Ep. 2052 - Possible Lindsay Clancy Copycat Killer Emerges In Illinois

We've all heard radio advertisements about owing the IRS money. They lean on fear and try to frighten you into calling. Tax relief advocates does things differently. Whether you owe $5,000, $50,000, or $500,000, TRA offers an actual solution. Do not lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe the IRS. Their passion is taxes and helping individuals and businesses settle their IRS problems. They've earned over 1,000 five-star Google reviews and an A-plus from the Better Business Bureau. There is no need to fear the IRS any longer. Substantial relief programs are available that can give you a fresh start, so do not delay. Visit TRA.com, that is TRA.com, or call 800-575-4908. That is, once more, 800-575-4908. Tax relief advocates, real solutions for real people. Tammy regularly hauls stuff to her kids at college. That's why she shops at BJ's Wholesale Club, saving up to 25% off grocery store prices. Beef jerky, microwave meals, laundry pods, even they can't screw up. Have you met my kids? And with BJ's gas, she gets there for less. They call me the road warrior. This is your home, road warrior mom. Home of the Save. Join for just $20 at BJ's.com slash mesquite and save 10 cents per gallon for six months. Open soon. Limited time offer, new members only. BJ's, home of the Save. This episode is brought to you by Cardiff, America's favorite small business lender with over $12 billion funded since 2004. Apply in under three minutes for same-day funding up to $500,000 at cardiff.co slash knolls. Crazy women deadlock the jury in the trial of child slayer Lindsay Clancy as the murders appear to inspire a copycat killing in Illinois. Then, a major new development in the trial of Charlie Kirk's alleged murderer. And, a little bit lighter news, Bill Clinton is hiring a new intern. Don't, do not, it might, even if it sounds like a good, don't apply. You don't, you gotta read the hidden text. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show. The Department of Justice is suing a Kansas City public school, the Kansas City public schools, I should say, for transing kids behind their parents' backs. You thought it was over. You thought that was through. Three years ago, four years ago, that was woke one, right? AOC says, woke one was crazy. Still going on. It's still going on now. I mean, and now, anytime anything is crazy, I just call it woke one. Oh, man, that's sunset. That's just like woke one. That's crazy. Well, we're still in it. Okay, first up, though, we are now entering day six of the jury deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial. This should have been over after six seconds, but now we've gone into six days because crazy women on the jury are crazy. I'm not convinced that she's innocent. Presumably, that's the only thing that I can infer. Obviously, we don't know the internal deliberations of the jury, but we have seen the social phenomenon of a ton of crazy women, like lots and lots of them on social media, in front of the courthouse, bringing their kids, defending this woman who murdered her children. And now she might get off the hook because of that. Every second that the trial goes on, every second that the jury deliberates, it is more and more likely that this lady is going to get off the hook. Meanwhile, you have conservative journalists, going in and interviewing lots of women about this trial. Here is Caitlin Bennett doing Yeoman's work, interviewing what women are thinking. As this whole phenomenon has gone on, here is how women are thinking of Lindsay Clancy. Do you stand with her, yes or no? I don't think she did it. Yes. We feel she's very sleep-deprived. Her job as a labor and delivery nurse working night shifts and three children is. It's a lot. A lot. Do you have children? Yes. Would you ever hurt them? Yes and no. As a mom? Or as a dad? I think that you are not perfect. So what are the consequences she should face for this? Obviously, she's already in a wheelchair. He should go to jail for negligence. He needs to take care of his kids, and that was his responsibility. Is this any of your girlfriends? Mine. This is your girlfriend? Yes. I think you have to do some reflection on that. I just have seen a little bit on TikTok of the case. I'm watching it on TikTok or the live streams. Where are you getting your news that the defense, you might not be getting theirs? I don't, but I. What did you say? TikTok. Okay, so it's not just the 21-year-old, purple-haired, septum-piercing, lesbian Antifa chick who's saying this sort of stuff. It's not just the political radical. It's the grandma. It's the bougie Midwest mom. It's the yoga aunt. It's a wide spectrum of women who are saying, well, she was sleep-deprived, you know? She was sleep-deprived. They're not. They're not even really making the argument that Lindsay Clancy had postpartum depression anymore because Lindsay Clancy was never diagnosed with postpartum depression. And as I pointed out at the beginning of this saga, her youngest child that she murdered was eight months old. And you usually don't have postpartum depression eight months in. Not to mention that the murders were methodically planned. She sent the husband out of the house. She did it in a very gruesome way. Took a fair bit of time to do so. So. Now what they're saying is, well, yeah, okay, forget about postpartum depression. You know, it's hard. I mean, nobody's perfect. And, you know, I mean, hasn't she suffered enough? She's paralyzed. Because after she killed her kids, she jumped out a window and hurt her legs. So, you know, I mean, when you think about it, right? And what is a common thread here? They say, well, we're following the case on TikTok. Here is now what women are posting on TikTok apropos of the Lindsay Clancy case. See, it's a. For those of you, just listening. It's a woman walking with her baby, and then there's a smash cut, and they swap out the baby for a doll, and the mothers throw the babies down the stairs, throw them into a laundry machine, put them into the dishwasher, drop them on top of the stairs. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. And the caption is, postpartum anxiety be like, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. So all of this is really, really horrifying. A lot of people have suggested that this is radicalizing young men on how they look about women, generally. And you're hearing cries from people saying, okay, we need to ban women from social media. We need to ban women from voting. We need to lock up a lot of women in St. Isla and so on and so forth. But let's bring it back to the realm of the practical and the judicious and the prudential and the responsible. We can't just write this off. All of these crazy women, it's not just one or two, they're showing up en masse to the courthouse, posting all over social media, doing all these interviews, responding to all of these, there is something wrong with women here. It's not all women, hashtag not all women, but there is something wrong in the psychology of women here. And people should have seen this coming because this is a direct outgrowth of abortion. Mother Teresa said, what, 30 years ago now, she said at the United Nations that you'll never have peace in the world as long as you have abortion. Because if a mother can kill her own children, there's nothing that people will not do. And the pro-abortion movement went from this idea that abortion is really tragic and sad and terrible and no one wants an abortion, but sometimes circumstances demand that you sort of have to have one. It grew from that into, okay, maybe we need abortion even in a more elective way, more focused on women's autonomy. You know, it's my right to choose. It's my body, my choice. But still no one has those late-term abortions. That's crazy. Every, all the abortions are really just in the first trimester. Then you got more recently, states passing all of these laws, legalizing abortion up until the, the moment of birth. And the social conservatives at the time said, there is nothing stopping the left and the pro-abortion movement from advocating for fourth trimester abortion. This was considered a kind of a dark joke, but there's a hint of truth in jokes. It said, you know, if you can kill a baby five minutes before he's born, then there's nothing stopping you from killing a baby five minutes or five months or five years after he's born. If we accept the principle that a mother can murder her kids, because of how she is feeling about herself, then there is no limiting principle here. There's nothing to stop her from killing her young kids. That's what Lindsay Clancy did. And notice that the women who are defending Lindsay Clancy are the exact same women who defend abortion. And they are defending Lindsay Clancy on the exact same grounds with the exact same arguments. Well, she was really upset. Well, it's not entirely her choice. Well, I mean, even if she technically made, she just, she was being so put upon by her husband, she wasn't. And by society, she wasn't. And she's not, she wasn't totally in command of her wills and no accountability whatsoever. It's all the same stuff. And who are you to judge? And she's suffered enough and there should be no problem here. So I don't think that we need to lock up all women in insane asylum, though we could lock a few of them up. I don't think that we need to take away the right to vote from women. I don't think that's really practical or anything like that. I don't think that we even need to ban women entirely from social media. But here is one very practical thing we could do. We could ban people generally, which basically just means women, from posting their kids on social media. This is something that's bothered me for a really, really long time. And it's not just women who do it, but it's mostly women who do it. They post their kids on social media. They need to stop that. That's very wrong to do. There are a lot of creeps on social media and your kid never chose to be famous and your kid is not just an instrument for you to be famous. for you to get likes from strangers, and your kid is not just an instrument for you to become famous and live out your childhood fantasies. We should pass laws that stop people from putting their kids on social media. No good comes from putting your kid on social media. Lots of potentially bad things come from putting your kids on social media. And the latest social media trend involving kids is women empathizing with Lindsay Clancy, pretending to murder their children. That's all over TikTok. TikTok, where a lot of these women are getting their information following the case. That's a really practical thing. And can anybody make the contrary argument to me? Can anybody tell me why it would be wrong to say we're going to enforce a law that says that you can't post your kids all over social media? It seems to me that only good would come from that. No bad would come from that. And it would help to mitigate some of this mass psychosis that you're seeing, this social contagion of people who are now empathizing with a woman who murdered her kids in cold blood. You are seeing a very practical consequence of that social contagion. There now appears to be a Lindsay Clancy copycat in Illinois. A lot of people are bringing up the big trial that's playing out right now in Massachusetts. They're talking about the Lindsay Clancy trial, especially after this came out. A lot of people are saying, oh my gosh, this sounds so similar. Because guys, we've been talking about the Lindsay Clancy trial that's happening nationwide. It's the biggest trial that's happening right now. And it's been going on for weeks. And so for a lot of these folks who are reacting to what's happened in their backyards, they're immediately reminded of what's playing out at the national scale. This is just absolutely devastating that this could be another Lindsay Clancy situation. So this is a mother who killed her two-year-old kid, allegedly. You never think it's going to hit so close to home. Then tried to kill herself. So it's almost exactly the same thing. I mentioned yesterday my little update from Europe. Now that I'm back, I'm having a secret project. It's mostly filmed back here. I've slid through the screen. I've slid through the clip for about 45 minutes in the last week. But I mentioned yesterday on the show that the clearest analog to what's going on with Lindsay Clancy is the OJ case. One, because you have an obvious murderer who very possibly will get off because of a crazy jury. But also because in the OJ case, what that represented was black jurors voting to let a black criminal off the hook, not on the basis of his innocence, but on the basis of the racial ideology. Specifically at a moment when the racial ideologues had gotten everything that they thought they wanted. That's what happened with OJ. You had the civil rights movement. You had the black power movement. You had political correctness come up in the early 1990s. You had the whole racial ideology curriculum come into the schools. They got everything that they said that they wanted. You had affirmative action, all the rest of it. The news, the great society, the civil rights laws. And still that didn't solve whatever the black activists thought the problem would be. Be that poverty, be that racial identity, be that issues of social solidarity, whatever. It didn't solve the problem. The left-wing policies, the left-wing ideology didn't solve the problem. And so they had to ask for more. They got everything they wanted. It didn't fix the problem. So what did they ask for? They said, we need to literally get away with murder. That's the only way we can be equal. It's the exact same thing playing out here. We have now had 50 years since second wave feminism came about. Women have gotten everything that they said they wanted. 100 years since first wave feminism. And women have gotten the right to vote, certainly. They've gotten the liberal divorce laws they asked for. They've gotten to kill their kids through abortion, which they asked for. They've gotten to get into universities. Now there are more women in universities than men. They've gotten into the workplace because of affirmative action. Now there are more women in the workplace than men are. They've gotten into the military. They've gotten everything. They've gotten every single thing that they said they wanted. But women are actually less happy than ever. So because the activists, the feminists have succeeded, and because that hasn't worked, what are they saying? They're saying the exact same thing that the black activists said during OJ. They said, well, you need to let us literally get away with murder. There's nothing left to ask for. You need to let us literally get away with murder. And of course, that won't make anyone happy either. That will only make the problem worse. There are kind of two extremes here, which is there is this misogynist idea, that crops up and says all these women are completely insane and they need to be totally shut up from society. And then there's this other idea which says that women can never do anything wrong. And any crime that a woman seems to commit is really a man's fault somehow. It's the same thing with the black activism. Anytime a black criminal commits a crime, they say, well, it was really society's fault. It was really the white supremacist structures of our institutional racism that made them do it. Same thing with the women here. So it's impossible, according to this ideology, from the very premises. It's impossible for the criminal to have committed a crime. And the real answer is clearly a via media, which is, no, in order to respect women, you have to recognize that they must have some accountability sometimes. This would be the clearest case. So it would seem pretty clear to me that this lady needs to fry. She needs to be punished to the greatest extent of the law. But we also need to take measures to contain the social contagion, which is, of course, spreading through the empathy for Lindsay Clancy and even copycat murders. And this gets into the idea of broken windows policing. This gets into the idea that when you don't punish the little things, the problem metastasizes. You're seeing that especially in the murder trial for Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin. Big, big update there. We'll get to that in a second. First, I want to talk about Cardiff. Go to cardiff.co.noles. The annoying thing about a good business opportunity is that it rarely arrives at a convenient time. The supplier offers you a great price if you buy in bulk. The perfect location suddenly becomes available. A competitor closes. A huge customer calls and asks, can you handle this? Sometimes the answer is yes, if you have access to the capital. That is where Cardiff comes in. Cardiff offers up to half a million dollars in business funding, and they've designed the process for business owners who don't have three months to sit around waiting for a big bank. Apply in less than five minutes, no impact on your personal credit. Approval can happen in minutes with funding potentially the same day. There's a lot that you can do to grow your business if you have the resources and the money, but you can't do it without those things. Sometimes the expensive decision is not taking the opportunity. It's missing the opportunity. If you want bank rates without the bank delays, Cardiff can get your business approved in minutes and funded the very same day. Check out cardiff.co.noles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, up to half a million dollars in same-day funding. Banks try to lock out small businesses. Cardiff has the key. Big banks may not want to approve your business loans. Cardiff does. If you've been in business for at least a year, you can apply now for up to $500,000 in same-day business funding, cardiff.co.noles. That is cardiff.co.noles. Real growth, fast funding, Cardiff. Borrow better. Tyler Robinson, Charlie Kirk's alleged murderer, has finally entered his plea in the case. Don't forget, everything that we've been seeing so far, the state gathering evidence, the preliminary hearing, all of this, that is all prelude to determine whether or not the case will even go to trial. We have just heard that the case will go to trial. The judge has observed that the state has a lot of evidence, to put it mildly and diplomatically. The state has a lot of evidence against Tyler Robinson, and so the case will go to trial. Tyler Robinson has expectedly entered his not guilty plea. The judge here is Tony Graff. He said that Robinson will stand trial on all counts. Don't forget, there's seven charges against Tyler Robinson. That includes the most serious one, which is aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury. The defense was trying to get that first charge thrown out. Not the murder charge, but the enhancement, the aggravated murder charge. Because the defense said, quote, there was no evidence that anyone else was threatened while Tyler Robinson murdered Charlie Kirk. That was the argument from Tyler Robinson's defense, was not, Tyler Robinson got set up. Tyler Robinson's a patsy. Tyler Robinson wasn't even in Utah. Tyler Robinson's never even heard of Charlie Kirk. That wasn't the argument. The very narrowly tailored argument before the judge ruled that this trial will progress was, well, hey, there's no evidence that Tyler meant to kill anyone else while he murdered Charlie. That was basically the argument that the defense was advancing, which is, again, if you've been following the murder trial of Tyler on TikTok, the same place that a lot of these chickies are following the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy, you might not have understood just how narrowly tailored the defense is. And the reason for that is the defense lawyers have certain ethical and professional obligations that people on TikTok do not have. They can't make totally ridiculous specious arguments. They need to operate within the realm of the facts that are presented, and they need to try to get the best outcome for their client. And for Tyler Robinson here, I guess the best outcome for him is that you get some crazy jury, like in the case of the Lindsay Clancy trial, and maybe he gets off the hook or he's a mistrial or whatever. But more likely, if I were the lawyer, if I were the defense attorney for Tyler Robinson, I would realize, okay, there's a lot of evidence here, and we've admitted into the court Tyler Robinson's alleged confession. We've admitted into the court the fact that Tyler Robinson allegedly turned himself in. We've admitted into the court, the alleged text messages between Tyler Robinson and the trainee boyfriend, and the alleged Discord messages in which he is confessing. to the murder. We've admitted all of that and not really questioned that. So the best thing we can do is keep Tyler Robinson from being executed by the state. The only way that he gets the death penalty is if they can prove that he was threatening the lives of other people while he was murdering Charlie Kirk. So really the best argument the defense can make here is, no, no, no, he was really only threatening the life of Charlie Kirk, whom he murdered, but the other people were not in danger, which could mean that Tyler Robinson goes to prison for the rest of his life, but at least he will not be killed. Do not forget the defense attorney for Tyler Robinson explicitly rejected the internet conspiracy theories that suggest that he wasn't part of this at all. Explicitly rejected this months ago, said, yeah, we just consider that noise. We're dealing in the realm of facts here. So the thing that's really frustrating about this case is not that it seems like justice will not be served. I would say if I were a gambling man here, the justice system is imperfect. But if I were a gambling man, I would say probably something like justice will eventually be served in the Tyler Robinson case. The thing that's really frustrating for those, especially people who love Charlie, is it's going to take forever. It's going to take forever. We are now coming up on the one year anniversary of Charlie's murder. We are just now reaching the point when the judge says, okay, this case can go to trial. This is going to take, forever. And I suppose that's built into the system that the wheels of justice turn slowly so that we can be judicious and not get carried away with our passions. But this is really, really slow. In any case, the political takeaway from this, beyond the facts of the case itself is, the way that we got to Tyler Robinson allegedly pulling the trigger in Utah, murdering Charlie Kirk, the way we got there was not overnight. It's not just because one guy went crazy. It's not even just because one guy went crazy. It's not even just because of one political issue, this tranny issue, which seems to have been at the heart of Charlie's murder. The way that we got there is because for 10 years or more, left-wing radicals have been threatening and attacking conservative speakers on campus, and they've basically never been held to account for it. When people attack Ann Coulter on college campuses, giving a speech, when they have to shut down the city of Berkeley because Ben Shapiro, Ben, who's a pretty, he's a pretty mild-mannered guy, they have to shut down Berkeley in, what was it, 2016, 2017? When Riley Gaines is being chased into a locker room trying to give a speech, when I myself, I was attacked a couple times giving speeches and doing debates at college campuses. That's a small number of all of the total incidents. Those are just the ones that come to mind right off the top of my head. When the leftists who perpetrate those crimes basically always get off or they get a little bit of a hard time, they get a little bit of a hard time, slap on the wrist. Even the one at Pittsburgh, at my event, two Antifa agents throw an explosive, very seriously injure a female cop. The wife gets off the hook almost completely. She had to do community service. And the guy had a few years in the can, then goes to a halfway house, and his charge was reduced to obstruction of justice. These people committed attempted murder. They very seriously injured a police officer. This was investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by the federal government. Even in that case, throwing an explosive into a crowd, you get, what, a few years in the clink, and the wife gets off scot-free? Well, what did you think was going to happen? This is broken windows policing. Back in the Giuliani era, they implemented in New York broken windows policing. Broken windows policing is the exact opposite of what the left wants. What the left says is only prosecute the serious crimes and don't even prosecute those. Let's let the drug dealers off the hook. Let's let the petty muggers and assailants off the hook. Let's let the petty muggers and assailants and vandals off the hook. Because we're just going to focus on the real serious crimes like rape and murder. But actually, we're going to let them off the hook, too, because we want to abolish prisons. But their theory is, well, if you don't focus on the small crimes, then you can put a lot of focus on the big crimes, and that'll make the community safer. But that's not how it actually works. The way it actually works is, if you ignore the little crimes, then those criminals are going to be the ones to commit the serious crimes. In other words, if you catch the guy who's graffitiing buildings, who's breaking windows, who's committing petty theft, who's doing simple muggings, if you catch that guy, you've probably prevented a murder down the road. Because the number of criminals in society is relatively small, and they don't all start out as murderers and rapists. They start out with small crimes. So if you nab the small criminals, if you keep things real tight on all of those little things, and the little things where the rot begins, you're going to have hugely outsized effects on the serious crimes. It's one of the many pities, as we reflect on the one-year anniversary of Charlie's murder. Had the authorities stopped the violent left when they were just pushing people around and chasing the conservative speakers down the hallway, and even squirting weird substances, or had they just stopped them there? Would a leftist assailant have felt empowered to go pull a trigger in Utah? I think very likely not. And so that's got to be the lesson. The lesson has to be to double and triple and quadruple down on the lower level offense. That's the only way you stop the higher level offense. Okay, speaking of the DOJ, speaking of the justice system, the DOJ is suing Kansas City Public Schools for trancing kids behind their parents' back. You thought it was all over. Before we get to that, speaking of kids, I want to tell you about Preborn. Go to preborn.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-A-S. Doctors told a woman named Alba that pregnancy was impossible. Her husband's diagnosis confirmed it. A child of their own simply wasn't going to happen. Then the possible happened. Alba was pregnant. We might call that a miracle, but to Alba, it didn't feel like one. That positive pregnancy test felt like a mistake, a cruel twist of science. She did not understand or want. Nothing added up. She had accepted that pregnancy was not possible. This baby was never planned. Suddenly, she was confused, afraid, and overwhelmed. What should have felt like a miracle felt like a crisis. Then Alba walked into a preborn network clinic. She was welcomed with compassion, given a free ultrasound. When she saw her baby and heard that tiny heartbeat, everything changed. Fear gave way to hope. Alba chose life. Today, baby Laura is healthy and thriving. A reminder that when God is writing the story, impossible does not get the final word. Right now, another mother needs that moment. You can give it to her. Just $28 helps provide one life-saving ultrasound. $140 helps rescue five babies. Please give today. Dial pound 250, say keyword baby. That is pound 250, keyword baby, or go to preborn.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-A-S. That is preborn.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-A-S. That is preborn.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com slash knowles.com. It's ongoing. Here is the Assistant Attorney General, Harmeet Dhillon, explaining the case. The Justice Department is filing what it calls a first-of-its-kind lawsuit challenging the school district's secret gender transition policies. Now, according to the lawsuit, the school district, quote, directs staff to develop and implement transitioning plans for children's so-called gender identity without informing or obtaining consent from their parents. This is a really important law. It's a law that's going to be passed down to the children of the school district. lawsuit for us. And the point I wanted to emphasize, which I think I did, is that it's the first of many. I want there to be a very clear message to every school district in the United States. They are on notice that if they violate FERPA and PPRA, the United States Department of Justice stands ready to protect the rights of parents and the rights of pupils to privacy, dignity, and parental rights. So great stuff from Harmeet, great stuff from the DOJ. And it's shocking, even this point that she's emphasizing. She says, this is the first lawsuit of its kind. This craziness started seven years ago, seven, eight years ago. My second speaking tour with Young America's Foundation, after this show started, after my blank book, Reasons to Fight for Democrats, my second speaking tour was titled, Men Are Not Women and Other Uncomfortable Truths. That's how far back this issue was beginning. That was seven or eight years ago. Matt Walsh's movie, What Is a Woman? was what, six years ago? Something like that, six, seven years ago? Six, seven years ago? We're still dealing with this because the left is still pushing it. And this is the first lawsuit of its kind. Now, obviously, the conservatives were out of power for four years in there, right around that time, right after the 2020 election. But now I'm really glad to see the administration jumping in on this because we need to ground these school districts into the that the left trying to distance itself from woke one is a completely different lie. It's totally disingenuous. When AOC comes out and says, woke one was crazy. She won't explain how it was crazy. She won't specify anything that was crazy about it because nothing has changed at all. I'm now taking this phrase. I'm just using it all over the place. Sweet little Alisa gives me some lasagna at night. Girl, this lasagna, so delicious. Oh, it's just like woke one. Oh, it's just, you know, it's crazy. Oh man. Hey, you guys see that Yankee game last night? Man, it was just like woke one. It was crazy. That is the kind of vagueness with which the left is using this phrase woke one, which never went away. Woke one and woke two are identical. Here's some proof. Here's the new Democrat candidate, the new reformed non-woke, putting that behind us, James Tallarico, ostensibly straight white guy down in Texas, Christian man, he says. Here is a James Tallarico describing capitalism as an oppressive system. The multifaceted threat of a climate crisis, an economic crisis, and a social justice crisis. I think that kind of New Deal effort would be the only approach to start to address all three in a thoughtful and meaningful way. Thank you very much. The second question, communities of color receive the most harm from the impacts of climate change and yet receive the least government support to deal with it. Tell us about one of the committees you are on or hope to be on and the most important actions that committee could take to fight for climate justice and mitigate the impacts of climate change for all Texans. Yeah, and I'm, I am so thankful that you asked this question and also thankful that young activists have, have really drawn the link between climate change and white supremacy. And capitalism in our country. And I think only ending the ways that all three of those oppressive systems work together, are we going to be able to begin the process of dismantling them? It's the only way, the only way to stop the sun monster from bringing in the end times is to dismantle whiteness and capitalism, you know, but woke one was crazy, wasn't it? This is Tallarico speaking, I believe to the Sierra club, the environmentalist club. It's all the same. There's a great new ad out from the lone star pack. Cause Dems are trying to draw this hard line. No, no, no. Okay. Yeah. We got our AOCs. We got our Ilhan Omar's. We got our Rashida Tlaib's, but we all don't worry. We're also the party of James Tallarico. Okay. We're, we're a little more moderate. We're a little more down the middle. Here is Ilhan Omar and James Tallarico side by side. Two months apart. Same idea. Environmental racism is real. A link between climate change and white supremacy and capitalism. These systems of oppression are linked. All three of those oppressive systems work together. We must begin the work of dismantling. We're going to be able to begin the process of dismantling them. The whole system of oppression. Ilhan Omar's words. Two months later, James Tallarico's words. He's not leading Texas. He's repeating the same socialist script. Lone Star Liberty Pack is responsible for the content of this ad. Okay. Please excuse the TV-ness of this ad. I love old TV political ads. James Tallarico, wrong for Texas, wrong for the environment. And America. And hotdogs and fireworks. Wrong for, you know, I love, it's very, they're very, it's very blunt messaging. It's mostly to boomers in an old timey way. But the, the substance of this ad is perfect. It points out that the, the most deceptive thing about James Tallarico is that he passes for a straight white man. Again, I know, you know, his girlfriend, she lives in Canada. She goes to another school. She, but he ostensibly, he's a straight white man and a Christian. And yet he's not, I guess he's a man, I guess he's white. Yeah. You know, he wants to dismantle whiteness, but maybe he's straight. He's certainly not a Christian in any meaningful sense of the word, but he's exactly the same as Ilhan Omar. He's exactly the same as Hassan Piker. There's no difference between this. And this was the point when, when, when a few weeks ago we were watching those Democrat primaries between the DSA radical socialist candidates and the Democrat establishment, you had conservatives variously apoplectic. And relieved when either the establishment Democrat would win or the DSA candidate would beat the establishment Democrat. And I, I don't know, I feel like a boxer in animal farm, you know, he says he never gets all that riled up about the revolution, which side is winning. Who's because he says, you know, donkeys live a very long time. None of you have ever seen a dead donkey. And I don't, I don't see any difference here. I said, you're, you, this is a false dichotomy between the DSA candidates and the Democrats. I said, you, this is a false dichotomy between the DSA candidates and the Democrats. And I, I don't, I don't see any difference here. is an acknowledgement that there is not only an eternal consequence of sin, but a temporal consequence of sin. In other words, if I go out and I murder somebody, brings us right back to the top of the show. If I go out and murder somebody, there is an eternal consequence of that. Namely, I will go to hell if I die without repenting and being absolved of my sins. That's an eternal consequence. There might be eternal consequences for the person murdered. We don't know if that person's in a state of grace, if that person was baptized, whatever. But there will certainly be an eternal consequence for you. Now, you could go and receive God's forgiveness, turn your life around, repent, be baptized, be born again, be absolved of your sins in the confessional, and you will no longer suffer that eternal consequence. But there remains a temporal consequence of your sins. Namely, that guy is still murdered. And his parents still have to live with that for the rest of their lives. And that guy's wife and kids needs to live with that for the rest of their lives. And so on and so forth. And the political community will reel from that. And scandal will spread throughout the community. And trust in institutions might decay. And on and on and on. There are eternal consequences and temporal consequences. Well, same thing here. I don't know if Bill Clinton has sought forgiveness from God for his sins. But the temporal consequences do follow you. Okay. It's like that old joke. I'm a little slap happy because I haven't slept a lot recently. But you know that old joke. Old McGregor. Two Scotsmen. They're arguing with each other. And the Scotsman says, You see? You see that down there? Down the hill in the town? You see that bridge there? I built that bridge with me own hands. But do they call me McGregor, the bridge builder? No. Do you see? Look down there. Look down further into the town. You see that church there? Well, I built the walls of that church with me own hands. Do they call me McGregor, the church builder? No. But you copulate with one shot. Cheap. Do you get it? Do you get it? Do you get what they call them? But that's true. In that joke, there's always a little grain of truth in jokes. It's true. The consequences of your sins really can follow you. And at a political level, they can seem to define you. Even if you're super smart like Bill Clinton, you know, Rhodes Scholar, graduate of Yale Law School, super powerful and popular and famous, two-term president of the United States, that guy can't even post an internship at his non-profit. It's a word of caution to be careful. Grace abounds. It's like St. Paul tells us in the letter to the Romans. Grace abounds. So, you know, the more the sin, the more the grace. But that is not an argument to go sin such that more grace will abound. By no means, St. Paul tells us, should we make that conclusion. Gotta watch out. Gotta be careful. Gotta not let ourselves get carried away. Okay. Speaking of sexual impropriety, before we go, Susan Collins, she drives a lot of us crazy because she votes like a lib half the time. But she's in Maine, and Maine is half a lib state, so I give her a little bit of grace here because she's a Republican who is trying to manage this purple state. Susan Collins is in a tight race now. Previously, she was running against the Nazi rapist, Graham Plattner, and then the Democrats at the last minute took him out. Now she's running against this guy, Troy Jackson. She's being interviewed about how she's going to run this campaign. This is going to probably be a very tough year for Republicans. Susan Collins could easily lose her seat to this Democrat. Here's how she talks about her opponent. Should the circumstances of his personal life and the mother of his children be relevant to this campaign? Is that fair game, do you think? Well, I'm not going to bring up the fact that the mother of his two children is his second cousin. I don't know whether people know that or not. Bravo, bravo, bravissima, Senator Collins. So well done. We were just talking about that kind of old school political commercial. Senator so-and-so, bad for this, not for that. I'm Congressman such-and-such, and I support this, not that, and whatever, you know, all that kind of old political rhetoric. Well, this is a formula, tried and true, par excellence, where she gets the question from Politico, which is a left-leaning outlet. They say, hey, do you think that the circumstances of Troy Jackson's personal life should have any effect on this campaign? But notice how vague. The questioner is, just the personal life. Do you think personal issues are fair game here? If Susan Collins had said, oh, yes, absolutely. Well, then she looks kind of cheap and petty. Oh, don't bring the family into this. So she doesn't do that. She says, oh, oh, no, no, no. I would never bring up the fact that my opponent sleeps with his cousin. No, no, no, I would never. Why would you ever think that I would bring up the fact that, is this thing on? I would never bring up the fact that my opponent had two kids with his cousin. I would never do that. I don't know if people know that or not. I don't know if people know, just for the people in the back, I don't know if people know that my opponent sired two children with his cousin like a freak. No, no, I would never bring that up. I would never bring family into this race. Really well done, Susan. Excellent, excellent job. You know, sometimes the old political tactics, they're oldies and goodies, you know, they're traditional for a reason. She did a really great job with that. Okay, speaking of weird sex stuff, I want to get to Ellen Page. Do I really want to get to Ellen Page? Ellen Page is complaining that she hasn't received any job offers since The Odyssey came out, and she can't figure out why, and I could probably help explain why, but we have to do it tomorrow. I'm such a tease, because today is Theology Thursday. The rest of the show continues now. You don't want to miss it. Become a member. Use code KnowlesKennedy. That's WLAS at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Home of the Save. Open soon. BJ's, home of the Save.