Tyler Rowley

@joerogan, if you watch this full episode, you will invite Fr. Dalton onto your show as a guest. Father is a world expert on the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, the Shroud of Turin, which is the most studied artifact in the history of the world. Buckle up. youtu.be/HAbuG-oVq1Q

Which right-wing podcast had the best take on the ‘26 Midterms? We feature 50 in today’s issue of RIGHT MIC. e.customeriomail.com/deliver…

In the latest episode of the @TuckerCarlson Show, Tucker delivers a passionate critique of Republican politics, foreign influence, and what he sees as the erosion of the original MAGA agenda following the defeat of Thomas Massie. Carlson argues that Massie’s loss was not simply a normal election outcome but a demonstration of the influence of wealthy donors and pro-Israel political organizations within Republican politics. He repeatedly emphasizes that Massie, a seven-term incumbent whom he describes as principled, independent, and deeply rooted in his district, was overwhelmed by forces larger than local voter sentiment. Carlson frames the election as symbolic of a broader shift in American politics away from popular sovereignty and toward elite influence. He begins with a personal story of Miriam Adelson charging her way to the front of the line at Trump's inauguration church service. One of the episode’s defining lines follows: “This country doesn’t belong to the oligarchs. It belongs to us… we’re the owners here.” He argues that elections should reflect the will of citizens rather than the priorities of wealthy interests. Carlson claims the U.S. is moving toward unequal standards regarding criticism of certain groups and foreign governments. Perhaps the philosophical core of the episode: “If something is wrong, it is wrong for everyone. If something is okay, it’s okay for everyone… when we do [make distinctions], it’s called corruption.” Tucker uses the case of Jeffrey Epstein as an example of what he sees as unequal accountability and public distrust in institutions. He argues that powerful people appear insulated from scrutiny while ordinary citizens face increasing pressure over speech and political dissent. Carlson says, “Jeffrey Epstein gets to win Powerball somehow. His murderers walk free. We’re not even going to investigate it, but you watch yourself.” He uses this line to suggest that unresolved questions surrounding Epstein have become symbolic, in his view, of a system where elites avoid consequences while the public is expected to self-censor and comply. Carlson also criticizes what he views as the Republican Party’s changing priorities, stating: “The Republican party of right now bears absolutely no resemblance to the Republican party we thought we had just elected.” The episode reaches its strongest conclusion when Carlson declares Massie’s defeat to be “the death of MAGA” and claims the political system no longer resembles a democratic process. He argues that a small number of powerful actors can shape outcomes irrespective of public sentiment and says this realization will permanently alter political alignments. He closes with the principle that “the truth is always worth telling” and warns that “a politics based on anything but the truth is always poisonous.” "Tucker Responds to the Israel Lobby Defeating Thomas Massie and Killing MAGA" is today's #1 podcast. RightMic.com

You have the attention of the Twelve Apostles for thirty seconds. You can ask them one question. What do you ask?

@JeremyDBoreing (co-founder of @realDailyWire ) opens with a confession. Watching the 9/11 conspiracy documentary Loose Change in the early 2000s, he felt that exhilarating, scales-falling-from-your-eyes sensation of finally seeing the truth. Then he hit mute. The narration on the film stopped. And he saw exactly what he'd always seen: buildings struck by jets, burning for hours, collapsing under their own weight. "The narrator hadn't shown me anything new. They hadn't revealed the hidden truth. They'd simply reframed the narrative so that I believed something different about the exact same footage." That feeling, he argues, isn't the feeling of truth. It's called the illusion of insight, and it can be manufactured. That's the thesis of his latest podcast episode that focuses on @RealCandaceO , @TuckerCarlson , and the wave of anti-Israel sentiment sweeping through young conservatives. It has the same fingerprints as every social contagion in modern history: eugenics, the population bomb, COVID hysteria, BLM, transgenderism. "When every free thinker arrives at the same conclusion at the same time in the same words, their thinking isn't as free as they believe it is." Boreing spends the bulk of the episode dissecting the specific rhetorical machinery behind this contagion, using Tucker and Candace as primary case studies. On Tucker, he identifies a technique called presupposition — stating a claim and then treating it as already established fact within the same sentence. Tucker on Pearl Harbor: "When Roosevelt allowed Pearl Harbor to happen, which he did, that's been proved, I think." Boreing breaks it down: "He states the claim and then inside the very same sentence treats it as already established fact. He doesn't argue it. He doesn't source it. He assumes it into existence." The hedge, "I think," is legal fine print tacked on after the certainty has already landed. He also catalogs Tucker's signature phrases: "obviously," "clearly," "universally recognized," "of course." His team analyzed 23 episodes and found hundreds of examples. "Universally recognized and obviously aren't actually making any arguments. They're skipping the arguments entirely. They're telling you the verdict is already in." On Candace, Boreing zeroes in on her trademark phrase: "We don't know, but we know." Her entire evidentiary basis for claiming something was suspicious about Charlie Kirk's death was that she's always been mic'ed backstage at Turning Point events. "From that singular data point, her personal experience at her own personal appearances, she concludes that anything different is therefore suspicious." Then she converts admitted non-knowledge into collective certainty. "We don't know, but we know is not a thing. It's the sound of someone gesturing at a conclusion they just can't reach and then hoping you'll make the jump with them." He also identifies what he calls authority transfer: "One true or compelling claim becomes a credential. And that credential is then used to smuggle in a dozen other claims you never independently verify." Tucker and Candace each earned trust by exposing something real, and then spent that trust on claims that don't survive scrutiny. "The voices that profit from your cynicism want you to believe that trust is weakness," says Boreing. "They want you to believe that doubt is strength." The antidote isn't better manipulation from a more trustworthy narrator. "It's clarity. It's evidence. It's the humility to sit with uncertainty rather than reaching for the intoxicating snap of false certainty." Boreing zooms out from Tucker and Candace entirely and places the current anti-Israel wave inside a long and ugly lineage. Eugenics felt inevitable and scientific — nearly every doctor, professor, and policymaker agreed — until Adolf Hitler put a gun to his head in a Berlin bunker and the world was forced to see where "the science is clear" had led. The population bomb theory felt urgent and obvious —

Why is it surprising that Democrats are funding the KKK? They founded them.

@JamesCarville just publicly described a Democrat strategy that, if implemented, would create the precise conditions for genuine constitutional conflict in the United States. Carville's proposal: if Democrats win the presidency and both chambers of Congress in 2029, they should immediately grant statehood to Puerto Rico and DC (adding four guaranteed Democrat Senate seats) and expand the Supreme Court from nine to thirteen justices. "F it, eat our dust," Carville said. @NickJFreitas, former Green Beret and host of Making the Argument, responds: that's not politics. That's the conditions for war. Freitas spends significant time establishing the legal and historical foundations of the Constitution and why these political stunts are so dangerous. The federal government was created by the states, not the other way around. Article 1, Section 8 enumerates its powers. The 10th Amendment reserves everything else to the states and the people. The general welfare clause, the supremacy clause, the necessary and proper clause — Freitas methodically dismantles the left's broad readings of each, arguing none of them grant the federal government unlimited authority. "There is no way the founders would have signed on to a document that said the federal government could do whatever it wanted provided it was in the general welfare." The Supreme Court itself, he notes, derives its authority not from constitutional text but from tradition and general acceptance. That is a tradition that evaporates the moment the court is openly packed for partisan outcomes. "If you stack the Supreme Court, why would I trust it? Why would I think it capable of rendering a fair and impartial judgment?" Jefferson and Madison's Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 established the doctrine of nullification and interposition: states have not only the right but the duty to push back when the federal government exceeds its constitutional authority. The process has two levels. First, refuse to enforce. Second, actively block federal enforcement. "We're going to use our state law enforcement to resist you. You're going to attempt to enforce this through force. We're going to resist you with force." The federal government's dirty secret: it doesn't have enough personnel to enforce everything. It relies on state and local cooperation. Remove that cooperation and the whole apparatus stalls. And Freitas, who has served in the military, flatly states that ordering the 82nd Airborne into Texas to confiscate guns (as an example) would produce mass refusal or quiet obstruction. Freitas identifies the likely trigger of a real armed conflict if Democrats follow Carville’s plan: a packed Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment does not protect individual gun ownership. At that point, he envisions a compact of governors — Idaho, Wyoming, Tennessee, Texas, Indiana, Oklahoma and more — issuing a joint declaration: we do not recognize these laws, we will not enforce them, and we will not permit you to enforce them within our borders. "Let's see how bad you want it, because we can tell you how bad we don't." This wouldn't be secession. It would be states collectively asserting constitutional limits on federal powerthe. That is the exact mechanism the founders built into the system for exactly this scenario. Freitas's final point is that the Left can't win this fight: "The vanguard of the revolution for the left right now are the same people that literally have a panic attack when they get misgendered. Not exactly the sort of people that are capable of fighting an effective civil war." But Carville doesn't seem to realize that. If Democrats actually execute what Carville described, they won't achieve permanent power. They'll achieve the one thing that turns cold culture war into something much hotter, and they'll lose. — Full Issue with 50+ podcast episodes: e.customeriomail.com/deliver… — Subscribe to get Right Mic in your inbox: RightMic.com

Want to save the planet? Have children and stop voting for Democrats. The left has hijacked the conversation about the planet, and for some reason, conservatives handed it to them. That's the central argument of the podcast episode between The @FDRLST Kylee Griswold and Clare Ath, a mom and founder of the new nonprofit Vita et Terra (Life and Earth), which aims to reclaim environmental stewardship from a Christian, pro-life perspective. Ath's core distinction is between conservation and environmentalism. Environmentalism, she argues, has been weaponized by the secular left to bundle in abortion access, LGBTQ ideology, and population control under the banner of saving the planet. "They view people as pollution," she says. Conservation, by contrast, flows directly from Genesis God gave humanity dominion over creation, which means a duty to tend it, not destroy it. "It's time for us to get involved and to take more of a biblical perspective." The most striking claim for modern ears in this episode: having babies is itself a pro-planet act. Ath describes reading a Guardian piece about a woman who aborted her child due to "climate anxiety" and later regretted it. "It makes my stomach turn to think that there is an organized movement instilling fear in people to not have children, when in reality it's our children that are going to help improve the planet." From a spiritual perspective, Ath argues that humans are made in God's image and are the stewards of creation. More humans will lead to more stewardship, not more destruction. To counter the left's premise (fewer people = healthier planet), she points out that China's pollution record has gotten worse despite decades of population control. The problem isn't people, she argues, it's bad governance and bad incentives. Shifting topics, they discuss the DOJ's newly-released 800-page bombshell report on Biden-era persecution of pro-lifers. Ath breaks down four explosive findings: 1) prosecutors withheld evidence from pro-life defendants, 2) attempted to screen jurors based on religion, 3) colluded with Planned Parenthood to build cases, and 4) sought sentences twice as long for pro-lifers as for pro-abortion offenders. "It happened and people were imprisoned." On Planned Parenthood funding, Ath informs that their federal funding is set to resume on July 4th — the nation's 250th birthday — and Republican leadership appears to lack the will to stop it. "They shouldn't get a single dollar." 🔥Top Quotes "A woman who is staunchly pro-abortion and views that as her constitutional right — she's never going to vote for a Republican anyways. So to be playing with people's lives for votes is just crazy to me." "By having no kind of federal regulations on mifepristone, we're not letting states implement their own law. You have Texas, Florida, Tennessee who have said no — but federally, they're just going to mail these pills like candy." "Neither girl bossing nor trad wifing is biblical. We are called to be wives and mothers, but we're not just expected to bury our heads in the sand. You need to be a strong woman if you want to be a strong mother and raise strong children." — TODAY'S TOP 5 PODCASTS ⭐️ 1. Having Babies Is The Most Pro-Planet Thing You Can Do & DOJ's Persecution of Pro-Lifers Federalist Radio Hour • 48 min ⭐️ 2. What Explains Hatred Toward the Jewish People? Timeless Wisdom with Dennis Prager • 36 min ⭐️ 3. Who Wins in 2028? Making the Argument with @NickJFreitas • 77 min ⭐️ 4. The Dating App SCAM That Is Destroying The Dating Pool The Matt Walsh Show • 27 min ⭐️ 5. Is Someone Killing Scientists Who Know US Space Secrets? The Glenn Beck Program • 128 min — Subscribe: RightMic.com

Cast out Paula #CastOutPaula Thank you @TaylorRMarshall for bringing this heretic into the light.

@MattWalshBlog’s deep dive into the welfare system starts with a bizarre squatter case, but quickly turns into a sweeping indictment of incentives, fraud, and government failure. He highlights the case of a woman who illegally occupied a $2.3 million home while living on just “$538 in child support and then 48 bucks in food stamps,” exposing how public assistance continues even during active criminal behavior. Walsh’s core argument is simple: the system isn’t just broken, it’s designed in a way that invites abuse. He points to a massive $250 million COVID-era fraud scheme where a defendant received just “a one-year and one-day sentence,” asking bluntly, “Would you take $250 million for a year in prison? I think a lot of people would.” If the law is meant to be a teacher of ethics, America specializes in educating its citizens to lie, cheat, and steal. From there, he zooms out to the bigger picture. Welfare expansion, he argues, has made oversight nearly impossible: “It’s impossible to police them for fraud… even if we want to.” The most striking example comes from a real benefits comparison: a minimum-wage worker receiving full assistance nets more than someone earning $110,000 a year. Walsh calls this a system that “rewards not working over working.” He also challenges assumptions about need, citing data that “3/4 of adult food stamp beneficiaries are overweight or obese,” arguing the system operates largely on an “honor system” ripe for exploitation. His conclusion is that the current structure incentivizes dependency, fraud, and lawlessness, and without major reform, “your government won’t protect property or enforce basic accountability." 🔥 Top Quotes “Even when they're sentenced to prison, criminals aren't actually punished anymore in this country.” “If they hadn't been so obvious… nobody would have detected it. They'd still be doing it right now.” “As long as they say they're looking for work, they get to steal your money.” — TODAY'S TOP 5 PODCASTS ⭐️ 1. I Did A Deep Dive Into Our Welfare System, And It's WORSE Than I Thought The Matt Walsh Show • 32 min ⭐️ 2. Undercover Inside an Islamist Network - with David Gaubatz The WallBuilders Show • 27 min ⭐️ 3. The Catastrophic Collapse of Eric Swalwell w/ Ben Domenech @RuthlessPodcast • 87 min ⭐️ 4. Netanyahu: The World’s Most Wanted Man in 2026 @MLofton26 Reason and Theology Show • 23 min ⭐️ 5. "Born Gay” — NATURE or NURTURE? | Dr. Joseph Nicolosi The @sgruber91 Show • 69 min — Full Issue: e.customeriomail.com/deliver… — Subscribe for Right Mic emails: RightMic.com

@benshapiro’s conversation at the @HooverInst is a warning to the American right: the conservative movement is at risk of collapsing from within. At the center of his argument is a cultural shift toward grievance and conspiracy thinking. Shapiro argues that the right is adopting the same worldview it once opposed. The result is a movement drifting away from truth and toward suspicion. He identifies three catalysts: Russiagate, COVID lies, and the double standards of the 2020 riots. These events, he says, created a justified distrust, but that distrust has now metastasized into something dangerous. “Once you believe that "they" are lying to you… you’re susceptible to literally anything.” Shapiro’s sharpest critique is reserved for figures inside the right who “traffic in conspiricism and dishonesty… offering nothing but bile and despair.” He insists conservatism must draw Overton-window lines: “Any movement worth its salt must have ideological borders.” Shapiro makes his point most when he brings up Michael Shellenberger appearance on @joerogan’s show where Rogan is convinced that Trump is being blackmailed into the Iran war based on the Epstein files. Shellenberger remionds him there is no evidence tying Donald Trump to Epstein-related wrongdoing, yet Rogan immediately pivoted to “Yeah, but that doesn't mean they won't eventually find that evidence,” implying there must be something there simply because the full truth isn’t publicly known. For Shapiro, that reaction perfectly illustrates the problem: even when presented with exculpatory information, the instinct is to default back to suspicion. The standard quietly shifts from “what does the evidence show?” to “what might be hidden?”—and once that becomes the operating logic, no amount of evidence can actually settle anything. The deeper problem, Shapiro argues, is philosophical decay. The movement still repeats slogans—small government, liberty, low taxes—but can no longer explain why. “There’s been a fundamental withering of the ability to explain the philosophy undergirding of these policies.” He classifies this as an identity crisis, no longer anchored in a coherent worldview, but increasingly driven by emotion, distrust, and personality. What once was a movement grounded in principles like limited government, ordered liberty, and objective truth is now splintering into factions that either reject or don't appreciate those foundations. In his view, the right is in danger of becoming a mirror image of the left it criticizes—replacing reason with grievance, institutions with suspicion, and truth with whatever narrative feels right. Shapiro predicts fragmentation. The old Reagan-era consensus is gone, replaced by competing factions within the MAGA coalition. His solution is that conservatism must return to truth, rebuild its intellectual foundations, and reject grievance-driven populism and baseless conspiracy theories, or risk losing its identity entirely. 🔥 Quotes: “If you abandon truth as your standard, there’s nothing left to conserve.” “Politics that runs purely on anger will eventually consume the people fueling it.” “When everything becomes a conspiracy, nothing can actually be solved.” — TODAY'S TOP 5 PODCASTS ⭐️ 1. Ben Shapiro and The Battle For The Soul of Conservatism | Peter Robinson | Hoover Institution Uncommon Knowledge • 58 min ⭐️ 2. Josh Shapiro on Trump, Iran War Chaos, Israel's Failure, the Economy, and 2028 Race All-In with Chamath, Jason, Sacks & Friedberg • 62 min ⭐️ 3. Making War Moral: The Enduring Relevance of Just War Theory – Prof. Michael Krom @ThomisticInst • 43 min ⭐️ 4. Christianity Is NOT Compatible With Socialism The @michaeljknowles Show • 52 min ⭐️ 5. Eric Jorgenson - The Wild Psychology of Elon Musk Modern Wisdom • 96 min — Full Issue: e.customeriomail.com/deliver… — Subscribe: RightMic.com

I am now a Catholic.

On The Matt Walsh Show, Matt delivers a critique of last weekend's “No Kings” protests in his classic fashion. Walsh highlights what he sees as a central contradiction: protesters claiming to oppose authoritarianism while simultaneously embracing it. He points to a rally speaker who told attendees, “What we need is pack mules… be the folding-chairs people, be the I'll bring the donuts people...for the brilliant minds who are actually making this train run," mocking the irony that a supposedly anti-authority movement is preaching obedience to leadership elites. Daily Wire was on the ground talking to attendees Walsh highlights multiple interviews where participants struggle to explain their cause, including one who admitted, “Now I’m going to sound like an idiot… I can’t [explain]." He also criticizes what he views as exaggerated or unfounded claims, such as assertions that minorities are systematically harmed or that the U.S. is descending into dictatorship. Walsh sarcastically contrasts these claims with the reality that protesters can openly demonstrate nationwide, arguing, “A pretty good indication you don’t have a king… is if you can protest him ALL THE TIME.” Beyond the protesters themselves, Walsh warns that these movements are not grassroots but organized and well-funded, citing reports of large networks and political organizations backing them. He concludes that while the activists appear “incoherent, deranged, and disorganized,” they remain politically significant due to funding and institutional support. Some classic Matt Walsh one-liners: “God has blessed us with truly pathetic and embarrassing enemies.” “They don’t actually oppose authoritarianism — they just want to be the authoritarians.” “Every time one of these people was asked to explain their worldview, it all fell apart.” “This isn’t really a protest about kings at all — it’s about everything and nothing at the same time.” “They have no interest in being coherent… which makes it impossible to have any real conversation.” “These people want power over your lives and the fate of Western civilization.” — TODAY'S TOP 5 PODCASTS ⭐️ 1. The "No Kings" Protests Released New Levels Of ABSURD The @MattWalshBlog Show • 71 min ⭐️ 2. "65 Years In Prison For Burglary" Michael & The Prison Inmate | Damon West The @michaeljknowles Show • 124 min ⭐️ 3. The Best Argument Against Jesus’ Resurrection — and How to Respond | Guest: Dr. Sean McDowell @RelatablewABS • 50 min ⭐️ 4. Kevin O'Leary's Shocking Prediction For The Stock Market, Housing Prices, & 2026 Economy The Iced Coffee Hour • 99 min ⭐️ 5. Understanding the Enemy Provoked with Darryl Cooper and @scotthortonshow • 72 min — Get the next Right Mic issue in your inbox! Subscribe: RightMic.com

Stay on the Ark.

Just days after his bombshell @TuckerCarlson appearance, @joekent16jan19 sat down with @ShawnRyanShow for a deeper, more candid conversation about why he resigned as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, and what he thinks it will take to get America out of this war. Kent's central argument is that Israel, not any genuine American national security threat, is what got us into this war. And he says you don't have to take his word for it. The @WSJ reported that @LindseyGrahamSC flew to Israel multiple times, met with Israeli intelligence, and was personally coached by Netanyahu on how to lobby @realDonaldTrump. Graham then bragged about it publicly. @Reuters reported that Netanyahu called Trump directly less than 48 hours before the strikes began. Secretary of State @marcorubio admitted on the record that the US attacked because Israel was about to attack first and we jumped in alongside them. Kent's point is simple: when senior American officials are openly admitting all of this, calling it a conspiracy theory doesn't hold up. Then, he explained exactly how Israel moved the goalposts. Trump's stated red line was always no nuclear weapon. Iran agreed. The Israelis and their media surrogates — @marklevinshow , @FoxNews , Foundation for Defense of Democracies — systematically shifted that red line to no enrichment whatsoever, a position the Iranians could never accept. Kent personally researched if America's position ever reflected a "no-enrichmen" policy. "The only American official who ever said America's policy is zero enrichment was @mikepompeo in the first Trump administration." That manufactured hardline was utilized by the Israelis to muddy the communications with Iran and ultimately torpedoed negotiations that Kent said could have produced a deal. Shawn Ryan pressed Kent on accusations that he’s flip-flopped on Iran, pointing to Kent’s past claim that Iran has attacked the U.S. over 150 times through proxies. Kent pushed back, arguing his position has been consistent: he’s neither an isolationist nor a regime-change hawk. He defends Trump's decision to take out Qasem Soleimani as justified and effective, while warning that escalating into a full regime-change war in a massive country like Iran is a strategic mistake. On sleeper cells, Kent was blunt: "The more we dug through the data, the more we realized we truly don't know" how many bad actors entered during four years of open borders. He testified publicly that his department had identified 18k known suspected terrorists with access to America. His proposed exit: restrain Israel first, then use Gulf partners to bring Iran to the table. "Until we do that, I don't think the Iranians will take us seriously." Kent made an argument almost nobody else is making: The all-volunteer military actually makes it easier for politicians to start wars. "The only reason the Vietnam War ended is because the people basically revolted against it because of the draft. And that's a big reason why after Vietnam they were like, we can't draft people anymore. Let's create a professional military." His point: when only a small professional class bears the cost of war, most Americans never feel it, which makes it far too easy for Washington to keep sending people back. On the political fallout, Kent pulled no punches. "We promised to deliver and we didn't deliver." — TODAY'S TOP 5 PODCASTS ⭐️ 1. Joe Kent - His Message to President Trump on Ending the War With Iran Shawn Ryan Show • 123 min ⭐️ 2. Coleman Hughes and Glenn Greenwald Debate Israel’s Influence on Washington @coldxman • 125 min ⭐️ 3. Leaked Police Interrogation Footage of Netanyahu, and How He Cowers Behind War to Keep Power Tucker Carlson Show • 31 min ⭐️ 4. Dave Smith Joe Rogan Experience • 178 min ⭐️ 5. Convention of States: Washington Can't Fix Itself - Rick Santorum P.A.S. Report • 27 min — Full Issue: shorturl.at/3ELhw — Subscribe: RightMic.com

Can You Actually Know Anything? Epistemology for Normal People — Dr. @trentdougherty on Pints with Aquinas @RealMattFradd — today's #1 podcast. What does it actually mean to know something? Not just believe it, but know it. And can a Christian genuinely claim to know their faith is true, or are they just hoping really hard? Dr. Trent Dougherty is a Catholic philosopher who has spent his career on exactly these questions. His answer might surprise you: stop obsessing over knowledge, and start thinking about justified belief — proportioning your confidence to the strength of your evidence, the same way you do every other day of your life. "You shouldn't care what knowledge is. What you should care about is justified belief." He argues that atheists routinely hold religious belief to a standard they would never apply to anything else. Ask someone if they know they're sitting in Nashville and they'll say yes without hesitation. Press them — but do you really know? — and watch the certainty evaporate. Religious belief gets that treatment by default. He also makes a case that the very philosophical tools once used to demolish Christianity quietly became, sixty years later, the strongest arguments for it. Early 20th century analytic philosophers developed modal logic (the logic of necessity and possibility) specifically to show that religious concepts were incoherent nonsense. By the 1980s, Alvin Plantinga had taken that exact same logical framework and used it to construct what many consider the most powerful version of the ontological argument for God's existence ever formulated. "The logical tools that early analytic philosophers used to show religion was meaningless are precisely the same tools that grounded the strongest arguments for Christian theism." He calls it intellectual judo. He also makes a case that skepticism, or the refusal to commit, isn't intellectual honesty. It's cowardice. "Skepticism is a failure of nerve." But then the interview turns. Dougherty opens up about burnout, adultery, a child born out of wedlock, a period of psychosis where he couldn't distinguish hallucination from reality, and suicidal ideation so coldly logical it terrified him. What pulled him back? Twelve-step, spiritual classics, and a wife who invited the mother of his child to live in their home. "There's nothing good about me that isn't something God twisted out of a vice." This one will make you think, and it’s absolutely worth it. — TODAY'S TOP 5 PODCASTS 📷 1. Can You Actually Know Anything? Epistemology for Normal People (Dr. Trent Dougherty) Pints With Aquinas • 195 min 📷 2. How Israel Fights: Inside the Mossad with Zohar Palti | Peter Robinson | Hoover Institution Uncommon Knowledge • 51 min 📷 3. Drag Queens, Abortions, Jabs & More In American Schools Scrolling with Hayley • 38 min 📷 4. Jensen Huang: NVIDIA – The $4 Trillion Company & the AI Revolution Lex Fridman Podcast • 152 min 📷 5. Why I Left Hollywood for Christianity with Comedian Rob Schneider I Don't Have Enough FAITH to Be an ATHEIST • 82 min — Subscribe: RightMic.com

Kent has been one of the loudest anti-intervention voices. Freitas is a combat vet who’s argued the other side. Let’s have a gentleman’s debate. Because the discussion isn’t happening in mainstream conservative media. Fox and others won’t touch it.