

What is a community?

What is a community?

She doesn't know that.

We don't have a sense of that.

And this is deeper than this woman, and it's deeper than even the Democrats.

We don't understand what a community is.

We don't really understand what common good is anymore.

So the left ignores that and just pushes selfishness on the social front, largely through weird sex stuff and drugs and just disordered behaviors.

But the right has pushed it a little bit too, just largely on the economic front, where we exalt the notion that greed is good and the virtue of selfishness, which is a book by Ayn Rand.

Ayn Rand, who until recently was a popular writer, one of the favorites on the right, pushed this kind of hyper-individualist libertarian idea.

So we both, we're kind of both sides are guilty of it.

But it's even worse, it's worse.

The fact that this woman doesn't know what constituent means is bad.

The fact that she doesn't know what community means and that none of us really knows what community means, even

worse.

Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines were cooked as that video.

Okay.

Dearborn Heights, Michigan, speaking of lack of community and foreigners, is now proposing the first ever Arabic language police patch in the United States.

The wait is nearly over.

Tonight, we're celebrating a decade of the Daily Wire with the live premiere of our new show, Friendly Fire, at 7 p.m.

Eastern.

We're not here to tell stories of the past.

This isn't nostalgia hour.

We're giving you a first look at what's coming next.

New series, new projects, huge announcements, surprises we've been holding back until now.

This is the official start.

of our next decade.

It's the live premiere of Friendly Fire, all of us together doing what we do, yell at each other, and

when we're in person, we try to hit each other.

But this time, this will be just virtual.

Watch live tonight, 7 p.m.

Eastern, dailywire.com, and on the Dailywire Plus app.

My favorite comment yesterday is from Marcus W210.

It says, I'm amazed that Greta's boat hadn't already sunk under the weight of her self-importance.

Yes, yes,

you could imagine hearing just,

How Dang!

Yes, that's true.

Although now, I don't know, now with Kefia wearing Greta, it might just be like,

anyway, you're right, but she's okay.

Greta's okay,

as are all of her friends.

And looks like it wasn't a drone now.

No evidence it was an Israeli drone.

It was off of Tunisia.

And anyway,

she got her attention.

She got, and she loves that.

If they said, Greta, you could end global warming now.

You could finally vanquish the sun monster, or you could get one more second of attention.

How dare you ask me that question?

Give me my attention.

Speaking of foreigners, Dearborn Heights, Michigan

has proposed a new patch for its police department.

This patch is unusual.

I travel around the country, you know, I give speeches and stuff, and often the local cops will give me a patch of it.

It's kind of cool.

And so I have this great collection.

Well, this is a patch unlike any that I have ever seen,

at least in America, because it has Arabic on it.

Dearborn Heights in English, followed by Arabic, and then the seal, and then police, followed by Arabic.

And

reportedly, they're backing off this after public backlash.

Yeah,

it's a bad look, especially in this political environment.

But just at the local level,

what's wrong with the patch?

I guess it's an unpopular view on the right.

Why shouldn't the patch be in Arabic?

Everyone in Dearborn speaks Arabic.

It's full of Arabs.

It's all Muslims.

Why wouldn't it be in Arabic?

They have Arabic customs, Arabic ethnicity, Arabic language.

They

why wouldn't the police patch reflect that?

Well, because they're American now and we expect them to assimilate.

Yeah, but they haven't.

Even if they do within five generations, maybe they will, maybe they won't.

It's somewhat dubious, but maybe that will happen.

But right now, they're not doing that.

You can't just flood a country with a certain type of person from a particularly alien culture and then expect them immediately to assimilate.

That doesn't work.

So yeah, why?

In some ways, I want the patch to be in Arabic.

I don't.

I don't want to flood our country with radically different ethnic and linguistic and cultural and religious enclaves that remain

totally to themselves.

I don't.

I would like to not do that from the beginning.

But if you're going to do that, in some ways, I want the police patch to be in Arabic

because that honestly displays the problem.

To keep the patch in English totally in English is a lie.

It's trying to paper over the problem.

We are flooding the country with alien cultures that don't assimilate.

So show that to people.

You know, the media do a good job with propaganda of pretending that it's all just, you know, hunky-dory and pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Then every so often you get a video like the Arena Zarutska video.

You say, oh, yikes, man, crime really is a problem.

We don't live in a society where,

as we heard during the year of our Floyd, where, you know, racist white cops are just going going around trying to lynch innocent black men.

That just doesn't happen.

That never happens, ever.

It's not real.

The reality of crime is very different.

And so when you see that, it shifts your perception.

That's what the patch does.

I'm pro-Arabic patch.

First, I'm pro not having these enclaves in the first place.

Second, I'm pro radical assimilation with radically restricted immigration.

But third, if the first two options are not going to work out, third, yeah, show me the problem in all honesty.

Okay, speaking of Arabs, I mentioned at the top of the show, state of Israel has blown up another country.

In this case, it would be Qatar.

Qatar, which has hosted for many years the leadership of Hamas.

Hamas, which has sworn to the destruction of Israel.

And you say, well, all right, Qatar gets what they have coming to them.

Accept that.

It's actually useful, not only to the state of Israel, but to the rest of the world, to have Qatar as this diplomatic outpost that allows for negotiations.

And more important, from my perspective, Qatar is a good U.S.

ally.

So we don't like it when Qatar gets blown up.

The official story we're hearing is that

Israel just launches this attack on Qatar.

Sorry, on Hamas in Qatar and says, hey, sorry, Qatar, we like you well enough, but we're going to blow up Hamas here.

The U.S.

didn't know about it.

The U.S.

was shocked.

Qatar didn't know about it.

This is just that Bibi Netanyahu blowing stuff up again whenever he wants to, willy-nilly, without any consequences.

Here is the White House, in the words of the Press Secretary Caroline Levitt, explaining what happened.

This morning, the Trump administration was notified by the United States military that Israel was attacking Hamas, which very unfortunately was located in a section of Doha, the capital of Qatar.

Unilaterally bombing inside Qatar, a sovereign nation and close ally of the United States, that is working very hard and bravely taking risks with us to broker peace, does not advance Israel or America's goals.

However, eliminating Hamas who have profited off the misery of those living in Gaza is a worthy goal.

President Trump immediately directed Special Envoy Witkoff to inform the Qataris of the impending attack, which he did.

The President views Qatar as a strong ally and friend of the United States and feels very badly about the location of this attack.

President Trump wants all of the hostages in Gaza and the bodies of the dead released and this war to end now.

President Trump also spoke to Prime Minister Netanyahu after the attack.

The Prime Minister told President Trump that he wants to make peace and quickly.

This is a fascinating statement.

Very, very well done by Caroline Levitt.

She is reading almost verbatim President Trump's post on Truth Social.

Her version is a little bit more polished, obviously,

but like the Truth Social post, so balanced.

This is a very strange statement.

We could do a whole show on this statement.

We don't have time.

We have two minutes.

They open up, they say, Netanyahu went rogue and blew up this place in Qatar

and gave us a slight heads up, but that was it.

So Netanyahu, come on, Netanyahu.

And this is really bad.

And the president feels terrible that Qatar had to deal with this.

Feels terrible about the location of this.

But it's good that they blew up some of these Hamas guys.

And we need peace.

And Bibi, with gunpowder still on his fingers, says that this is a great moment for peace.

And President Trump believes this is going to help us secure peace.

But attacking Qatar was not a way to advance peace, but this will advance peace.

But, but, but Trump was asked if he had advance notice.

Here's what he said.

But we are not thrilled about the way that went down today.

I'm never surprised by anything, especially when it comes to the Middle East.

How did you worry about yourself?

I'll be giving a full statement tomorrow, but I would tell you this.

I was very unhappy about it, very unhappy about every aspect.

And we got to get the hostages back but i was very unhappy about the way that went down okay so were you given advance notice

no

were you surprised i'm not surprised about anything people are saying this is a contradiction it's not a contradiction he's saying he's saying expect the unexpected especially when it comes to the middle east i'm not surprised by anything especially these days are you kidding me they tried to imprison me four times kick me off a ballot and shoot me in the head i'm not surprised by anything Especially when it comes to the Middle East.

There's no contradiction there.

It makes perfect sense.

He says he was not given advance warning, and he's not happy with how it went down.

He's not happy with how it went down.

Notice a lot of the expressions of regret here are just, it's about the location.

It's, I don't like, I'm not thrilled about that.

I would have preferred what?

You weren't given advance notice.

Well, hold on.

I just can't help but notice.

This attack occurred yesterday.

Two days prior to that.

President Trump posts on Truth Social.

Early in the day, two days prior to that.

Everyone wants the hostages home.

Everyone wants this war to end.

The Israelis have accepted my terms.

It is time for Hamas to accept as well.

I've warned Hamas about the consequences of not accepting.

This is my last warning.

There will not be another one.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Donald J.

Trump, President of the United States of America, all caps.

The White House then reposts that.

It says, this is my last warning.

There will not be another one, President Donald J.

Trump.

And then two days later,

he posts that.

One day later, nothing happens.

One day after that, just coincidentally, the Israelis hit Hamas in Qatar.

Hmm.

Just, I can't help but notice that coincidence.

The United States didn't have any heads up?

Well, no, the United military got some heads up, at least, the president acknowledges.

Did Qatar get a heads up?

So you can't be disrespecting a U.S.

ally.

Qatar condemns the cowardly attack, shocked and condemning the cowardly.

And yet,

I'm a little skeptical of that too.

You know why?

You know why?

Because what people are saying is, hold on.

Trump said, and look, this is plausible, I guess, that Trump said that Hamas needs to accept his ceasefire

terms.

Israel already accepted.

Hamas hasn't accepted it, and they need to accept.

And just as Hamas was meeting to accept the terms, Netanyahu wanted to blow up the peace process by blowing up Hamas.

And so he was undermining the peace process.

Maybe, could be,

could be, Netanyahu is a tough guy.

So yeah, maybe, maybe he was doing that.

And Israel doesn't always act in U.S.

interests.

Sometimes it acts against U.S.

interests.

So yeah, maybe, could be, could be.

But

maybe not.

Trump says there will not be another warning.

The attack takes place in Qatar.

I also can't help but notice

that when Trump said,

here are the terms, The Associated Press reported a senior Hamas official called it a, quote, humiliating surrender document.

but they said they would discuss the proposal and respond within days.

A humiliating surrender document?

Does that sound like the kind of language coming from someone who's about to accept a ceasefire proposal?

Does that sound like someone who's really going to be negotiating in good faith?

I don't think so.

Hamas has had two years to release the hostages.

They haven't done it.

I think Trump's tired of it.

So were they really negotiating?

I'm not so sure about that.

Also, because I can't help but notice, just about a month ago, about five weeks ago, the Arab League, including Qatar,

for the first time ever condemned the October 7th attack from two years ago, but more importantly, called on Hamas to disarm and relinquish power in the Gaza Strip to end the war in the territory.

That was one month ago.

So now I think people are reacting to this attack on Hamas in Qatar

without being familiar with the drama that, the performance that goes along with geopolitics, Trump says, oh, I feel very badly about this because we love Qatar, but it's good that Hamas has been somewhat destroyed, but this is very bad, and Netanyahu totally didn't tell me.

And then Qatar says, this is cowardly and terrible.

And I condemn the cowardly attack of Israel, but I'm not going to knock the United States for this.

And I'm not, and I'm just going to, and I condemn this, and I totally didn't know about it.

And then Israel says, hey, we totally acted alone here.

But I'm looking about what's going on behind the scenes.

You get Trump signaling two days prior that this isn't going to work out well for Hamas.

And you get Qatar and Saudi Arabia and Egypt and all these other Arab and Muslim states one month ago saying, Hamas, you have lost our support.

Hamas, we have a vote of no confidence in you.

You're done in the Gaza Strip.

That's the Arabs saying it.

That's not the Jews and it's not the Americans.

That's the Arabs saying that.

To me,

if you're paying attention not to the big sensationalist headlines and the explosions, but just to the diplomacy that's going on behind the scenes, you could have predicted this tack a month ago.

Because they're saying, yeah, Hamas, you're done.

You have to disarm.

Is Hamas going to disarm willingly?

No.

So.

If you're Qatar, at this point, Hamas is just a problem for you.

Previously, Hamas, you know, was had some political power and Qatar was the center of diplomacy.

But once Qatar votes and says, you're done, and once the United States says, yeah, you're done.

Was anybody really surprised by that attack yesterday?

I need the war to end.

The war needs to end.

The war needs to end for the Palestinians.

The war needs to end for American conservatives.

who are being split over this war.

The war needs to end for Israel, frankly.

Israel is just losing support dramatically, including among its last political supporter on the international stage, the last strong supporter, which is the American right,

which is now barely supporting Israel or slightly below in support for Israel.

So it's bad for the only people who are benefiting from the war continuing are American Democrats.

It's the American left, which can use this as a cudgel to smack Trump.

So the war has got to end.

And if that means pressuring Netanyahu, then you got to pressure Netanyahu.

And if it means pressuring Hamas, what's left of Hamas, you got to pressure Hamas.

And if it means, but the war has to end.

It's, it's very bad for the people, you know, who are actually in the Holy Land, but it's also very bad for us.

And so it's got it, it has to end.

But something tells me that what happened yesterday is part of that ending, orchestrated not just by the Israelis, but

maybe in a little dance between the Israelis, the Americans, and even the Arabs.

Okay.

Today is Woke Wednesday.

The rest of the show continues.

Now you do not want to miss it.

Become a member.

Use code KnowlesKinner WLIS at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.