In the wake of the election, some might say Christmas came a little early when Daily Wire host Michael Knowles took the stage at the IMU’s International Ballroom at the University of Iowa on Monday. The Veterans Day event hosted by Young Americans for Freedom, a student organization dedicated to promoting free speech and conservative values, stirred up controversy among the student body. Some students tore down the club’s posters, while others poured water over the chalking listing the time and date for the talk. Even the banner wasn’t safe from those less than excited about the upcoming event, as the word ‘fascist’ was scrawled over an image of Mr. Knowles.
Despite all the controversy leading up to Monday, Nov. 11, the turnout for the talk far exceeded the expectations of some of the club’s leaders. Before seating began, about 200 chairs were set up and ready for attendees. When the doors opened around 6:30, and the line of people—reportedly extending out the front door of the IMU—began to encroach on the space, it became clear that many more chairs would be needed.
After adding several more rows, nearly every seat – around 400 chairs – was filled, and the speech began promptly at 7 p.m. with no impediments.
Knowles began his talk by addressing a feature article written about him by The Gazette. He highlighted how the article said that he was “inciting pushback from some on campus in the form of vandalism and planned protests.” Knowles utilized the skills one might gain from an interpretation of literature class as he pointed out the odd use of the word ‘inciting.’
“I am inciting vandalism by accepting an invitation to speak at a university, that’s a little strange, apparently my very presence stirs in liberals an irrepressible urge for violence,” Knowles said.
He said the piece by The Gazette is not alone in its ‘strangeness’ but is a “particular species of a broader editorial category, and that is the Republicans pounce genre, in which liberal journalists distract from Democrat misdeeds by focusing their reporting on the Republicans’ reaction to the Democrats’ misdeeds.”
He highlighted what he called ‘the most preposterous version’ of this phenomenon—specifically, how left-leaning news outlets chose to report on the 2024 presidential campaign, particularly the attempted assassination of former president and recent president-elect Donald J. Trump.
Next, he read Politico’s headline: “Republicans outraged over possible assassination attempt.” Knowles followed this up by asking, “Is that really the story? It seems to me that the more newsworthy aspect of that story is the President almost being murdered… a second time.”
His favorite article from the ‘Republicans Pounce’ genre came from The Hill, which ran the headline: GOP Seethes After Second Assassination Attempt on Trump.
“We seethed,” Knowles said comedically, earning a few laughs from the audience.
Close reading the reporter’s choice of words once again, he pointed out the absurdity and ‘irony’ of using the word ‘seethe.’ He explained how to ‘seethe’ is to bottle up your anger and not act on it, whereas Republicans were far from silent about the assassination attempt. He explained how these leftist headlines were used as distractions from the reality of the events and instead focused on feelings.
“What was newsworthy about Trump’s near-murder wasn’t how you or I felt about it. What was newsworthy was that the man was almost murdered,” Knowles said before asking the most pertinent question of his speech.
“So how did Trump win? – How did the Libs lose everything.”
Knowles said that the left-leaning news ‘deserves credit’ for the landslide victory of Donald Trump and that it is due to their inability to report accurately and truthfully on events. He calls the press, “the chief propaganda arm of the Democrat party,” and argues that in this case “it overplayed its hand.”
This was the crux of Knowles’ speech; the party of propaganda and how that propaganda failed them in the election. He detailed many more of the bizarre events that littered the 2024 presidential campaign and followed it up by saying, “Those bizarre circumstances created a perfect storm that cracked the press’s credibility and allowed people to see our political order as it actually is.”
He argued all the absurdity and craziness of 2024’s election completely and utterly exposed the Left’s attempts to distract viewers from the truth of situations. Knowles’ speech unveiled and reasoned through how the Left’s ‘cover-up’ tactics ultimately backfired which led millions of Americans to vote red leading to the landslide victory of Donald Trump.
The lecture portion of the event lasted only about 30 minutes, leaving ample time for attendees to ask questions. This led to a mix of both comedic and meaningful dialogue between those who agreed with Mr. Knowles and those who disagreed.
The crowd was a mix of all walks of life which made this section especially noteworthy. Some wore MAGA hats, while others cozied up in ski masks. Although there was a group seated in the back that evidently and demonstratively disagreed with Mr. Knowles’ ideology, the audience was overwhelmingly supportive, as evidenced by the ample applause in his favor.
However, there were a few moments when applause was used to drown out Mr. Knowles, as one group in the back of the room began clapping loudly after a young woman made a heartfelt plea for the trans community, saying, “They’re really cool. I think it’s pretty unfortunate the way social media, media, ya know, fake news makes us think they’re something that they’re not, but there’s a lot of really awesome transgender people in our community, and I would encourage you to, enjoy their art, talk to them, get to know them. Maybe it takes a little getting used to because we’re indoctrinated to think certain things, but you are smart, and you have a heart. And you can get used to it.”
Although the open mic was set up for questions this attendee phrased no question and walked away before Knowles began his response. As she departed, the crowd in the back—most of whom were wearing either ski masks or medical masks—began clapping loudly for about 20 seconds, making it difficult for the rest of the audience to hear the beginning of Mr. Knowles’ response. Despite this interruption, he handled the situation in a calm and collected manner.
Another young woman sparked laughter and interesting conversation when she insinuated that Mr. Knowles was homosexual, based on a film he had acted in as a young man, and then asked, “Where do you find homosexuality in this New America?”
In his response, he pointed out the ideology that leads to the homosexual lifestyle being justified- he believes this idea is rooted back in feminism which states how men and women “can do exactly the same things, they’re exactly as strong, they’re exactly as delicate, they’re exactly the same.” He asserts that if this premise is acknowledged as truth, it only makes sense for people to believe that a union between a man and a woman or a man and a man or a woman and a woman are all comparable and rational. Knowles disagrees with this line of logic and proposes an “alternative perspective” saying that “the sexes are not identical- but rather complimentary, that men really have something to offer women and women really have something to offer men”
Another student took up the microphone and, in the context of the discussion on child mutilation, asked, “Have you been circumcised?”
Knowles responded, “That’s a little forward. You’d have to buy me a drink first.”
He went on to explain that he was born in an era when most American boys were circumcised. The crowd responded with laughter, as Knowles humorously confirmed that, yes, he had indeed been circumcised as a baby.
The attendee then said they had no further questions and left, prompting another round of laughter from the crowd.
Despite the humor this interaction stirred, Knowles used the moment to underline what he believed were the broader implications of the question. He argued that a practice that had been done for hundreds of years that does not irreparably harm one’s sexual function is not the same as “gelding a 5-year-old” he said, “I don’t see the analogy.”
“Perhaps we should be more specific when we talk about child mutilation. We’re not talking about tattoos- we’re not talking about earrings, we’re talking about something very specific, which is castrating little kids in furtherance of an ideology that will probably lead to early death. That’s what’s wrong,” Knowles said.
Not unlike the argument at the beginning of his speech, Knowles clarified that we need to be very specific with our terms in all forms of ideas, not just within the press.
When the hour was up and the last question was asked, the event wrapped up leaving the University of Iowa with yet another Daily Wire host on its roster of guest speakers. No matter what side you find yourself on, I highly encourage you to watch the lecture and Q&A section in full so that you can form your own opinions on this event. Watch it here!
