Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
As the clock strikes thirteen, it's Thursday, the twenty seventh of June.
You're of our lord, twenty twenty four. Well, today we have a
lot of Supreme Court cases that I want to talk about, especially the fact
that Amy Cony Barrett is, as we suspected, clueless about the First Amendment.
So we're going to talk about what is up with this decision and why
there may still be an opportunity to have something done, but it may not
be the right thing. You know, the Supreme Court decisions are supposed to
be the big victory of Trump, weren't they, And yet Trump couldn't even
figure out who was betraying him. And we're going to begin with this.
The Trump CIA chief knew about the letters, claiming that there was nothing but
buden in both twenty sixteen and twenty twenty. It was the usual suspects in
the CIA that went after Trump totally clueless about it. He and the rest
of his followers. We'll be right back. And of course there's more absurdity
about banning cows and cattle and that type of thing coming out of Denmark putting
a huge tax on each and every animal and the name of saving the planet
from global warming. You see, these people are not content with destroying the
fruit of the industrial revolution, good or bad, and there's good and bad
in that. They want to even go back an erase the agrarian society that
people have had for millennia. I thought that this was all something that was
man made global warming. Wasn't that about the machines? As my son was
saying last night, we're talking about this, it's like, Ah, they've
switched their narrative. Now it's not about your car and your washing machine and
your air conditioning. Now it's about animals that humans have raised forever. They
have to be eliminated. It is unbelievably idiotic. But before we get to
the climate stuff, let's talk about the politics. Yes, there's going to
be a debate tonight, and no, I will not be covering it.
I will not be covering it live. I have to see some proof of
life in the candidates before I did this. Before I cover this thing live,
I have to see some proof of life in the discussion. Quite frankly,
I will do an autopsy tomorrow, but I will not be covering this
so called live debate tonight. It is just all it is is this is
like some reality TV show, which I also don't watch, the Real Housewives
of fill in the blink. This is the real White House of America.
Yeah, that's just as phony. Just the whole thing is all about gossip
and in the window. As a matter of fact, you know, when
you look at this, it reminds me more and more of high school elections
for students government. What did they do? Nothing, They never had anything
to do. There was no policy that they had any involvement in, and
yet you had clicks form around these individual people. Fortunately it didn't matter who
was there, but it mattered a great deal to those people. Take a
look at this from Laura Lumer talking about what happened in the Virginia primary to
Bob Good. Now, Bob Good was the guy who was the head of
the Freedom Caucus and well still is I guess he's still there. But they
came after him. Why did they come after him? He had both Trump,
the Trump camp and the McCarthy camp came after him because he stood up
to McCarthy because he's a real conservative and he endorsed DeSantis because he's a real
conservative, and so Trump said, well, we got to get him out,
and so both of them worked on getting him out, and he only
lost by something like three hundred votes, tens of thousands on each side,
So it's a tiny fraction of a percent. I imagine it would go into
an automatic recall or recount, but he's going to challenge that. And it
was something of an embarrassment for clout for both Trump and McCarthy that combined.
Neither of them really had the clout to kind of squeak this out. And
it appears that the guy who is going to be there is going to be
another Dan Crenshaw, another statist Navy seal who is part of the UNI Party.
But Laura Lumer had this to say, what happened to Bob Good last
night needed to happen for the sake of restoring fear back into the minds of
elected Republicans. Fear of what, fear of the constitution, fear of we
the people, No fear of Donald Trump. She says, Donald Trump is
the leader of the Republican Party. If you try to resist that, you'll
be removed and replaced. Traders be punished Laura Lumer is the epitome of the
high school personality cliques, Absolutely the epitome. It disgusts me to see what
the maga people have become. And she is the tip of the spear of
disgusting. So is Trump really the leader? Does Trump know what he's doing?
Can Trump handle the deep State? Can he handle the CIA? I've
said over and over again that it was Gina. Look at Gena Haspeal.
Everybody was so excited when Trump said we got lied into the Iraq War.
Well, everybody knew that. He was the first politician really, I guess
to admit it, but everybody knew it that we were lied into the Iraq
War. Well, who did the lying there was Gina Haspeal. She gave
data it was based on a torture program. You get people say anything for
torture. And after people found out that it was based on torture program,
they said, well, we men had But she did that and got us
into a war. And of course she covered up the torture program. John
Kiriaku, who was a whistleblower who exposed it, went to jail. The
criminal who perpetrated it and who covered it up, and who deleted. Most
importantly, she got rid of the video files. Can you imagine if the
video files had gone out, it would have been far more damaging than anything
from that people got from wiki leaks. And so she deleted the video files,
covered everything up. John Kiriaku, the whistleblower. It's the only person
to go to jail, not the people who did the torture, not the
people who lied us into the Iraq war. She gets promoted to being the
director of the CIA by Trump. From the very beginning, folks, because
Pompeo was a figurehead. She was the deputy director from the very beginning.
She was the number two. She was the one who ran it. And
then after a year or so, he promoted Pompeo to Secretary of State and
Gina Haspal was moved up to the official director. But I said at the
time that she was appointed, I knew all that. I also knew that
she had been at the London station with all this Russia Gate stuff. Remember
all that the dot CIA, the Steele DOSIA and all the rest of stuff.
How they came out of London. You had the London Langley Axis axis
about how they were passing information back and forth, but it was really key
what was happening in London. She was the head of the London station.
She was right there from the very beginning of all this stuff, and all
of the Trump press did not want to talk about that. Now, I
want to talk about how clueless it was that Trump would appoint her, said
the CIA. It's almost like the CIA was in control of the government,
right. And so in twenty sixteen they put out a bunch of lines about
Trump, kept him busy, kept him preoccupied, They manipulated and managed him
in the open, quite frankly. And then we find out now with these
hearings, the Trump CIA chief, that would be Gina Haskell, knew about
the infamous letter dismissing the Biden laptop as propaganda before publication. This is the
headline from Fox News. They said, the Hatch Act forbids most spy agency
employees from engaging in part of some political activities. In theory right and theory
of the constitution would prohibit them from even existing and all of what they're doing,
quite frankly. But the conservative press likes to focus on Brennan and Clapper
and Hayden, and they completely ignore the woman who used torture and lies to
get us into the Iraq war, all the rest of this stuff. Pompeo
was just a beard, and so is Trump. Quite frankly, active CIA
intelligence contractors colluded with a Biden campaign when releasing a statement dismissing Hunter Biden's infamous
laptop as Russian disinformation ahead of the twenty twenty election, and the then CIA
chief was in the loop before the statement's release. According to a joint report
released by three House panels, we knew, says Jim Jordan again more TV
trials. We knew that the rushed statement from the fifty one former intelligence officials
was a political maneuver between the Biden campaign and the Intelligence Committee. So twenty
sixteen, you had seventeen intelligence agencies according to Hillary Clinton. James Clapper I
think was the one who put out oh yeah, yeah, it was the
seventeen Yeah, and then you had fifty one different officials in twenty twenty.
They keep running the same plays over and over again because they work on people.
So yeah, we knew that, he said, and so the House
Judiciary Committee is looking into it. You know, when I saw that,
I'm just so fed up with Jim Jordan. And the GOP in general in
Congress, they do nothing at all. They preen for the cameras. You
know, before Jim Jordon, you had Trey Gowdy as well, and he's
got his contract with Fox News. I wish Jim Jordan would just retire and
go to Fox News. Give it a break. So he's got the Judiciary
Committee, and it made me think about that quote from Karl Rove. He
said, you know, to journalists, he said, you are the reality
people, but we create our own reality. And while you are studying it
as you will judiciously, even in the Judiciary Committee, right as you study,
while you study it as you will judiciously, we will act again at
the very beginning of it. He says, you know, you're reality people,
but we are an empire now and we create the reality. And while
you're studying it, we're going to create a new reality. And you can
study that. He said. We are history's actors. And Jim Jordan is
a TV actor. He doesn't do anything, He never acts. These people
do their stuff and he's and I'm not just picking up Jim Jordan. He
is emblematic of the entire Congress Republican side now Democrats are acting. Uh,
they are taking action, they are rolling out their agenda, and the Republicans
are acting as in hypocrites as in the Greek definition of hypocrite or an actor.
They're pretending going through the motions of caring, of resisting, but they
never do anything. And so Jim Jordan and the GOP will be left to
study what these global empirests like Karl Rove were doing. And again, Karl
Rove is Republican. Yeah, it's uh. THEREO reveals new information detailing how
the highest levels of the CIA up to and including then CIA Director Gina Haspell.
We're made aware of the public statements of The Hunter byden emails by fifty
one former intelligence officials prior to its official publication. And they're like, oh,
you know, some of these people are still involved in all this stuff.
It's like, yeah, okay, it wasn't enough to disqualify Gina Haspital
to Lias and the Irock War. I don't really care which candidate she was
supporting at which point in time, why she was supporting one candidate or another.
And then you look at Real Clear Politics and there's a very long article
not Real Clear Politics, Real Clear investigations. They have very long article about
this same thing about rigging the twenty twenty debates, but also the twenty sixteen
and how the Intelligence agency was there, but they placed it all at the
door of James Clapper. How silly is that they even say in the article
everybody considered James Clapper to be the Barney Fife for the CIA. Brennan is
the true evil genius. You can see it in his eyes when he talks.
And Hayden. I mean, those those two guys are but Clapper is
like, oh, it's just the stooge that they've got out there, even
though he was at a CIA at one point, but the was I don't
know if he's had the CIA, if he was head of his director National
Intelligence anyway. Uh, it's ridiculous that they don't even talk about Gene Haspell
in this what's going on with that? I think you know who the really
powerful people are. They're the ones that they don't talk about, isn't it?
You know you won't know who rules this ruth. It's the ones that
they don't talk about. It was former fbissistant director Chris Chris Schwecker who said
that Clapper was the Barney Fife of the intelligence community, are you spuying on
Americans without a search? One senator or knows her non intentionally, I guess.
And then but we're all going to be saved. We're all going to
be saved by Trump. He's such a stable genius. Just take a look
at this little campaign thing that he staged. He had he'd set this up
with Brian Byron Donald's to go to a barbershop in a black community, and
he wasn't going to show up. He was just gonna phone it in,
and he phoned it in and listened to what he had to say. But
since this has happened, like the watch their expressions, it just beat Elvis
Presley and Frank Sinata buy a lot, by the way, lead him buy
a lot. But that's the number one month all time. It's really an
amazing thing. Since it happened, the support among the black community and the
Hispanic community has skyrocket. It's been amazing, really been amazing. It's I'm
one of you. Now got a mug shot to see to the president.
In one way. In one way you said, gee, isn't that too
bad? But the truth is, it's really a lovely thing. When I
see that we have great support now in the black community and in the Hispanic
community. Idiot, idiot. First of all, I was el the mugshots
of Elvis and Sinatra, like I know anything about it. I looked that
up and people had put out a picture of Elvis holding up like this card
that had some numbers on it and everything. You know, it was not
a full phrase and a profile. I you typically say with the mug shot,
that was not a mug shot. That was him getting out of the
army and they were taking an exit picture of something. Frank Sinatra actually was
arrested and actually did have a mugshot. He was charged with seduction and adultery.
Trump better be glad that they're not arresting people for that anymore. I
guess the seduction part is really only of his voters, but the rest of
he pays for. Trump sent his black friend Byron Donald's so that they can
call into a black barbershop and tell them how he has the number one mug
shot of all time and now he's got something in common with black people.
On Twitter, he says it's been a really great thing for him. One
person says, what does it even mean? To be the number one mug
shot of all time, the best smugshot, not mugshot, it's the best.
Another person says, look at their body language there, they're embarrassed.
Another person, Ray Pride, on Twitter, said Trump claims thug life an
Atlanta barbershop. Another one says, I thought Trump was you all guy in
the hood. He didn't want to come to the barbershop to chill with black
maga. Yeah, couldn't even make it there. Kind of interesting. Well,
New Paul chose a record number of people don't like Trump or Biden had
the first debate. Twenty five percent of respondents have unfavorable views of both of
them. Yeah, they don't want Donald duck or Goofy. I like that.
That's from Wine Press, Donald Duck or Goofy. You have the Rutherford
Institute, Whitehead there had an interesting piece has been picked up by a lot
of different outlets, Free Thought Project, Zero Hedge American dictators uncomfortable truth you
won't hear from Trump, pro Biden or from their supporters in their captive partisan
media. He says history has shown us that no matter who assumes the office
of president, all of our problems will remain the same. We need to
understand they don't care, they don't represent us. They're not even control of
what happens to their lives. As you can see with Trump being batted around
back and forth by these different forces, he can't even defend himself. He
doesn't even know who his enemies are and his allies are. Yes, he
doesn't do anything except in his own perceived self interest. But he perceives his
self interest incorrectly because he's such a narcissist. The twenty twenty four elections will
not do much to alter our present course to a police state. You know
what will. What made the difference all across the country down plan from Fauci
and the science and the money from Washington. What made the difference. It
was a local place, the local officials, and they made a big difference.
From place to place. It could be better or it could be worse.
So he has a few points here, read a couple of them.
He's got about fifteen. Actually I'm not going to read about three or four.
So the government's not your friend. It doesn't work for we the people.
Number two. Gradually it is whittling away our freedoms. It has liberated
itself from the contractual agreement the Constitution. You know, for years it was
I think it was back in the nineties that Russell Means, who was he
ran at the same time, actually, in nineteen eighty six, he ran
for the Libertarian Party nomination for president at the same time that Ron Paul did
nineteen eighty eight. I'm sorry, and Ron Paul got it. Russell Means
wrote a book and he called it Where White Men Fear to Tread, and
he said government has broken every treaty it is made with the American Indian.
He said, a white man, the Constitution is the treaty that the federal
government made with you, and they've broken every aspect of it. What are
you going to do about it? So that's the question for us, right,
he says. Republicans and Democrats act like there's a huge difference. However,
they're united in a common goal, which is to maintain the status quo.
Maybe it's not so much maintaining the status quo anymore, maybe it's maintaining
the status quo of their position there. I would say that it's about pushing
forward the fourth turning. I'd say they are united and a goal of taking
our country down that's what they're really about. Presidential elections merely serve to maintain
the status quo. Just make sure, folks that you're not dancing to the
Hegelian two step. Okay when they play that tune. Don't start to hap
in your feet, okay like an idiot. The US government is spending money
it doesn't have on foreign programs that can't afford, all the while piling up
debt. They'll be put on us and used to take everything away from us,
he says. Forty years past the George Orwell envisioned the stomping foot boot
of Big Brother. The police state is about to pass off the baton to
the surveillance state, he says. And now we are at a position where
exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime. This as I said before
about John Kyriaco and junasvill She becomes she gets promoted by Trump to the head
of the CIA. He goes to prison, and even after he serves his
time, he can't get a pardon from Trump unless he pays Rudy Giuliani a
million dollars. That's the corruption in the lunacy on the Republican side, and
you know about it on the Democrat side, but Juliana signs she's another example
of it. Somebody expose ing crimes is the one who goes to jail,
not the criminals. He says, as I may clear my book Battlefield America
of the War on the American People, and in its fictional counterpart, the
Eric Blair Diaries, you know the real name of George Orwell. He said,
these problems will continue to plague our nation and lessen until Americans wake up
to the fact that we are the only ones who can change things for the
better. The question is where do we work to change things for the better?
Way? You might want to listen to Elon Musk. You might want
to pay attention to what George Sois does. That's what Elon Musk said.
He says he's not focused on presidential election. He's focused on district attorneys because
he gets the biggest bang for his buck focusing on local elections. That's where
he can really change things. All politics is local. We've been told by
these people forever. The rest of this stuff, folks, is just a
distraction. These debates are just a distraction. The change is going to happen
is going to have to happen at the local level, and it can be
blocked to a large degree at the local level. The federal government does not
represent you, It does not represent change. A dictatorship in Washington is not
going to solve your problems. Washington is no longer a republic and it's not
a democracy. It has become a mockery. That's what it is. You
know, you had James Carbill. What's the matter with these people. They're
so stupid. They think that we got a republican It's like, yeah,
well that's what the constitution says. You know, we got a democracy here,
you know, all this kind of stuff. Well, no, we
have a mockery. This is a mockery. So everybody's talking about age,
are you going to drug tests? Biden and all this other kind of stuff.
Say they got him hyped up. Everybody's so concerned about it that,
of course Biden is eighty one, Trump is seventy eight. What they're doing
in their commercials and there was actually a brilliant commercial even though it doesn't matter
and it's you know, lies and all that kind of stuff, but it
was a brilliant hit job by the Lincoln Project on Trump because what they did
was they had all these conservative commentators like Sean Hannity and others who were talking
about Biden's obvious senility. And they would have these people and they wouldn't say
Biden. They would just say he's this and he's that. You know.
So, as they're talking about that, and then they would show Trump and
some type of the stuttering thing or where he uses the wrong word or whatever,
everybody can see that there is a huge difference in terms of cognitive ability
between Biden and Trump. That's about the only difference that there is between them.
And when it comes to policy, they don't want to talk about that.
So I focus on age. And if you focus on age, you
focus on snility. What is that telling people that these guys are really in
charge? Do you really think they're in charge? Do you really think that
Biden is in charge? And do you really think that Trump is in charge?
When he's got all the people around him, he doesn't even know which
they're on his side or not on his side. It's perfect fit, isn't
it. You know that the MAGA people think that Trump's on his side,
and Trump doesn't even know who's on his side when he's in the White House.
It's pretty pathetic. Everybody's living in this fantasy projection that they've got there.
So the age anxiety is only matters if you think that these guys are
in charge, and they're not in charge. But if you want to watch
the debate, I suggest that there is a way that you can maybe tolerate
it if you use some kind of an age filter to knock off about seventy
five years off of each of their ages. Wants to shut down this country.
I want to keep it open, and they just let me shut you
down for a second. Jet just for one second. I don't wear most
like him. Every time you see him, he's got a mask. He
could be speaking two hundred three away from that. He shows up with the
biggest mask I've ever seen. You could never have done the job that we
get. You don't have it in your like. You could have never done
that job. I know how to do the job. I know I can
do the job. I can. Neither one of them can do the job,
folks. But yeah, if you want to watch the debate, maybe
you could do that in real time. I don't know where that filter comes,
probably on a phone somewhere, but it's it's ridiculous. And when you
look at what these people at the time, everybody was talking, that's their
previous encounter at the time. As Reason magazine points out, a disastrous Biden
and Trump debate could be the best possible outcome out of this. When they
did that back in October twenty twenty, that just showed you that. The
Washington Post called it quote the worst presidential debate and living memory for media analyst
Tom Jones at Pointer, he said it was a dumpster fire, full of
constant interruptions, constant talking over one another, name calling, juvenile bickering.
Reason says a transcript of the debate reads like gibberish because it is gibberish because
it's about their personality, just like with the Laura Lumer thing. So you
about Trump or not? Okay, I'm sick of that now. It would
have been interesting to have some other candidates in there actually talk about issues,
but that's not going to happen. They control that very carefully. Everything about
this is a controlled pageant. It is a Wag the Dog pageant, remember
that movie. The characters just think of it as a pageant. Reasons Jacob
Sullam argued then that the debate was good for their public because it shattered the
unfounded respect for the people who rule us. So what if the debate doesn't
simply confirm that the Biden Trump debates in twenty twenty showed that these men deserve
neither our respect nor our affection. No, I mean, what if it
was actually really bad? Democrats have been working hard to counter program any suggestion
that Biden's mental acuity has declined. The evidence keeps piling up, and so
you know where do we go with this? What is the best possible outcome
of this? Well, the best thing would be for you to direct your
attention away from this pageant, this show, this entertainment in the things that
matter. RFK Jr. Did not make as planned the cut, but he
says that he's planning to join the presidential debate with the miracle of technology,
and so he's going to have some people who are going to evidently green screen
him into the debate so that he and maybe they'll pause it so that he
can make a comment on it. I will not be, like I said,
I'll not be covering a live debate because I don't believe these people are
really live. They are a couple of zombie puppets. I'll do an autopsy
of some of the stuff tomorrow. But life is too short, it really
is. We're going to do a kind of live streams that RFK jor that
includes me in the debate. It'll have a podium, it'll kind of look
like I'm on stage. He said. The most consequential political issue of the
last two presidential administrations had to do a COVID nineteen pandemic. And you can
rely on the fact that they won't be talking about that. They may use
it to criticize each other. They didn't do it enough. But here's what
rf K Junior said. He's right about this part. I don't support RFK
Junior. I'm just saying that we need to have somebody that's going to talk
about I said at the very beginning, there's absolutely no way I was going
to vote for him. He never was honest in terms of taking back what
he said about locking up people who disagreed with him about the green agenda and
many other things, and then he jumps in and supports the war other things
like that. But an abortion of course, big, big support of abortions.
So there's a lot of reasons that I would not support him. However,
I thought it would have been good to have him in the debates because
he would bring up some of these issues that these other guys are not going
to talk about, and then they won't be asked by CNN. He said.
They locked down our country for five hundred days, which both President Trump
and President Biden went along with. That decision shifted four point three trillion dollars
of the American middle class to this new oligarchy of billionaires. They created a
billionaire a day in five hundred days. Five hundred billionaires are creating it.
And they shut down three point three million businesses. They shut down all the
churches. See, you weren't essential, as Trump put it. He goes
on, they shut down freedom of speech. Companies started actively censoring for the
first time in history, pressuring social media and media companies not to publish critiques
of their policies. And the biggest cheerleader was CNN. He said, Jake
Tapper was out there shaming people who violated mask mandates or who weren't staying in
their homes. I feel somebody should be on that stage asking all three of
them about their role in it all. You see is criticism of Jake Tapper
because he doesn't like Trump, because he's biased against Trump, and he is
biased against Trump. They put him in as a moderator, but he joined
Trump and Biden in pushing this pandemic of fear lies and propaganda. RFK Junior
goes on to say Louis Brandas Brandeis says that the role of medium and a
democracy is to maintain a fierce position of skepticism toward government authorities and toward official
pronouncements. This is what the media did in this country for the first two
hundred and eighty five years as part of our existence. But in the last
decade, and particularly culminating in COVID, you saw the need to completely take
the opposite a posture. The media has become a mouthpiece for government policies and
shamed people. It silenced them, it marginalized them, it gas lit them.
And let me say, what we saw for the first time in the
Trump administration was conservative media. Well, that was the last bastioning of this.
The liberals went over to a you to play this game, to be
on the side of government a long time ago. And now we have the
conservatives and the people who used to be on the outside. They used to
not push the idea that all of our problems could be solved in Washington.
But they all became uncritical cheerleaders. They all looked for a demographic that could
make them money, and then they serve up to that demographic. Whatever that
demographic demographic wants to hear, whether it's about Trump, whether it's about Biden.
When asked if he would accept a job from Trump if the former president
was elected in November, Kennedy said that he would consider a proposal, but
he doesn't think he would accept the offer. He said, I don't think
so. I would listen to a proposal, but I don't think so.
He said. One of the reasons that I don't think i'd go to work
for him is because he offered a job in the last administration, but instead
he took a billion dollars from Pfizer. And you know what he's talking about,
it's well covered. You know, Trump posed during the election as a
vaccine skeptic. He believed that, you know, he put an indications out
there. They believed that the childhood vaccines had been part of the autism issues,
and so he called in RFK Junior to Trump Towers during the transition period,
and as he was coming out the press is there. I said,
what you talk about, you're going to ban vaccines. No, no,
no, We're going to actually do some science and test them to see if
they work, if they're safe. That type of thing is the way he
put it. Well, Trump was just using RFK Junior to bid his price
up with the pharmaceutical companies, and they paid him millions of dollars each.
And what he did was he hired Eli Lilly's CEO, the most politically connected
of all the pharmaceutical companies, alex Azar, put him in charge of HHS
and it was alex a czar to put out the first emergency order in January
of twenty twenty before Trump released the emergency cash that paid everybody to do what
Alex's are and the pharmaceutical companies wanted them all to do. We're going to
take a quick break and we'll come right back. We've got some Supreme Court
decisions about the First Amendment that are very important and many other things. You
know, we've not had a decision yet on the whether or not there was
a couple of issues about January the sixth and about Trump. They've not released
decisions on those and I don't think that they will until after this debate.
I think that was deliberate, but something else leaked out the common man.
They created common Core, dumbed down our children. They created common past,
track and control us their Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing and
the communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated ordinary.
But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take
away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire
to know everything about us while they hide everything from us. It's time to
turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information
and links you'll find at the Davidknightshow dot com. Thank you for listening,
Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us
in your prayers. Ddavidknightshow dot com. Welcome back, and I've got a
couple of comments. I've got a tip here as well. And by the
way, I just want to thank everybody for the support. Yesterday Marty did
matching funds and we had a lot of support. Yesterday, I apologize for
not getting an update. I did not go through in total everything up.
I was just yesterday. I was just so exhausted. I went to bed
early. So you some of this. Sometimes this really gets to me.
But I apologize. We'll get that done today. I'll do that instead of
watching the debate. How about that. It's going to find something to do.
Duke Nukem, thank you for the tip, he says, research flat
Earth Deep in the rabbit Hole d t r H on you on YouTube and
rumble NASA moon Landing's globe Earth our world as mass deception. As you well
know, we can see many miles beyond purported global curve. It's undeniable and
a no brainer. Well, I agree. I just look, you know,
we have a lot of perceptions out there, and so I like to
focus on the things that have a direct influence on us. It is hard
enough to get people to believe that buildings just collapsed on their own, you
know, to not believe the nine to eleven official story. Many people want
to clean to that, and so you know, if we could get people
to pay attention to that, we could look at some of these other things
as well, but that's really my focus because it's tied to what happened to
us in twenty twenty. That was the other shoot to drop. Those two
things were happening at the same time. As a matter of fact, they
even did the first germ game two months before nine to eleven Octospook does David
list an itinerary someplace on the subjects that he plans on the subjects of the
day, or just chosen from current events, either as acceptable course just asking
I don't I used to put some of the key topics that I was going
to talk about up, but you know, quite honestly, when I'm doing
the show, sometimes I'll just change it. And I always have more stuff
each day than I can actually get to, and so sometimes I don't go
in the order that I had planned. Sometimes I skip over to something else.
So I stopped doing that because I'd mentioned that I was going to cover
this, this, this, and this today, and I wind up covering
some different things. But I do every day. We have started trying to
get the show up earlier, so I first put the show up where they
without any description, saying the description will follow, and then when I get
that done, and as usually by about four hours after the show, I
put up a transcript that shows with time codes, that shows the topics discussed
in general and about where you can find them, because I know it's a
long show, and I know people don't most people don't listen to all of
it every day unless you're traveling or working or something like that, and so
I put the subjects there if people are looking at it after the fact,
but it takes a while for those to get there, but they do show
up. So we used to wait until I had everything ready and put it
up because I'm not sure if when I put it up on when I put
it up for the podcast, it immediately pushes it out to other places,
and I'm not sure if it pushes out the change to the other places.
So you guys can let me know if you don't see the update, if
you only see a generic description there each day, we'll have to change that.
But I thought it'd be better to get it up sooner, a couple
of hours sooner, rather than waiting until I had all of the description topics
by time code and everything in there. So chef GN three two one.
I'm tired of being told that if I don't like Trump, I must like
Biden. Are we really that dumb? Yeah, we're really that bipolar ap
rumblest bragging about a fake mugshot. That's what you want in president. They
have dismantled this nation. I know it wasn't that ridiculous? And again and
capable of acting except out of his unperceived self interest and a totally consumed narcissist.
Of course he will act out of revenge as well. About the child
version of the debate, and Najee Levin says, you should air that version
of the debate on your show, probably the most watched broadcast. Yeah,
get the whole thing and do that. It's kind of interesting because CNN has
got lots of rules for anybody that wants to cover it. You can do.
You must put it full screen. You've got to put their chiron there.
Nothing about your network if you want to cover it when you go to
commercial break, when they go to commercial break and you go to commercial break,
you can't do any commentary about it and all the rest of stuff.
Well, that's not going to happen. And on Twitter a lot of people
be doing commentary. I'm not going to do that. I've done that in
the past. I think the best way to do commentary quite frankly, so
that people you always wind up having to talk over them. If you're going
to say anything, if you do it live, I think it's better to
do it as a tweet. But I'm not going to do that. Anybody
else want to do that, knock yourself out. I can't stand watching these
guys. I literally despise them. It's just, you know, like I
said, life is too short a Syian girl, I don't think the debate
can be anything but a disaster. Neither candidate can talk to the issues.
Just Laura Lumer type personality batching. That's all it is. So are you
for this guy or against the thing? And that's why they do only two
candidates, because it makes it easier to do the ad hominem attacks. And
they always ask the same stupid, irrelevant questions. They never address the issue
of the day, and that's on the news media people seeing in other people
of that ilk. That's why they picked them, and that's why the debates
are not even controlled by a third party like the League of Women Voters.
They don't want to have somebody like Ross pro or third third wheel but they
don't control on again, and so they created a Debate Commission that's run by
the Republicans and Democrats. Everything is a duopoly and it really the Debate Commission
is just another example of the UNI Party. So checktering three to one.
Trump, the vaccines are great, Biden just blah blah blah. Yeah,
I agree, Octo spoke. I wish RFK Junior was not blocked from the
debate. I think he would have forced a bit of honesty to these debates.
I agree. I suspect the majority of Americans real concerns will never be
addressed. Perhaps RFK Junior DUBN will cover those. Well. I'm glad that
he's going to fight all of that. But of course we've always seen that.
I've always and I realized a long time ago when I was involved in
third party politics that their whole agenda was to keep you focused on the race
for president or maybe the race for governor in some cases, so you didn't
really put a lot of resources in getting somebody elected at the local level.
It's like, if they are so concerned to keep us over here, maybe
we shouldn't be doing what they want us to do. Maybe that's a really
stupid way to do politics, to do exactly what they have designed for us
to do. Well, let's talk a little bit about the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court has acknowledged accidentally posting an Idaho abortion case document that may
preview a narrow Biden administration win. Isn't it interesting? You know, we
had the Dobbs decision that was leaked, course about the overturning of Roe v.
Wade. Now we have another abortion decision being leaked. Huh. Maybe
if they want to know who's doing this, maybe they look to see who
in this inner circle of just a few people it's rapidly pro abortion. They
might be able to figure out who actually leaked this stuff. So they say
it was inadvertently posted and then they removed it from its website, but some
people got a snapshot of it. The court appeers things, and we don't
know if this is the actual decision or if it's going to change or not.
They said, the court appeers to set to be to allow emergency room
doctors in Idaho to perform abortions in certain situations, according to a copy of
the decision, And of course this would contradict what they just did. With
dobs with dobbs. They just said, with a tenth Amendment, we don't
get to make these decisions. These things belong at the state level. Now
they're going to go back in and start micromanaging at the federal level these different
decisions. Right now, they're going to start writing law about things over which
they should have no jurisdiction, and they're going to do it in the federal
sphere. And it's kind of interesting to see that they are waiting into these
areas where they have no jurisdiction, where they disrespect the clear language of the
Constitution on issue after issue. It's interesting to see that even as they pretend
that they don't have any authority to rule in some of these controversial cases like
the free speech case, the social media free speech case, that they just
took a pass on and said, well, these defendants don't have standing.
Oh, yes they do, Yes, they do. Everybody sees through that
dodge, and it is a dodge. The bottom line is, as they
pass on a couple of these controversial cases saying they didn't have standing, they
are jumping into areas where they have no standing, where they have no authority
under the Constitution, No federal agency has any authority, he says, not
any authority when it comes to abortion. There's no authority for the federal government
at any level. For the Supreme Court, for the President, for the
Congress, none of them have the authority to have a say about that.
That belongs at the state level. So this case, this Idaho case,
concerns whether a federal law, again at the federal law comes into an area
that the federal government has not been expressly given power, then it is usurping
that power because that power has been reserved by the Tenth Amendment to the States
and to the people. But it's a federal law that regulates sumergency room treatment,
and it overrides Idaho's strict abortion ban. Brown Jackson wrote separately to say
the court should have go on ahead and decided the bigger issue, which is
likely to come up in another case and d course would have an impact in
other states with similar abortion restrictions. She said, today's decision is not a
victory for pregnant patients in Idaho, while this court daddles and the country waits
pregnant people. Why she keep talking like that? Why does she say pregnant
women? Oh? Well, because it's pregnant patients and pregnant people. Remember
it was Brown Jackson that Marcia Blackburn asked point blank what is a woman?
That was Katanji and she still doesn't know what she knows, but she won't
say right, She's still playing this game. Pregnant people, pregnant patients famously
would not acknowledge what a woman is, and she's never going to He's going
to keep up this charade with all this stuff. So Supreme Court is also
in terms of free speech, they're going to allow the government to pressure social
media companies to censor. You know, we had we all knew what was
happening for a long time. We knew that was exactly what was happening.
Then we got the Twitter files and we got we had the documentary proof that
they were doing it. And so you had two states, and you had
five individuals, high profile individuals, who had been censored by Facebook because there
were there was a paper trail showing that the government wanted them to censor people
that disagreed with the government's agenda, and they did it. And so Amy
Coney Barrett wrote the decision and she pretends that these people don't have standing one
of the most ridiculous evasions I've ever seen in my life, CNN says,
the Supreme Court allows White House to press social media companies to remove disinformation.
Well, in reality, it was really more not saying well, this is
okay. They just said, well, it's not even We're not even going
to issue a decision about the substance of this claim. We're just going to
dodge this completely by saying that it is you don't have standing. The FBI
may continue to urge social media platforms to take down content that the government views
as misinformation, says CNN. How is that not censorship? Censorship by proxy.
I've always said that you see the iron fist of censorship in a velvet
glove of private companies. That's what this stuff all is. Social media was
created to do this. The government helped to create it for this very purpose.
CNN says. Rather than delving into the weight the weighty First Amendment questions
raised by the case, the court ruled that state and social media users who
challenged Bide administration did not have standing to sue. Barrett, who wrote the
opinion for the six to three majority, said to establish standing, the plaintiffs
must demonstrate a substantial risk that in the near future they will suffer an injury
that is traceable to a government defendant and readdressable by the injunction that they seek.
Because no plaintiffs has carried that burden, none has standing to seek a
preliminary injunction. How clueless can you be? As Information Liberation says, it's
more conservative cowardice on the part of two Trump appointed Federalist Society approved justices,
Justice Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Gorsch were the ones who dissented.
And so what we see here is a pattern. Oh people like say,
well, it's a conservative court, Well, how do you come up with
that? And we've got a hardcore radical left, the Obama Biden women that
are there, that's the three. Call him the squad if you will.
And then you've got John Roberts, who more often than not, folks,
and especially on the big issues, more often than not, he sides with
the left. Now he didn't he and Kavanaugh didn't on Robie Wade, but
they came really close according to discussions that we're hat. But Kavanaugh is like
a clone of John Roberts. He seems to do everything that he does,
which leaves us with Amy Cony Barrett. And do you remember when she had
her confirmation hearings and she was asked about the First Amendment and she couldn't couldn't
summarize it, didn't understand why things like religion and politics will be talked about
in the First Amendment. What are the five freedoms of the First Amendment?
Speech, religion, press, assembly, speech, press, religion, assembly.
I don't know what am I missing? Redress or protest? Okay,
why is there one amendment that has these five freedoms clustered? What do they
hang together? I don't know what you're getting at on that one, Like,
what is the common denominator? Why five of them in the same amendment?
I don't know why. Actually, as a historical matter, those were
grouped. I'm sure there's a story that I don't know there about why those
appeared in the First Amendment altogether rather than being split up in different amendments.
I mean, assembly and protest and speech bear more relation to one another than
necessarily free exercise. Say no, no, sorry, thanks for playing next
next contestant. That's what they should have said. But now they went ahead
and pastor on the next level. And this is why we get from some
idiot like that. Okay, so there's the Bill Wrights, which too many
of us is kind of important. And you can't be bothered to even learn
what the first one says, let alone understand why it was put together.
Why do we have religion and politics. Well, it's because that's the kind
of stuff that the government doesn't want. You're talking about, right, Everything
is about religion or politics that they want a censor. For the most part,
that's what the First Amendment is trying to prevent. They know that that's
what the government wants to shut down. So Justice Alito and Thomas, Clarence
Thomas, and Neil Gorsich wrote a dissent that dubbed this case quote one of
the most important free speech cases to reach the Court in years. They said
the challengers had brought forward enough evidence to establish standing in by the way,
all the lower courts thought so as well. All the lower courts didn't throw
it out because of standing. The Court, however, shirks that duty,
says the decision written by Alito and Thomas. I think it's Thomas, they
all signed it together. Gorsic. The court shirks that duty and thus permits
the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for
future officials who want to control what people say, what they hear, and
what they think. That was written by Alito. He called the conduct of
the officials sued in the case unconstitutional, coercive, and dangerous. He said
it was blatantly unconstitutional and the country may come to regret the court's failure to
say so. He had a thirty four page descent that went through the details
of the case as he sought to counter the court's conclusions that they didn't have
standing. So he wrote thirty four pages to show that they did have standing.
He said, for months, high ranking government officials placed unrelenting pressure on
Facebook to suppress Americans free speech. Because the Court unjustifiably refuses to address this
serious issue, the serious threat to the First Amendment. I respectfully dissent.
Well, what do we expect? All right? She was a diversity pick,
just like Sandradale O'Connor was a diversity pick. For she was Trump's diversity
pick, his DEI if you will, just like Sandradale O'Connor was Reagan's diversity
pick, and it was a big one because it was the first time anybody
put a woman on the Supreme Court. I remember they even came out rushed
a really garbage piece of quote unquote entertainment propaganda. You know, even Hollywood
was so excited about Reagan doing this diversity thing with Sandreday O'Connor. I think
they even had it like first for Sunday or Monday in October or something like
that, and it was about, you know, the first day of this
female Supreme Court justice, and of course Santdreday O'Connor huge disappointment to all the
Conservatives that thought, well, we don't have to fight Roe v. Wade
at the local level because Reagan is going to do it for us in Washington
with Supreme Court picks. And she turned out to be one of the most
leftist statist shills in there, and she's wrong on nearly everything, nearly everything.
Well, Alito railed about this again as Berrett read her, and this
is from the Hill, and they said, these three guys were so furious
that Supreme Court just pushed this thing out of the way, and they talk
about how Alito and Thomas, who were there, how they reacted while her
decision was being read, and the fact that Gorsich wouldn't even attend, wouldn't
even attend. As Barrett read her opinion, Alito mainly looked down at the
set of papers in front of him, with his head, sometimes leaning on
his hand. He did not read his descent aloud from the bench. Like
Alito, Thomas also looked down for the greater portion of the opinion reading and
leaned his head on his hand at times. About halfway through Barrett's reading,
Thomas could be seen putting back on his glasses, reading papers in his hand,
and occasionally looking up and out into the courtroom. Gorsic was absent,
and so the Alito wrote in his decision, I assumed that a fair portion
of what social media users had to say about COVID and the pandemic was of
little lasting value. Some was undoubtedly untrue or misleading, and some may have
been downright dangerous, you know, like what Vauchu was telling us. But
he said, we now know that valuable speech was also suppressed. And most
importantly, it's not for the government to decide what we allow to hear or
not. Here, it's not their prerogative to decide what is true and false.
It's also not their prerogative to decide what is acceptable and what is hateful
speech either. The wide administration contended that it was merely encouraging the platforms to
moderate content, so the communications didn't cross the line into outright unconstitutional coercion.
How could that be? How could you course somebody through social media? Government
has a monopoly on coercion, and it was government that was coursing. Alita
rejected that view and his dissent, insisting that White House officials browbeat Facebook into
deleting posts, and the platform's response quote resembled that of a subservient entity determined
to stay in the good graces of a powerful task master. That's what this
all is, he said. If the lower court's assessment of the voluminous record
is correct, this is one of the most important free speech cases to reach
the court in years. So where do we go from here? Well,
this particular case, as Cony Barrett, the others take a pass on it,
refused to really judge it and allow it to continue. There's another one
that is making its way up, and this is coming from Children's Health Defense
and RFK junior and class action suits that have now been combined and in this
particular case, They said they also are very disappointed in this. They said
the decision reversed decisions by two lower courts which held that when the government quote
coerced or quote significantly encouraged unquote the platforms to moderate content that presidential elections and
other controversial topics, that they transformed the social media company's decisions into state actions
and violating the First Amendment, and so Children's Health Defense CEO Mary Holland said,
we consider the government's role in coursing and encouraging censorship by social media platforms
the greatest threat the free speech in our time. Children's Health Defense and its
founder and chairman on leeve, Robert F. Kennedy Junior, in March twenty
twenty three, made similar allegations, and a class action lawsuit filed on behalf
of all American news consumers. Holland said that these two suits don't face the
same problem of standing as some of the plaintiffs and Murphy versus. Missouri,
and that Kennedy versus A. Biden is expected to move forward. We note
that the Supreme Court did not reach did not reach the merits. In other
words, they didn't get to the point with actually discussed the issue the First
Amendment, they dodged it by lying about the fact that these defendants didn't have
standing. These are people who've been censored. We will continue with Kennedy versus
Bien Biden, a separate lawsuit in the Western District of Louisiana, where we
believe that there is no issue regarding lack of standing for RFK Junior or Children's
Health Defense, who were directly and traceably censored and continued to be heavily censored.
We expect this case to move forward even if standing remains an issue for
the Missouri plaintiffs. If Kennedy versus Biden has heard on its merits, which
the court did not do in Mirthy versus Missouri, the outcome could have wide
reaching implications for the First Amendment and online speech on x RFK Junior said there
is no question that he PhD have standing. He said the Supreme Court got
it wrong and has failed to hold his responsibility to the Constitution by finding no
standing in Murthy versus Missouri. My case of Kennedy versus Biden will proceed in
the trial court where there is no question that I have standing. He's the
new York Times called the decision by the Supreme Court one of the most important
First Amendment cases of the Internet age because the constitutional questions at stake. Judge
Dottie in July of twenty twenty three even issued a preliminary injunction, telling the
Biden administration officials that they could not communicate their desire to have stuff removed or
silenced. Then the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed but upheld what Barrett,
writing for the majority, called a sweeping preliminary injunction in September of twenty twenty
three. Barrett then wrote, the Fifth Circuit was wrong to do so.
The people, by the way, are people that you've heard quite a bit
about, Jay Badikaria, Martin Kohldorf, Aaron Karrioate Gateway pundit, and one
person I don't know. Health activist Jill Hines argued that the censorship they experienced
on social media could be tied to government action, and that they're also likely
to be censored in the future. Barrett said they did not show specific causation,
and they did not show that the moderation was tied to the government.
Did she not look at the evidence at all? His Twitter files were very,
very clear what was happening with it. She said that the relationship of
the government to these social media's companies is more complex, and this lawsuit glossed
over those complexities. We talk about projection. That's exactly what she did.
She glossed over the censorship. She glossed over the censorship by corporate proxy,
the coercion, and the cronyism to destroy the First Amendment. She glossed over
all of those quote unquote complexities. They're not complex, They're right out there
for people to see. So this is it was simple, clear direct censorship.
And she refuses, and the majority of the Supreme Court refuses to pay
attention to that. This is why I say judicial supremacy is a very bad
idea. It was never the intention of the founders. It was usurped in
Marbury versus Madison, and Jefferson said, well that's it, you know,
I destroy the Constitution, and they have over and over again. The record
reflects that the government defendants played a role in at least some of the platform's
moderation choices, but the Fifth Circuit, by attributing every Platform decision at least
in part to the defendants, glossed over complexities and the evidence, said Barrett.
So she said that they did play a role in at least some of
these platforms moderation choices, moderation, it's censorship. How many times does Facebook
have to censor somebody at the request of the Department of Justice or to be
censorship? I'd like to know what is the level? How many times?
He says, Well, at least some of these they did do that?
Okay, Well, what's the number? Is it five times? Is it
ten times? Is it fifteen times? Before you care that it's censorship?
I think once is enough, isn't it? So she said the plaintiffs must
demonstrate their own standing for each claim against each defendant. Now you just have
to say that it's being done. But I don't think there's a problem with
that anyway. Alito said the court is shirking their duty, permitting the successful
campaign a coercion to stand as an attractive model for future officials. He said,
there is and he wrote thirty four pages. He said, there is
a vast that was his term, a vast record of evidence. The shows
that federal officials communicate with social media platforms about so called misinformation and relevant to
the Kennedy case because it's still in the Children's Heelf Defense article where they say,
yeah, our case is still coming up. They said, our record
includes specific evidence that Biden officials sought to censor tweets by RFK Junior. For
example, the White House specifically targeted Kennedy's January the twenty second, twenty twenty
one tweet about the then recent death of a Baseball Hall of Famer Hank Aaron,
eighteen days after he publicly received the MODERNA vaccine. So they said,
well, you know, we got evidence saying shutdown RFK Junior. It was
not a generalized thing. So quite this is not a conservative court, and
Trump didn't put in conservative justices when two of the three of them were constantly
making the wrong decision, and not even Gorsich is completely reliable. But it's
gone to the point where Amy, Coney, Barrett, and Kavanaugh are completely
unreliable, just like John Roberts. So again statists Amy doesn't have a brain,
Kavanaugh basically does, I'm with him, you know, type of thing
with Roberts. Alito's descent included lengthy summary of the dubious actions taken by the
federal government to induce social media companies thirty four pages of it. He said,
in some of the officials wielded potent authority, their communications with Facebook were
virtual demands, and Facebook's quavering responses to those demands show that it felt a
strong need to yield. Well, I'm glad that they're not yield, but
still, your god given rights are not up for a vote. You see,
we don't we have If we have a republic, then your rights can't
be taken away by a majority of the people like they can in a democracy.
But if we don't have a republic, then a majority of political appointees
wearing black robes can take away your rights as they see fit. We're gonna
take a break. You're listening to the David Knight show. Well Guard Goldsmith
says this opinion was one of the most disingenuous and factually empty Scotis decisions I've
ever read. Well, that's because way good way to describe it their Guard.
That's because it was written by a disingenuous, actually an empty person Barrett.
He also says the velvet clad glove of regulatory attack, section two thirty
of the and the FCC all were behind the government pushing the social media sites
to conform the ever present threat. Yeah, you know, yeah, it
is amazing. It truly is amazing, and it's how they twist everything too
right. It is interesting to see that, you know, they would always
use FIS on that section two thirty stuff. FAISO was supposed to stop the
the tracking of people, and yet they use these that they now use it
as the court to give them legal cover to do exactly what the intention was.
The intention was to stop the CIA and the NSA from spying on Americans,
which they had been doing from their inception right after World War Two.
So now they use the PISA Bill and the FISA Court as legal cover to
do what they were always doing. But now they took the thing that was
supposed to prohibit it and they use it as legal cover. That's the way
they always turned this thing around. Brian and Deb McCartney. It is conservative
court, all right. Yeah, that is a big con Jason Barker,
I got several emails in the past twenty four hours about changes to terms of
service in some accounts. I wonder if this decision is why. I don't
know, I don't know. Syrian girl, remember when they were pushing Barrett
as a conservative Catholic mother of a large family. The lies just keep on
coming. I remember that, you know, all of the stuff that was
put out publicly about her, I thought, oh, you know, she's
I was actually I felt like she was a much better possibility of being an
outsider than Kavanaugh because they talked about the fact that, you know, she
I think she didn't go to Georgetown or something like that, which most of
these people have, and so I thought, well, maybe, you know,
there's more of a hope for that. And yet right away she started
making decisions about lockdown and closing churches and stuff. Oh yeah, you know,
here is this woman who's all about family, all about being a Christian
and so forth, all the things that were told, and she's shutting down
churches and voting for that kind of stuff. They're just awful. Don't frag
me. Bro says, how can we be denying women's rights if we don't
know what a woman is? That's right, Well, it's that is Their
big problem is. Then, as I said the other day, you got
the t's versus everybody, including the LGBs, because the t's are at war
with biological women and have been all along a very bitter war with biological women.
And then of course you've got the g's, the gays who said there's
a gay gene. They were saying that everything was biological, so you know,
that's the basis for having homosexual marriage and things like that. But then
the t's come along and say, no, there's nothing biological. It's all
in our minds. Gender is a mental construct, and so they're odds with
the g's. And then when you go the bees, the bees are bisexual.
What does by mean? That means two means there's two sexes. Oh,
the trainees think there's a gazillion of them. It's just it's strange.
I don't know how they well, they just lie, you know, how
do they keep this coalition together? They lie about it? DG eight,
David Trump, POMPEII, Cotton, Tame, Scott, Rubio, Stefanik all
want to prosecute whistleblowers? Yes, how is that draining the swamp? And
all of them are Trump's potential vps. You're absolutely right. Don't frag me
bro So as a judge that doesn't know the history of our founding. What
a POS doesn't know and doesn't care? Yeah, if you're going to ask
somebody the Constitution, just just read it out to them, you know,
just just recite first Amendment. I would think, you know, if I
was going to be a Supreme Court justice, I think I would be able
to at least memorize the Bill of Rights because it's so important. They don't
because it's not important to them. Guard Goldsmith Alito nailed it. He cited
examples, specific and direct thirty four pages of it, and he noted the
overall threat that inspired the changes in social media terms of service quote unquote.
Guard Goldsmith also says this decision is one of the worst than the last half
century. I agree. I agree. And you know, if if you'd
had two votes that switched, if these two Trump judges had gone the right
way, they would have had a five to four majority, because you know,
Roberts is going to go with the squad that's there staring girl. They
are an embarrassment. The worst decision the Founding Father made was the establishment of
the Supreme Court, and many of them saw the danger I pose at the
time. The Supreme Court is the greatest enemy of our constitution has ever faced,
and they continually get away with destroying this country from the inside, tearing
it down constitutional right by right. I agree, we're going to get rid
of this idea of judicial supremacy, and we have to have the only way
to stop this is that the state level. And what are the dynamics of
all this? How did they get away with all this? Well, the
Congress has abdicated its legislative ability to the bureaucracy. And then what's even worse
is that they all pretend that a rule from the bureaucracy doesn't come with due
process or constitutional protector build rights protections. They say, well, that's a
rule, and so whether it's the irs or whether it is the EPA,
or whether it's the ATF, you are guilty and you have to prove your
innocence. That's why they call it civil asset forfeiture when they steal your property
and don't even charge you with a crime, let alone get a conviction on
you. And so you have no protection against successive fines, you have no
presumption of innocence, you have no due process. Because our elected legislators that
were all so worried are we going to have a majority of Republicans or Democrats,
we're also worried about that, Well, they kick everything over to the
bureaucracy, and so we have representation, we have taxation as well as regulation
without representation. And it's been that way for a long time. And then
when you get to Congress and you get to the president, just as we
saw with Trump and DACA, that was a political hot potato. He had
promised people he's going to do something about DACA, that he was going to
end it, maybe even deport the people who were here under DOCA, because
if you stop deferring action, that means that they would deport the people who
were young and who had come here when they were young and come here and
stayed illegally. He didn't want to have to do that, so he kicked
it to the Supreme Court, which again got it all wrong and gave but
gave him legal cover so that he didn't have to do it. He could
pretend that he couldn't do it because the all powerful Supreme Court wouldn't let him.
So we have to have people at the state level who are going to
say, well, Supreme courts had their ruling, let's see them enforce it,
which is what Andrew Jackson said. And he was wrong on the issue
but he was right on the principle when he was talking about the removal of
the cherokey rational lampoon or terms of use, also known here now as slipped
this ever more restrictive and exploitative noose around your subjugate sheeple's next, Yeah,
Guard Goldsmith, The Bartt opinion is insulting to the great Barrington folks, the
concept of free speech and limited federal powers, and it opens the door for
more fascism speech influence Octo spooks says media acting as criminal proxies for criminals embedded
in American government. Absolutely yeah, and searing girl. I'm sure Barrett was
too busy taking care of all of her conservative Catholic children to take out to
take time out to read the evidence refers to amendment infringement. What she's doing?
What these people besides besides not caring where the Constitution says, they don't
give the impression of intellectual heavyweights. They're pretty lightweight in terms of the stuff
that they put out there as well. Somebody who's really come into his own
I think is Clarence Thomas. Thomas and Alito are solid for the most part.
They occasionally get something wrong that or something that I disagree with, but
they've been pretty solid, and there is a big back and forth and a
lot of resentment from and bad blood between Amy Cony Barrett and Clarence Thomas.
And she's got a lot of things wrong. There's some other Supreme Court things
that I might get into later today, but I wanted to move on before
I run out of time to climate stuff. Brandon Bennett, thank you very
much for the tip. I appreciate that, and again I apologize to everybody
for not going through and totaling everything up and updating the gas gage. We're
getting right up to the last minute here, and I really do appreciate everybody
rallying around. As Marty said he was going to match the contributions. It's
just I was exhausted. I needed to get one night where I got more
than six hours of sleep, so I turned in early last night. Older
comments here, we got DG eight David. Unfortunately, ninety plus percent of
the Trump cult will never accept that he did anything wrong in twenty twenty under
COVID Tyrney. That's right. I know. I've had these discussions with people.
I've even had discussions with people face to face who had not listened to
my program. But you know, I try to make same points with them.
They just don't want to hear it. Do not obey says we can't
see beyond the left right paradigm. Stop participating as a collective. Yeah,
Nigete Levin says, it's not a dwopoly, it's monopoly with the WWF.
Spinyah professional wrestling. Well, we have seen the bird flu going for what
we all know is the next thing to shut down meat and day. They've
said it's about shutting down meat and dairy for quite some time. And so
now we have had the we've had the legislator legislature in Denmark. They have
not passed the law, but it has begun the process. And here's the
headline. Flatulent cows, sheep and pigs face the world's first carbon tax in
Denmark. I gotta say, I think there's really only one appropriate response to
this kind of nonsense. I don't want to talk to you no more,
you empty headed animal food troup whopper, I fart in your general directions.
Your mother was a hamster and your father smete of elaborates. Is there someone
else up there we can talk to? No? Now go away, or
I shall talk you a second time. If you do not agree to my
commands, then I shall. Yeah, the farmers in Denmark need to get
themselves coutapult. They don't need to throw cats at them. Let's give them
the real thing there. So look, we're talking about this last night,
and Whistler, who's running the board, said, I thought that it was
about stopping the industrial revolution? Right. Why are they now trying to get
rid of these animals that have always been around? You know? Is that
the car is at the gas range and all these other things that they've been
hectoring us about. It's cows. Seriously, Like I said, you know,
they want to get rid of not just everything in the Industrial Revolution,
they want to get rid of our agrarian society because folks, they want to
get rid of us. The ultimate goal is to starve us, to kill
us. That's what these zero people are all about, all of these agendas,
zero this and zero that. It's all about shutting us down. Wessler
says, they're taxing farting cows, but I think it'll be the farmers who
pay it. Do they think calling a tax on cows sounds better than taxing
farmers? Yeah? I guess they have absolutely no shame. They don't mind
people talking about a fart tax. The absurdity of this stuff. It is
Monty python will one. We ought to just catapult the cows right back at
the legislature. That's kind of what they're doing. When you look at the
riots that are breaking out in Kenya, it was eco austerity and they said,
we're not having any more of this stuff. What is going to be
the tipping point or the cows? Will the cows be the tipping point?
Caut tipping. People have always had these, always had these animals. Why
are they pretending that this is now somehow an existential threat to us? What
an absurdity, just like this bird flu stuff, And they're incessant focus on
cattle and Redfield. Trump's propaganda meister out there saying, oh, it's inevitable,
it's going to happen to humans, and it's inevitable that's going to be
twenty five to fifty percent casualties. Well, then you know, imagine that
if people are going to buy that, then we're going to do something even
more draconian than what they did with COVID, because COVID didn't need to come
anywhere close to it. We had respiratory casualties and that stuff about one tenth
of a percent, just like with flew and it was the hospital protocols that
was killing people. As of twenty thirty, Danish livestock farmers will face a
punitive financial imposition of excuse me, forty three dollars per ton of carbon dioxide.
And so, I guess my question was how many unicorn farts make up
a ton of carbon? Well, they've got an answer quite frankly, they've
already thought this through. They said that a Danish cow amidst six tons of
carbon per year. But you need next need to find out is that laden
or unladen A tax will increase and more than double. It'll go up to
one hundred and eight dollars by twenty thirty five. So by twenty thirty it's
going to be forty three dollars. Then they're going to rapidly take it up
to one hundred and eight by twenty thirty five. However, because of an
income tax deduction of sixty percent, the actual cost per ton will start at
seventeen dollars and increase in twenty thirty. So okay, so it's a tax,
but then we give you a tax deduction. Is that acceptable? Well,
actually, they've already tried this in New Zealand. New Zealand, where
by the way, they have more sheep than they do people. They have
a lot of deer there, so much of that. I think they've got
now more deer than they do sheep because they have massive exports of venison to
Germany. But when they tried that with the New Zealand farmers, they got
the law passed, and then the New Zealand farmers undid it. None of
this stuff is written in stone, none of it is in concrete. We
don't have to obey any of this stuff. You look at what happened,
and you know this is in Denmark and neighboring Netherlands. They threw Mark Ruta
out. Now, of course, you know where does a disgraced politician globalist
go to NATO. He's going to be the head of NATO, so he's
going to still be at war with everybody. We'll take a big step closer
and becoming climate neutral. In twenty forty five, they said, folks,
this is utter nonsense. And you can spell that with t's or with d's.
Either way, it is absolute garbage and I no longer want to talk
to you people about about any of this stuff. This is, this is
doesn't rise to the level even of debate. Just got to shut them down.
Denmark will be the first country in the world introduce a real CO two
tax on an unreal threat. No, that's they're saying that it's a real
CO two tax on agriculture, and we hope that other countries will follow suit.
Again when New Zealand did, it was put in when they had that
globless jab Senda Arden and she's gone. But she wanted to tax the and
get rid of farms. Sounds like that's what you want to do. Yep,
yep, that's what I want to do. She's the one that it
sounds like you're gonna have two classes of people vaccinate, non vaccinated. Yep,
yep, that's what it is. Yep, yep. Well, we've
got two classes of people, people like her and then the rest of us
who, for at least the time being enough, people are just passively going
along and ignoring what is really going on with this stuff. And when we
look at this, what is the matter with these people? They're now looking
at uh, we don't need cows. We don't need meat, and we
don't need dairy, and we don't need eggs, and we don't need chickens.
You know what we need. We need skin for the robots, full
terminator stuff. And these people are absolutely insane and big bucks. This is
coming from Harvard University, so you know this is being funded by the military
industrial complex on the people like that. Don't frag me, bro So here's
the deal. I'll spend twenty four hours in a closed garage with a cow.
Bill Gates can spend twenty four hours in a close garage with a running
car. Let's see who walks out in the morning. Yeah, kW hay
sixty eight, says Scotis is a sixty three, but it isn't conservative.
Trump's picks were as awful as he is. Yeah, Brandon Bennett, my
Trump or dad thinks I'm a Democrat while he swallows all the excrement from the
New York Democrat idol. Yeah that's true. Yeah people, Oh, you
you're a libertal Democrat. You don't like Trump? Con think, says tonight's
debate drinking game. Take a shot every time one of the candidates puts forward
an incoherent sentence, or if you really want to get trunk. Every time
Trump refers to himself, it will all be about him, everything about it
will be him. Better get some extra bottles and get the ambulance service on
call right ready to pick you up, because you're going to have alcohol poisoning
if you play that game. So you know, what is the problem with
these people? What is the problem with darpar and government? Right? These
people, it's the same groups of people, the technocracy that wants to destroy
our cars, our homes, our air conditioning, our food supply, and
yet they want faces and skin for robots. As a matter of fact,
this is what it looks like. Look at this is really creepy. Here
it is smiling for you. Oh, there you go. It's got some
little manufactured eyes in there. Yeah, they've managed to create a cultured mix
of human skin cells grown in a collagen scaffold and placed on top of a
three D printed resin base. Are human like robots something that we should aim
for? Well, PC gamer thinks, yeah, maybe they said. These
staring eyes, why does it have eyes? This rictus grimace, this stretching
skin just made me feel rather queasy and I'm more and tad unnerved, says
a writer. I wasn't the only one in the office to fight the urge
to torch it all before there was any chance of it being wrapped around a
metal skeleton and then romping around with murderous intent. Leaving aside the nightmare inducing
robot faces, there's some really good science going on behind all this. They
say, oh, well it's for science, then yeah, absolutely support that.
At the moment, mechanical actuators were required to make the face, But
the authors of the research paper behind the studies say that if we substitute them
with cultured muscle tissue, it presents an intriguing prospect in the realization of a
higher degree of biommetics. You know, we're back to where Michael Crichton was
with Jurassic Park. Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should,
right. That was the whole point of that book. If artificial skin
and flesh can be perfected, then it's not just the world of that can
benefit, but also cosmetics. Cosmetics. Are we going to have celebrities that
look like this? I think we've already got a lot of celebrities that look
kind of like that. We've had so much plastic surgery and pharmaceutical research into
drugs administered via the skin. These people can't come up with any reason to
do this. Oh, well, we could have plastic surgery, or we
could have no way to administer drugs into the skin. You got to do
a little bit better than that. Is that examining the correlation between facial muscle
contractions and resulting facial expression can offer insights into the physiological aspects of emotion,
leading to new exploration and the treatment of diseases such as facial paralysis, surgery.
And the terminator was designed to help little old ladies go across the street.
What is the Department of the Defense Advanced Research Projects doing right? Defense
Advanced Research Projects DARPA. Why are they involved in this kind of stuff?
Why are they involved in mind control and brain control and all the rest of
this. Well, it's a rhetorical question. These people are monsters, and
they're creating monsters, and they're doing it and getting obscenely rich doing it off
of us. They are using this while the city sleeps. As Chicago said
in their lyrics, men are scheming new ways to kill us and tell us
dirty lies. Let's have at least one technological advancement that doesn't masquerade as a
fellow human being. Can we do that? They said, just leave the
robots metal. James Cameron is no mere filmmaker, but he is a genuine
profit of the future. They said, no, you want a profit of
the future. You want to know where this is all leading. Go read
Ted Kaczynski's Unibomber manifesto. He laid it all out there, just like James
Cameron, but a little bit more explicitly. And then we go to the
Paris Olympics. The Olympic village will not allow air conditioning there, and so
the US is going to bring its own air conditioning units byac because they said
that air conditioning is a very high priority for its athletes to reach peak performance.
Well, you know they're going to Paris, but they're not going to
play by the Paris Climate Accord rules. What would that entail. Well,
if they played by the same rules of the Paris Climate Accord, that would
mean that, yes, the US would still not be allowed to have air
conditioning, but athletes from China and India would because that's what they do under
the Pairs Climate Accord. They take the most populous countries on Earth and let
them have as many power plants without any cleaning or filtering or anything. It
could be as dirty as they want, and they can make as many of
them as they want, while the rest of us have to get rid of
ours. So if they were to play in the Paris Olympics by those rules,
only the Chinese and the Indians would get air conditioning. Everybody else would
have to sweat it out. And then we have this from the Guardian as
they are pushing the lies about global warming, the headline why pregnant people are
more at risk during heat waves. Pregnant people? Who would that be?
Yeah, again, we're back to Brown Jackson and the pregnant people think that
she wrote in her decision. It's ridiculous and it's especially everything about this Guardian
article is ridiculous. The fear mongering, the non science of their sky is
falling, the climate change stuff. I mean, it's all chicken little,
isn't it. The bird flu is chicken little, The heat is chicken little.
They're about to have an election on the fourth of July next week in
the UK. Labor is way out ahead, it's about two to one over
the Conservative Party. I saw they had a debate. There's a lot of
different parties running in the election, and of course they are pulling in the
two top positions, but it's pretty much a dead heat statistically between the Conservatives
and Reform. They should have at least had a three way there. Can
you imagine if it had Nigel Farage on with Rishi Sunak and Kirstnama Starmer,
that would have been something to say. He would have eaten their lunch for
sure. But now Labor, which again is the favorite to win about two
to one, where both Conservatives and Reform are. If they were Conservatives that
get out of the way, Reform might be able to win this thing,
but Labor looks like it's going to win. They're going to create an Office
of net zero, an Office of net zero. Just call it the Department
of Nihilism, because that's what this is. They're going to push the green
agenda. As Daily Skeptic says, I'm sorry, this is bite part in
the mad dash towards eliminating carbon emissions in Britain. Labor Party leader care Starmer's
transition team, headed by a former top bureaucrat and chief of staff for Starmer,
will look to establish an office of net zero, so you know,
I have zero tolerance for all this zero nonsense that is out there. Zero
is just a code word for destroying everything. They want to destroy all of
our material wealth, They want to destroy all of our food, They want
to destroy all of our liberty, want to destroy all of us. It's
ultimately about depopulation. They use zero to strip us. And yet it's these
emperors who have no clothes. When are we going to stop this stuff?
And it's told them to go pound sand and Richie Sunak has already established the
Department for Energy Security and net zero last year. So again Conservatives are there
before even Labor. The only difference is that their office has an oversight role,
while the envisioned Office of zero by Labor will make their office more active
in policy. So there you go, the unit party just like we have
here, the only difference being in the speed at which they put it out
there. Whichever party is in there first, usually it would be the left
that would move things forward, and then the conservatives will make that the new
normal. Right, they will make that the new baseline. It's like a
ratcheting effect. You're never going to go back. But we're going to lock
that in. Okay, you guys raise the minimum wage up to here.
Well, we're not going to move the minimum wage when we get in backwards.
We're not going to get rid of the minimum wage. We're just going
to oppose any increase in the minimum wage from this point on. But we'll
leave everything that you did in place. That's always the way that it is.
It's a ratcheting effect. In this particular case, it was the Conservatives
who did it. First. They create a net zero bureaucracy, and then
the left gets in and they will make it more involved in policy. This
unit party approach has been challenged by the pro energy approach of Nigel Frauda's Reform
UK, which has vowed to cut all green subsidies, all crony capitalism,
which they claim could save the taxpayers thirty billion dollars or thirty billion euros rather
per year the next twenty five years. But see what's going to happen with
that is that you know, the people who are going to get taxed.
There's thirty billion euros are I'm sorry not euros are pounds? People are going
to have to pay that for each of them. It's going to be thousands
of dollars perhaps, and that's a lot of money, but it's going to
be spread out over perre time. The people are going to fight tooth and
nail for this are the people of the few people who are going to get
the thirty billion pounds they will, They stand to have this, they've got
the biggest incentive, and they're going to fight the hardest for this. And
this is why government continues to increase. Well look at this and it's like,
well, you know, we got to stop this. This is unjust
and it's corrupt, and it's going to make the government worse and more centralized
and stronger and all these other things. But you know, I've got all
these things that I've got to do, and you know, it's what is
it going to cost me. If it was going to take out your business,
it's going to shut down your farm or something, yeah, you do
something about it. But if it's only going to raise your taxes, most
people don't take the time to do it. But the people who are going
to get the money from everybody, from everybody, they are going to fight
tooth and nail to get that stuff. Farage the Reform Party, not Forage
but his party said net zero. It is pushing up bills, it's damaging
British industries like steel, and it's making us less secure. We can protect
our environment with more tree planting, more recycling and less single use plastics.
See this is the bad part though, Even the Reform Party is out there
playing by the rules. And Christopher Monckton, I'll get to this coming up
here. Christopher Moncktin says, if you're going to play by their rules,
you've lost already. So you don't use their labels, you don't let them
frame the debate, you don't try to craft a policy that is going to
be setting on top of their shifting sands. You've got to get to bedrock
foundation of truth. That means you don't play this emission games. Well,
you know this would actually be fewer emissions if we were to do this.
We must not impoverish ourselves in pursuit of unaffordable, unachievable Global CO two targets,
they say. Reform is also called for fast track licenses for companies to
drill for natural gas and oil in the North Sea. The party would also
open up shale gas fracking test sites for two years and then pursue major production
after safety and local compensation schemes are implemented. Frauger's party went on to call
for a push toward clean nuclear energy, particularly with the creation of new small,
modular nuclear reactors in Britain. Of course, that would be the move
to try to make common cause with the people who are standing to make a
lot of money. Even the Hillary Clinton people and the Arnold Schwarzenegger people and
Larry Fink, all of them are now pushing towards small nuclear reactors. So
it's kind of a no brainer to throw that carrot out to them. Corporations
that concede the science are doomed, Christopher Monckton. And here's an example,
he says, by and it's not just corporations, it's us as well.
If we're going to concede this quote unquote science, we're doomed. If you
concede that there is a virus that it leaked out of the lamb, oh,
we got to do something about it. Maybe that's maybe we should take
the vaccine. Maybe we should rush this thing out. You accept their lies
and their false premises. If you start fretting about CO two or nitrogen or
plastics, kind of word for you have plastics. If you start following that,
how can we minimize that stuff? You've already lost by three votes to
two, he says. The UK Supreme Court ruled last week in one hundred
page judgment that the Surrey County Council, in granting planning consent to UK Oil
and Gas for oil production at horse Hill Surrey, had neither requested nor considered
in their assessment an estimate of the CO two emissions from third parties combusting the
three point three million barrels of oil. But horse Hill Field might produce over
its lifetime. And so now the company says, now they've lost the Supreme
Court. They said, well, we'll work closely with the Surrey County Council
directify the situation. We will do an amendment to the environmental impact Assessment or
whatever. We'll have a new retrospective application, will try again. But he
says, you know, if you're going to play this game, you're going
to lose. He said, out of the one hundred pages of the judgment,
there was only one page that discussed the facts, only one page out
of one hundred. He said. The reason is that, as usual,
the corporations behind the project did not dare to argue against the science, don't
question any assumptions about CO two or global warming or any of that. No,
Instead, they tamely accepted the party line. As a direct result of
their failure to get to grips with either the physics or even the economics of
global warming, they lost the case. The judgment made no attempt to calculate
how much global warming the ten million tons of CO two emitted by Horsehill Project
over its lifetime would cause. He said, So, let's do something in
this case that nobody did, least of all the judges. He said,
Let's do the math. He said, So, let's start with a ten
point seven million tons of CO two emitted either directly or indirectly by the project.
But this value must be reduced right at the outset, because, as
the judgment says, if the oil at horse Hill is not extracted, some
forty percent of the unextracted oil will be extracted somewhere else. So again,
knock that out, and then we take a look at the mass of the
atmosphere, he said, according to NASA in twenty twenty two, that is
five point one times ten to the fifteen tons, And he says, in
the current CO two concentration as measured is four hundred and twenty seven parts per
million. Therefore, the total mass of CO two in the air, and
he works this out as the number of tons it is, and so he
says, the reduction in CO two concentration by not proceeding with a horse Hill
project would be this number. I'm not going to read all the numbers to
you because you can't follow that when we're doing this verbally. Anyway, he
says, the radiative forcing from a change in CO two concentration would be this
number. And if we want to convert watts per square meter to warming a
beta, then we do this. The bottom line, he says, that
is before we allow for the fact that the decatal rate of global warming in
the third of a century since the IPCC in nineteen ninety has been half of
what it was then and still is predicted. So half of what they predicted.
So let's make that less than one three hundred thousandth of a degree,
or just one third of one percent of the one to one thousandth of a
degree that would be abated if the UK actually attained net zero emissions by twenty
fifty, which it will not. In other words, he runs out all
these different fact Let's just take a look at how much CO two are we
talking about. It's nothing. And even if you run their estimates, which
are consistently wrong, use their math and show that it is going to be
less than one three hundred thousandth of a degree change, it's absolutely ridiculous and
we just need to put some cows in the catapults and shoot them. At
this point, scarcely a day passes in the UK without the Met Office announcing
another record temperature. But how many of its weather stations are next to airports
and solar farms? He says. Every day the Met Office This is from
Chris Morrison publishes the highest recorded temperature for a number of areas across the four
countries in the United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland every day.
Many of the same sites feature at the top of the various local lists.
Last week in Scotland, the measuring station at Edinburgh Botanic Gardens, Glasgow
and others featured four days out of seven, along with another one that was
up for three days. In England, he throw in Hull Park, Hull
East Park, We're joined by Killowin on four days, along with Usk,
Durham and Pershore College on three. He said, could it be a coincidence
that on such a large island the hottest days more often than not occur in
very specific geographical locations. How can it be that it's always the same for
three or four days out of seven, the highest temperature is always in the
same places and nowhere else, right, he said, just a few places
are so blessed. Well, it's not a coincidence, he said. The
obvious clue is if you look at Heathrow and Hull Park East. Heathrow,
of course is an airport, and that picture right there, let's goll it
down a little bit more so that red dot, that's where the temperature reading
is. It's right there next to a massive solar farm of heat island that
is right there. So you know, when we talk about man made global
warming, could it be that what is man made about it is our temperature
readings. Could it be that what's man made about it is that they put
their thumb on the scale, get what they want, and then even when
they put it up on the maps. I've seen several articles talking about how
the BBC has changed the colors. They made everything more red, you know,
so you have the highest temperatures. Oh they're really blood red. But
even the ones that they pull them down, you know, and then never
get off of anything less red than orange to scare people, make them think
how hot it is, and they showed the colors that they used to use.
It's just every bit of it is about propaganda. Someone of a suspicious
mind this article might think that they're deliberate adding these junk sites simply to make
current UK temperatures artificially higher. Yeah, someone might think that if they had
a suspicious mind. I think I did. Eric, Thank you very much
for the tip. Thank you very much. Jim's Jim Z seven says they
always violate their own rules. How many gigawatts of energy are wasted by the
NFL, by Major League Baseball, by NBA games, that's right, And
by CBDC, by the NSA, by the CIA, by their data sites,
by their constant surveillance everywhere. I wonder how much energy they could say,
but just getting rid of all these cameras that they're putting up everywhere.
But then of course it's the big computer centers where they store everything that everybody
does on the internet, storing it for the day in which they have quantum
computing and will have the ability to quickly go through and correlate everything and completely
profile each and every one of us Risha. And they already tax farmers for
every single head of livestock. It's bs. They want to put them out
of business. That's the thing, you know again. It's also though about
killing us all because if it was just about the money, people like Bill
Gates will be out there buying up every single farm now he's bought a lot
of farm land up, not going anything on it. They just want to
shut down our food supply. Tomic dogs so it COWI emits six tons of
carbon per year. That's thirty three pounds of dung and gas. I would
argue that minor has value and it's not polluting. And I would argue that
this is something that has always gone on. And this is if you're trying
to tell us that we've got some new existential problem. Why didn't that Why
wasn't that a problem during the agrarian period or all through the Industrial revolution.
This is nothing that's new, you know again, They got that, oh
we've got to get rid of the cars. The cars are destroying everything,
and the factories are destroying it. No now, now they're coming after cattle
that have always been there. If we didn't have ac where I live,
says Atomic Dog, there'd be a lot of dead people. Yeah. And
you can even see that when takes a power out in Florida to see people.
A lot of elderly people in nursing homes die from that, just like
for years after. Germany was one of the first places to start ramping up
the price of energy with all these green mandates, and so retired people who
were on a pension cutting afford to pay for it. So they were shutting
it down and they were getting sick and dying from the cold. So you
know that's the thing, extreme cold, extreme heat, And it's not just
about the quality of life, it's even about life expectancy. Cheap available energy
affects the quality and the quantity of life. Ap rumble seat. They will
tax us next on exhalation of each breath. Pay to exist or else,
Yeah, Atomic Dog. Our Electric company offered free smart thermostats. They failed
to tell people that they could control them. People started coming home to eighty
five degree homes. That program was scrapped. What a shocker. Yeah,
divided and that's their intention to you know, with electric cars, they want
to use your electric car as a battery for their grid. They'll tell you
when and if you can drive. Divided States CBDC will be the end of
freedom. When the state controls whether or not you can spend your money.
They have suspended. They have you suspended by the throat unless you are self
sufficient. It's absolutely right. We're going to take a quick break and we
will be right back. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Well,
as they add solar and they add wind everywhere. Of course, the follow
up to that is that they have to add battery energy storage sites, and
you know, they tend to have fires. I talked about this briefly,
but I didn't show the pictures of it. In South Korea. This is
what it looked like when a lithium battery plant caught fire. At least sixteen
people died in it. It's very difficult, of course, to put out
these very you know, radical fires that are there. They have. Here's
a news report about their efforts to put this out. Now, a large
fire is burning at a lithium battery plant in South Korea. One person's confirmed
dead and at least twenty one others are unaccounted for. More than one hundred
and forty firefighters have been sent to the factory to try to stop the spread
of the blaze, but fire Achie say it's impossible for cruise to enter because
battery cells are constantly exploding. Let's get more on this and talk to Unis
Kim so, he joins us on the phone from just south of the capital
Soul unit. So this sounds like a pretty big fire. At what more
can you tell us? Right, Darren? The Hassan Fire Department and holding
their first briefing on this blaze, confirming that the fires first casualty, and
they are also trying to assertain how many people are trapped inside, with the
twenty one unreachable at this hour, as you noticed, so that casually count
will lightly creep up. Firefighters have been struggling to even get inside of the
three story structure as the blaze raging since this morning. Is believed to hold
tens of thousands of lythion ion batteries, which burns hotter and for longer than
traditional batteries. Yeah, As a matter of fact, the numbers are thirty
five thousand battery sells on just the second floor where the batteries are inspected and
packaged, with more stored elsewhere. Now, if we're going to back up
the grid, we're going to have massive battery energy storage sites. And if
you don't want to see this happening in your neighborhood where there's going to be
trees and maybe your home, we got to do something about these idiots who
are doing that, and who have absolutely no concern about the cost of electricity.
They'll just pass it on. Of course, nothing is too expensive to
save the planet, right, we don't care about that. Here in Tennessee,
the TVA is talking about putting in these big battery energy storage sites,
these things that are put together by Musk, and they don't care what it's
going to cost people, no concern. They don't care about the risk of
fires either. About one hundred workers around the premises at the time, at
least twenty one dead. I should have gotten an update on this, because
this came out a couple of days ago, came out at the beginning of
the week, and I have had it here and haven't talked about it.
I wanted to show that before we went any further. They point out in
this article from the BBC they said a lithium fire can re act intensively with
water, so firefighters had to use dry sand to extinguish the blaze. We
need to tell these people when they say they want to put a battery energy
storage site in our area, we need to tell them to pound sand before
the thing catches fire. Because we be pounding sand afterwards. It took several
hours to get it under control. Lithium batteries are risk of exploding if they're
damage are overheated. While a fire can be extinguished, it remains at risk
of reigniting without warning due to a chemical reaction. Yeah, they're like the
joke birthday candles. They keep relighting and we've seen this over and over again.
We talk about electric vehicles that catch fire, and they use amazing amount
of resources try to shut this stuff down. They finally get it on something
and take it to the junkyard, think that it's out, and it starts
to catches fire again. A couple of days later, a Green Party leader
admits that she has a gas boiler, Oh the shame, instead of a
heat pump that amazing. Now, it's just hypocrisy. They want nothing for
you. They will have everything, but you're the one who gets nothing about
this. And so when we look at this, the approach that they're taking,
it's always the same stuff. No meat, no dairy, no cows,
no, no conveniences that you have in your home. Either. They
have to shut everything. Everything is going to be zeroed out, and we
should have zero tolerance for this. Brandon Bennett says, I wonder is that
David picking a guitar or is it samples? No, that's actually me playing
Well, it's I guess it's a bit of a bit of both. In
a sense. What happens is when you get these instruments, it's not it's
not a loop that I'm putting in there. Uh. And so what it
is is you get different instruments. It might be a harp in this particular
case, an Irish harp that you're just listening to, or a flute and
you play it with a keyboard. Now the problem is, unless you've got
a breath controller, which I don't have, you have to go back in
you can play. Some of them are smart enough to are starting to get
to the point where it can read the way that you're playing. If you
play like really short, I'm sorry, they'll put in staccato or stock at
tissimo or something like that really short. But many times you have to go
in with some of the different types of instruments, depending on how the instrument
is set up, and you have to. They'll they'll record these instruments and
they'll take a particular instrument and they'll have people play all these different notes and
they'll have them play it at different volumes because it may sound very different when
you play it loudly and then when you play it soft, and then they
will have them play long sustained notes, they'll have them play very short notes
and all that type of thing. And so it's kind of back and forth
of trying to get from one articulation to another to make it sound right.
And sometimes that can be done in the way that you play, or sometimes
you have to do it after the fact if they have the stuff that's there.
So it's really it's really playing the different pieces, different parts, one
at a time to put the stuff in there. That's really the way that
it works. I had somebody else talk about this, you know, we
had we had the piece that kind of stumped everybody for a while, and
Will wrote this to me. He says, well, even though I was
stumped, he said it was a lot of fun. This should be something
you do on a regular basis. It adds some beauty and joy and levity
to the podcast. By the way, I do have the score for the
Cowboys the suite. The segment you played is sort of buried in the middle
of the score, and that's right. And I got hung up on the
main title for getting that interlude. The opening title seems to borrow from Aaron
Coplan's Rodeo. Yeah, that's true, you know, just like the Empire
Strikes Back has some similarities to Mars from Gustav Holtz. So as anyway,
many thanks for your hard work. Although we're unable to donate this time,
you are in our prayers. I really do appreciate that, because it is
God who ultimately provides. We really do appreciate if people are able to do
that. But that's why we want to leave it as a way that people
can listen to it for free, if you know, if somebody is donating,
we want to the one thing that I would like to be able to
do that I can't do cleanly. We do it for the people on Subscribe
Star. We give them the audio podcast without any commercials. But you know
the way that a lot of the services do it, like Pandora. You
can listen and have commercials, or you can pay a monthly fee and you
get it commercial free. Technical issues have kept us from figuring out how to
exactly do that. But that's really where I would like to go, but
we don't want to put it behind a complete paywall. So we're gonna take
a quick break and I'll play the Cowboys the Yellowstone thing here. This is
from John Williams soundtrack for The Cowboys. We'll be right back defending the American
Dream. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Well, Johnny Freedom writes,
the green agenda is going to destroy the environment, absolutely truly. Sunset
like the strategy to leave the dead trees to start fires. Well, the
first time I saw that, Even before the massive devastation that happened near Austin,
close to where we lived, they had a state park there that had
a lot of pine trees had been planted as part of FDR's make work projects
back in the depression and they had grown to really nice forest and just before
we moved there, they had a fire, and because they did not get
rid of the dead trees and just left them there as fuel, it burned
almost one hundred percent of the forest down. It truly was amazing the devastation,
and then spread on to private lands, killing cattle, destroying homes,
that type of thing. But prior to that, as we saw the picture
there of Yellowstone a trip that we took out Yellowstone with a family back in
I think it was two thousand and two, they'd had a big fire to
even had threatened the Yellowstone Lodge. I don't know if they don't here,
for that's the name of it, but it's this lodge and one of the
first things that they built in Yellowstone, massive timbers and this log lodge that
was there, and it nearly took that out and they were able to save
it and get the fire away from it. But we're driving along and it
was nice, cool weather, and we rolled the windows down and we're just
smelling the pines and then all of a sudden, oom, you hit this
land, this line right as we got onto government land, and it was
just devastated with a forest fire. Prior to that, it was the private
land where people had been taking care of it, and then it got into
that saw it over and over again. Went to Oregon on a reporting trip
with Travis and we talked to a logger who had had his private land destroyed
by the negligence of the federal government. And this is something that I was
told about by my uncle who was a forestry He said, the Forestry Department
University Missouri and Columbia, and he was telling me about this in the seventies
and what was going to happen to it, And so we've seen that all
along. Jason Barker says, the issue with lithium ion batteries is that they
can produce very high current so that when they short out, they go into
thermal runaway. No putting them out. Well, you know, it's just
this unproven technology and in a market place, unless this is being coerced and
forced down our throats as it is being done, it's the technology that would
not be used. You know, people will be taking a look at some
other technologies. Every technology has got issues with it. They need to be
solved. But we're only allowed to go one direction. Notice that right.
They don't want to do anything with hydrogen electric cars, for example, which
have no emissions. Either they put out a little bit of water vapor,
but they don't want to build an infrastructure with it. And they discourage in
many different ways people doing anything, whether they don't subsidize it, push it
like they do the evs. And I think the reason for that is because
they want everybody on the grid. That's why they're focusing on this EV technology
that people are not that happy with. They want to keep you on the
grid. But you know, as we're talking about the neglect and the devastation
that is done by their policies where they don't care about the environment, even
though they call themselves environmentalists, it's really more of a religion for them,
and it's not about stewardship. You know. Used to that was another thing
that my uncle always talked about and said, yeah, we just always talk
about stewardship and conservation taking care of them land. These radical environmentalists, it's
like this religious thing with them. Don't touch it. It's sacred right.
And you know, we are put here. You know, God has put
together an amazingly complex world, and you know, night after night. It
pours out speech, but it doesn't say anything but the you can see creation.
You can see that it's designed. You can see how complex and complementary
all these different systems are that God has put together. And you don't need
to be told that it speaks for itself speaks silently. And all these people
worship it as if it somehow came together by chance, and so it's very
special. You know, don't don't touch it at all. That's the that's
the new age superstition. It really is. You know that the sacred earth
gaya that you must bow down to be careful, you know, don't leave
a footprint there. It's not about This is a very different approach than what
we get out of the Bible. That God has created this, He's built
it, he sustains it. But we are here to work it, to
till it, to make it sustainable, and to maintain it. You know,
we're kind of the maintenance crew for what God has created. They don't
look at it like that at all. Soaker Joe Too says, there is
no such thing as self sufficient. If you don't pay your taxes, they'll
seize your property. If you don't submit to the new money system, you
won't be able to pay your taxes. Well, again, I think that
it is. I think that if we were to do something locally, I
think it really would make a difference. But it has to be a lot
of people who are awakening to this, or you have to keep a low
profile. One guy that I knew back in North Carolina said, well,
if it all hits the fan, I know how to survive on my own.
I can go without any fingerprint. And he says, they'll never find
me. So I mean that's one way to look at it. In terms
of being self sufficient, you'd have to have absolutely nothing. I guess,
don't frag me, bro will We will all have to make a choice as
to what hill we're willing to die on, especially when they collapse the system
and force biochip implants. That's right, there will be a point, and
you know we've reached that point in the Netherlands, in New Zealand other places
like that. The farmers said, okay, that's enough, that's enough.
You see it with the farmers, you see it with the truckers. You're
going to see it with people who actually are the ones that we really rely
on, that do the real work, that do the heavy lifting, that
do the real stuff. Everybody else is you know, on top of that
and maybe being paid more than those people who are doing the vital stuff.
But they are the foundational thing. They can bring it all to a halt.
They really can't. Atomic dog. I know. Dave's an engineer.
He understands the amazing amount of potential a lithium battery has. I've seen these
batteries short and act at like a solid rocket propellant. Wow, impressive but
dangerous. Yeah, it is true, it is amazing and when you look
at the power and electricity. I remember working on my car in the foot
well. I was doing I think it was stereo stuff or something that was
in high school, and I had not disconnected the battery when I was working,
and I shorted something out there and it's big flash in my eyes and
just vaporized some metal there and I'm thinking, wait a minute, that was
only that was in high school. And it's like but that was like twelve
voltes and I can put my fingers on it. But when you get something
that's zero resistance, the battery has a lot of power involved in it.
So yeah, the lithium batteries. I've never played around with it things,
but I imagine it is really something to behold. Is China hiding how much
gold it really has? It's an article from Michael Mahari and Tony's not going
to be joining us today, but I do want to talk about that.
I do want to talk about it as an excellent article on RT is not
written by what was written by somebody for them, but it really goes into
what's going on with the petro dollar and the reserve status of the US.
But is China hiding how much gold it really has? The fact that the
People's Bank of China, the central Bank, didn't buy gold in May is
certainly interesting, but it hardly counts as earth shaking news. Standing pat for
one month doesn't mean that China has stopped buying gold, as some news outlets
have framed it. Before that news, China had bought gold for eighteen straight
months, and it ranked as the biggest central bank gold buyer in twenty twenty
three. Officially, their central bank added more than three hundred tons of gold
to its reserves during the buying spree. Many analysts have long thought that China
has far more gold than it officially reports. Jim Rickards pointed out on Mesa's
Daily back in twenty fifteen that many analysts believe that China keeps several thousand tons
of gold off the books and a separate entity called the State Administration a foreign
exchange. They call it. That spells safe. They keep it in a
safe. Chen Long is the founder and lead economist for a company called Plinim.
He starts by pointing out that Chinese Central Bank gold purchases are a drop
in the bucket compared to the country's gold imports. The country imported over fourteen
hundred tons of gold in twenty twenty three. This despite the fact that China
ranks as the world's largest gold producer. Chinese mines dug up three hundred and
seventy five tons of gold and twenty twenty three that they admit. Yeah,
and that's one of the things that Tony and I talked about many times,
the fact that gold, how much gold they have, and all the different
countries they guard that as a secret more so than they do the number and
the location of their nuclear weapons. Why is that? And of course the
amount of gold that they are adding to secretly that they mine. They're not
going to talk about that either. In other words, there's a lot of
gold flowing into China and the country exports very little of it. Only a
handful of commercial banks hold licenses to import gold due to the central banks type
regulation of the market, so that allows them to kind of get a you
know, ballpark guess as to what is going on with the central bank.
When you dig into the numbers, total official gold holdings by the cent bank,
retail buyers, and the big commercial banks only rose by four hundred and
thirty one tons last year. Total gold imports and production came in at seventeen
hundred and seventy five tons, So that's a gap of more than thirteen hundred
tons. Over the last two years, there have been about twenty seven hundred
tons of gold unaccounted for. So where did that go? Long sided is
common to see gaps between these figures, but they're usually within a few hundred
tons at most. Such a huge gap like this is rare. So where
is it? How do we account for the missing goal? Well, he
said, there's three possibilities. Number one, the Central Bank in China could
have bought more gold than it reported. They've massively increased their goal position.
If they have it, may want to withhold a full disclosure in order to
avoid shocking the market. Second possibility is China's Sovereign Wealth Fund holds some of
that missing gold. And a third possibility is that their numbers have been fudged.
In other words, like most governments, they don't tell you the truth
or the whole truth. Chinese commercial banks may have overstayed the reduction in their
gold holdings while household gold purchases were understated. So we don't really know what
is happening with that, but we do know as we look at the United
States, we gone from Fort Knox that had a lot of gold, and
we're backing the US dollar to the petro dollar. As people realized that that
was fraudulent, that were lying to people about that. It's interesting all the
talk about what happened to the petro dollar. The Atlantic did a retraction.
It was widely reported over the last couple of weeks. Oh yeah, this
petro dollar agreement disappeared. Well, as this RTA article points out, that
agreement was a piece of fiction. The spurious reports appeared to have originate in
India or in crypto website investment websites. There was an official agreement between the
US and Saudi Arabia that was signed in June of nineteen seventy four, and
another secret one that was reached later that year, according to which the Saudis
were promised military aid in exchange for recycling their oil proceeds in the US treasuries.
The deal whereby Riod would sell its oil and dollars was informal and there
was no expiration date. That's what I was saying from the beginning. It's
like, well, I know, okay, there's this agreement that you know,
we give them weapons and we give them protection and they do all the
trading in US dollars to help us to be the reserve global currency. But
I've never seen the agreement, and nobody had any specifics about it. Turns
out that there wasn't literally an agreement. It really grew up kind of de
facto and organic as a lot of it was, and it was, but
it was based on this defense agreement, it said. This fit, however,
points to an underlying truth of the petro dollar has entered a long twilight
from which there will be no return. No other economic arrangement has done more
to ensure American pre eminence over the last half century, and so it is
being very heavily targeted and attacked by Russia, by China, by everybody who
is an enemy of what Karl Rove says is an American empire. So all
the people who want to take down the empire, they're all focused on this.
It's going to have massive economic consequences for all of us if we don't
have at least a foot or something outside of the system. It's ultimately America
is in ability an unwillingness to maintain this backing that is gradually dooming the system.
In exchange for Green to sell their oil and dollars, Saudi Arabia became
a protectorate of the US military. Many people have seen this deal as a
kind of godfather thing, making you an offer that you can't refuse. As
we talked about before Kissinger Slessinger, it was a divinsive secretary. They openly
talked about what they might do to take over the oil fields in case these
in case we Opek tried to strangle the West, and as this RT article
says, it apparently has worked out well for the saud East because, unlike
a lot of Arabic oil producing nations. There hasn't been a civil war there,
there hasn't been a color revolution that the US does with their regime change
operations. But now at this point, when you look at what the American
government has done and what they're doing right now in terms of interest rates,
they compare it to Paul Voker, very very high interest rates and drove the
US into a deep recession and made everybody the lives a lot more difficult.
And they said it showed at that point in time, he really strengthened it
when we got into the late seventies because he showed that he was willing to
put the strength of the dollar over and above the US economy. And I
think that's something that we're starting to see now made clear that international considerations,
specifically the defense of the dollar, we're influencing American economic policy to a degree
that was unparalleled in the post war period. That's what the New York Times
said about it, about Volker's policies, and so, in other words,
they prioritized their dollar over our economy. And I think that is the type
of thing that we've been seeing the opposite of well, we've seen parts of
that, but as always, as Tony has said, it is about them
preserving their fiat currency to the extent they can, because that is their power.
And so when it comes to politics or anything else, they're not necessarily
going to drop the interest rates to help Biden. They're going to try to
preserve their power. The perception was created at that time that the US is
willing to subject its own economy to pain, as Vulcal put the US through
two punishing recessions in order to preserve the value of the US dollar for all
global players. But then everything changed in the two thousands period in two thousand
and three two thousand and eight when everything kind of blew up in two thousand
and eight, at that point in time, oil moved to the top of
its thirty year range. Over the next couple of years, WILL prices would
rise steadily before peaking at one hundred and forty five dollars per barrel in July
of two thousand and eight. Another way to think about this is that a
drop in the value of the dollar against oil an ominous development for those who
were holding dollars and buying oil. And who is it that is the biggest
importer of oil? China. So because this was a power, a big
power of the United States, gave them their key part of their power,
and because they were a big buyer of oil, China has been motivated to
get rid of this in any way possible. And yet it was Biden who
really did it for them. So it's two thousand and eight. They've been
looking for a way to weaken and to get rid of the dominance of the
US dollar, and they wanted to be able to just print up print currency
like we do in order to buy oil. And as they put it in
this article, finally under Biden, the US obliged and did it for them.
In March of two thousand and nine, the head of the People's Make
of China issued a boldly titled white paper called Reform the International Monetary System,
and it called for a neutral reserve asset to replace the dollar centric system.
China, the world's largest importer of oil, had made it clear this desire
was to be able to purchase oil using its own currency that they could print.
It also is cut back on buying US treasuries and been acquiring gold at
a blistering pace, both clear votes of no confidence in the dollar. But
it's really just been within the last couple of years that Saudi Arabia has openly
gone along with this, and other nations are going along with it. And
you want to talk about a domino theory, this is the domino theory,
the one that they don't want to talk about. So if you want to
try to get something that is outside of this system that's under collapse and it's
being intact from the inside as well as from the outside, because again I
think when they talk about America first, I think, man of these people
say we've got to take America down first. It's not Americans first, it's
America first. We are the first target. If you want to have something
that's going to be outside of this, make sure that you've got some gold
or silver, you know. They just had a dip in the price of
bitcoin, and I thought it was interesting because they said, and I forget
the exact amount, it was maybe two hundred and forty million dollars worth of
bitcoin that they had taken out of Silk Road at one point in time,
and so this massive dump of bitcoin and they traced it back to a US
government wallet, and so I thought, that's a couple of interesting things about
that. You know, they manipulate every market. They're capable of manipulating the
crypto markets with things like that. They and other people are as well.
Of course, they manipulate the gold market, the silver market, they manipulate
the stock market, they manipulate the dollar. Everything out there that is financial
they're manipulating. But there are certain things that I think if you keep them
privately with the other thing was the privacy aspect of it. I've said before
that I thought it was very surprising when some billionaire was notified by some guy
said, why did you sell nine hundred thousand dollars worth of bitcoin? Said,
I did sell nine hundred thousand dollars worth a bitcoin. He said,
well, yeah you did. I could tell this is attached to your wallet.
This is your wallet, and so he checked and yeah, somebody had
taken nearly a million dollars out of his wallet. He didn't even know it.
He's a billionaire. But so first of all, you know, anything
this electronic can easily be hacked. You are at risk to thieves from all
over the world, not just the ones in your neighborhood. And there is
no anonymity, you know, just like with this recent everybody saying what happened,
why did the price a bitcoin go down? Well, two hundred and
forty million or whatever dumped into the market, sold into the market, and
they go back and they trace it and they find that it's the US government
because there's nothing anonymous about any of that. I mean, there are some
cryptocurrencies that are out there, pirate coin, mon arrow, they are at
least for the time being, you know, before they get to a quantum
quantum computing, they are anonymous. I don't know what happens at that point
in time, but there's no anonymity to it. You know, cash,
gold, silver, things like that, there is anonymity, and that is
very important. So if you want to get into that, David Knight dot
gold to take you to Tony Ardoban and he has wise Wolf Gold. By
the way, Tony will be doing his program today immediately following this one,
so make sure you tune into that on Twitter and elsewhere and you'll find out
what Tony is following at the moment. I don't know if if he's anticipating
the stupid debate tonight, I doubt it. I'm sure that he's onto something.
It's far more real. But if you want to go to wise Wolf,
we can help you with a group buying program where you can gradually accumulate
on a monthly basis. You decide how much you want to put into it.
He's got different levels that are there and so you can gradually start to
accumulate gold or silver, and or silver. You can buy either of those
in large or small quantities. Again, Tony Rdoban, you can find him
with Davidnight dot Gold. I'll let him know that you're coming through us.
Some of the comments here, George Madonna, thank you very much. That
is very kind and generous. I appreciate that, he says, Hi,
David and family making up for lost time. I apologies, God bless you
guys. Thank you very much. That is a blessing. George, thank
you. I appreciate that octospook. I put an one eight sixty five zero
lithium in my pocket shorted with keys, burnt me badly, but cured my
ignorance of lithium batteries. As dangerous is carrying a car battery in your pocket.
Yeah, I bet DG eight. David. Notice all over the world
people notice tyrannical government and don't support it. But in the US say they
beg for more government under a different ruler. Yeah, or even under the
same ruler that they just had. The Goo and Fan David Paul Harvey said
in his if I were the Devil's speech, what would be be praying our
father who art in Washington? He said, that's what we would be praying.
That seems like what we're doing now, isn't it? A little?
John says, everyone is buying gold and silver from Tony as my son says,
because it's good service. That's absolutely right. We're going to take a
quick break and we'll be right back making sense. Comment again, you're listening
to the David Knight Show, Well, welcome back. I also want to
thank people who have put in checks over the past two weeks. Now,
these we did include in the gas gage, but I just wanted to get
people a shout out. George and Shauna T. John and Beth, Jay,
David and Deborah W. Stephanie K. John R. David and Anne,
Marie In, Brian and Hannah V. William G. Jeremy W.
Scott, C. Margaret Mary T. Peter G. Scott and Samantha T.
Kelly and Philip M. Jackie and Fred you and Walter, why,
thank you very much. I appreciate that. And we do want to read
out the checks when we get them from people, because I know a lot
of people you know, are we see the zechs canceled, but in a
lot of people because they don't get any immediate feedback from that because it's going
through the mail. So thank you very much, I appreciate that. Let's
talk a little bit about the idols of this world as we're heading into this
personality debate tonight. The modern idols of the world transgenderism, for example,
This is op ed peace from the center. So they pointed out one of
the things that was really abominable on the side of God when you look at
Israel in the Old Testament was the sacrifice of children to false gods. And
isn't that where we are today. We sacrifice the lives of our kids with
abortion. If they survive, we sterilize them, mutilate them. And the
contemporary form b idolatry rejects the natural order created by God instead exalts self definition
and personal desire above everything else. And so it is really foundational to our
human identity when we look at how we move forward from this, he says,
what about the call to love and acceptance? You know, that is
the key thing. That is the strategy at which Christians lay down their faith
and walk away from it, isn't it. Oh, We've got to be
loving and acceptable of all this. No, true love of God does not
affirm sin. It does not attend gay weddings or practice pronoun hospitality. Instead,
it calls for repentance and faith, he says, and John eight,
that was the woman caught an adultery. Jesus tells her to go and sin
no more. And that is really the heart of the gospel, grace and
truth without compromising either one of them. He says, where your accusers,
well, neither do I condemn you. Go now and sin no more.
So. In God's love, he calls us to repentance, not to an
affirmation of sin. And part of that is so that we can have a
relationship with him, you know, when we are indulging in our sin.
As Bob Dylan said in his song, he says, you're going to serve
somebody. Yeah, You're going to serve somebody. It may be the devil,
it may be the Lord, but you're going to have to serve somebody.
So that is the issue when we create these idols in our lives,
this kind of pagan idolatry, and part of what we see from that is
this idea that sex is above everything else. That's one of the things that's
so disturbing about these people that are being picked by Biden. When you look
at them, their whole life is assumed into by their sexual is just say,
polightly, their activities, their perversions or whatever. You look at people
like Sam Brinton, you look at this person that he's just put into another
position. Somebody like the guy who calls himself Rachel Levine, know, everything
that they do is focused on that. As a matter of fact, Rachel
Levine wants kids to be able to have this kind of transgender mutilation at any
age. And that's not surprising because what did he do. He was a
child psychologist. What do you think that was about. Just like if you
look at Sam Briton, he was part of a group that mentored disturbed teens
who were unsure of their sexuality. Well, you know somebody like Brenton who
dresses up in these weird outfits and bondage outfits and everything. I'm sure that
he'd be able to help them get their head straight. You think, no,
no, these people are there as predators and this is a kind of
slavery that slave ourselves too. He said, these people want sex. Their
entire world revolves around sex, quite literally. They worship sex. It is
an idol to them. And that's why when we look at this, we
so, I don't know, this guy's necessarily serious enough that we would want
him focusing on nuclear waste issues. That seems like that might be a little
bit dangerous to have somebody like that in that position, too preoccupied with their
private sex life and making that public. But I think all of this comes
back to you know, we've talked many times about Augustine and his just war
theory, and I think he really laid it out comprehensively. But there was
something else that he's even more famous for, and that was his idea that
there's two cities, that there's the City of God, and that is what
we need to be focused at. There was an interesting op ed, Peace
on a World, and it's the title of it is Augustine in the Ballot
Box, and he said, you know, there's a lot of parallels to
where we are in this society today versus where Rome was with Augustine in his
lifetime. The Roman Empire was in decline and falling, he said in this
op ed piece, you know when people look at Rome, it is the
quintessential Western empire. A thousand years or so. The situation confronting fifth century
Roman Empire on the eve of its collapse holds a superficial similarity to contemporary America.
Out of touch elites were governing Rome, people had lost faith in governmental
institutions, A stark divide existed between the needs of rural and urban populations,
and citizens faced economic uncertainty as the government manipulated the current at see by experimenting
with different coinage. Wow checks all those boxes today, doesn't. Rome even
had its own immigration crisis, failing to assimilate the German Goths, who a
generation earlier sought asylum in the empire when fleeing from the Huns. Other German
tribes illegally crossed Rome's poorous border, exasperating an already desperate problem. So on
August twenty fourth, four hundred and ten, Germanic Goths, led by their
king Alaric, sacked the city of Rome the first time foreign enemies had breached
the city walls in eight hundred years, and news of the devastation shook the
foundations of the Empire. The empire's mood darkened over the following months as the
government failed to contain the failure. But during this destruction, Augustine of Hippo
wrote one of Christianity's greatest literary works, The City of God, and he
argued that the City of God and the City of Man are not the same
thing. This writer says, this is a timely reminder for Americans as our
country finds itself in the midst of another election cycle. And he points out
that he began this work because there was and you still see this train of
thought. A lot of historians they blamed the fall of Rome. They said,
I got soft because it became christian. This was about one hundred years
after Constantine had become a Christian, and after him all of the Roman Empire
would swear to Christianity. Of course, he's set up the eastern capital in
Constantinople. Not is t Embul became later. I always laugh about because of
that song. But anyway, he so a lot of people said, well,
the thing that went wrong with Rome, and people will still say today
was it got soft because Christianity? And so for Augustine, he wanted to
first attack that, but then he expanded it into looking at the city of
God versus the city of Man. As this writer says, for many both
left and right, today, politics has become a religion. But it is
a religion that is filled with fear and trembling because the whims of a voting
populace in which each half distressed the other, shapes the world's destiny rather than
the designs of a good and sovereign God. I've said many times that when
Hillary Clinton talks about the politics of meaning, I said, the saddest thing
about that is that she looks to politics for meaning in her life. For
her, that's everything, that's the sum total of her life. That's why
she's able to achieve in politics, and of course she wasn't able to achieve
what she wanted. We don't live those of us who look for the city
of God, and those of us who are citizens of the City of God
don't define our lives that way. It's got to be a very frustrating thing.
And I really do feel sorry for people like Trump and by like Hillary
and Biden. That's all that they've got. And when I play those clips
I played earlier this week of Trump asked by people, well, you ever
ask God for forgiveness? And of course we know that he needs it,
we all need forgiveness. He has nothing that he can do with his sin,
and that is typical of most religions. Most religions don't have a something
that they have, works that they need to do to make up for the
mistakes or the rebellion that they've had in their life. But they can never
know that they did enough. You know, you can talk to a Muslim
and doesn't matter what they do, and maybe even if they maybe the only
thing is if they can take out a bunch of infidels or whatever. No,
I mean, don't study their theology. But it's all about works,
and that's characteristic of man's religion. It's all about trying to justify yourself before
God. That's what's different about Christianity. It's that Christ justified us. Christ
did what we could not do. He did it completely, and it's a
free gift. That's the amazing thing. It surprises me that people don't rely
on that more. I guess there's a lot of cynicism. You know,
when you offer somebody something for free, it can't be that good. Well,
actually it is. Our impulse, though, is to rely on a
benevolent dictator who's going to give us what we want in this life. And
whenever we do that, you know, by saying that we're going to trust
in Washington, trust in a president, all that does is make us more
fearful, more insecure, and with good reason, because we're asking for a
dictator. So, as he points out, he said, the situation in
fifth century Rome on the eve of its collapse has a super official similarity to
where we are today. He said. While Italy burned, Augustine served as
a bishop in a small town of Hippo in the Roman province of Africa modern
day Algeria. Through Though Hippo lay across the Mediterranean hundreds of miles from Rome,
those living there saw firsthand the effects of the empire's collapse, as they
had refugees flooding into North Africa. Fifth century Christians often viewed Rome as a
Christian empire, and many American Christians fall into this same trap, talking about
the United States as if it is analogous to the City of God rather than
just another manifestation of the City of Man. He talks about here, Senator
Ted Cruz will talk of that all the time. Of course, it was
Reagan who famously talked about the City on the Hill. Now Ted Cruz talks
about it forty years later, forty five years later. But prior to that,
you had you know, Reagan wasn't one to come up with that analogy.
Other people had come up with that, going back to the founding of
this country. But he said, Christians began to expect more from politics than
it can ever deliver when we start to look at it that way, he
said. Augustin worked on The City of God for over fifteen years, explore
the interplay between the City of God and the City of Man, and a
book that would run up to a thousand pages. The initial goal was to
answer the critics, the criticism of Pagans who blamed the Roman Empire's precarious situation
on its embrace of Christianity. The Sack of Rome took place about one hundred
years after Constantine began favoring Christianity, and so a lot of them were saying,
this is the fault of the Christian nationalists, something that we see again
today. In Augustine's Day, many Christians had adopted Eusebius's idea that the Roman
Empire was the manifestation of Jesus's coming kingdom. And we see that all the
time in our politics. It's amazing how many people do that about Israel,
how many people do that about America. They don't see the difference between the
city of God and the city of Man. And once they make that leap,
they'll embrace all kinds of actions because hey, I'm doing it. I'm
doing it to serve God, whatever it is that I'm doing. Tornador,
thank you very much for the tip. Swilling Goy says, if you want
to make a society to crumble, make nudity and promiscuity the norm. It
will take time, but it will crumble into dust. Yeah. It has
with us with the LGBT Pride parades. You know, last year I talked
about some body was disgusted that Karen saw something on somewhere where there was you
know, literally men parading down the street stark naked. Somebody last year called
up the police and said, I want to report a man who's naked on
the street says, oh where is he? Oh she said such and such
a way as that. Oh, that's just the Pride parade. Don't worry
about that. How does that get a pass? Well, they put a
pass on pretty much everything. They put a pass on. Mutilating kids.
They put a pass on saying the kids don't You can't stop them from doing
this, even though we have all kinds of activities and always have had all
kinds of activities that children are not mature enough to decide they want to participate
in. But hey, when it comes to the LGBT agenda, oh well
we throw that all away. Don't frag me. Bro responded to soiling go,
He said, throwing some materialism, some drugs, and some visual programming,
and the process accelerates nothing. And be happy. Of course, we
will steal your property, kidnap your children, will feed you drugs that make
you think you're happy. So anyway, said, I don't think this radical
individualism nonsense helps either. We excel through family and community, not individualism.
And you know, we just have to keep things in balance. I think,
you know there is something to be said for the individual. We have
to learn how to rule ourselves as individuals. We also need to understand how
to function in community and how to function in family. But we've got to
do all three of those. It's just that our unbalanced society has put everything
into government. Everything is about government. And it's really sad to see that
people conservatives are just as dependent on getting meaning and getting what they want out
of life. They're just as dependent on government as all the socialists and communists
that I've watched all my life. And it's a sad thing. See.
He goes on to say, let's say be careful because the individual is very
important. The only just justice system might recognize the rights and sovereignty of the
individual. If you ignore the individual, then you are embracing collectivism, and
that is just a euphemism for totalitarianism. I agree. One comment here says
about the debate tonight, they will dress it up though, they'll make it
look like these two senile puppets are capable of being Walmart greeters. Yeah,
that's right. Trump was talking about how Franklin Graham had contacted him, said
hey, I want you to think about cleaning up your language a little bit,
and then he goes on on about how, well, no, it's
really important that i'd be able to emphasize, you know, for a point
of emphasis. Well whatever, Franklin Graham was saying, there's kids watching it
in that type of thing. That's why we tried to keep it clean with
our guests here. But I remember, and I've told the story before about
how we went to see Penn and Teller when we were on a vacation.
They were performing and enjoyed the show and the humor and what they were doing
until they decided that they would stop in the middle of the show and lecture
everybody about how much they hated God. And Penn was saying, he said,
when people use the F word, he said, it's just because they
don't have any vocabulary, and they sound really stupid. He said, every
other word is an F word if you look at some people in some of
the movies, and of course Robert de Niro is one of the best examples
of that, or worst examples, I guess. And he said, so
I don't do that, He said, I want to have a better vocabulary,
and it's ridiculous. He said that a lot of people who were writers
don't have a better vocabulary than that. They use it as every form of
speech. They use it as an adverb, a verb, an adjective,
and all this other kind of stuff. And he said, I don't do
that. Instead, he said, I want to deliberately blaspheme God, so
I use Jesus Christ's name in vain. And so he starts going on with
that, and we just we were in the middle of this. It was
like a big circular table and we were in the smack dad middle of it,
and we made about ten people get up out of the table to let
us get out of there because it's like, I'm not staying here while he's
doing that. That's the one that really bothers me. I don't really care
that much about the F word. Try not to use it because it's coarse,
but try not use it because we have kids who listen to the program.
It'll be interesting night to see what Trump does. If he's going to
get really frustrated turning his microphone off. I don't know if that's going to
do anything for him or not. He's got a pretty loud voice. He
may scream over that he made, curse over that. Who knows what he's
going to do if he thinks that that is a very effective rhetorical principle.
I think, as Finn was saying, it reflects a lack of vocabulary.
We certainly certainly see that in Donald Trump. He doesn't have He thought it
was a real big deal, and he thought it was intellectual show voting or
pedantry pedagogrit for somebody to say existential Oh, that sounds really important, doesn't
it? Is that a big word for you, Donald? That's not something
that you typically talk about in existential threat. With all of the stuff around,
they were always hearing about existential threats, about COVID, about every mcguffin
the climate especially, It's all existential threats about everything. And yet it seemed
to be a new word for him, new word for the week. But
as we move forward, we want to make sure that we don't put our
trust in what is happening in this world. So some contemporary going back to
this op ed piece, he said, some contemporary conservative politicians like Senator Josh
Holly of Missouri, claimed that America is a Christian nation because the founders said
so. But do the founders or contemporary politicians get to decide or does God.
Some also claim the country must turn back to God if it is to
achieve its former glory. Even some pastors succumb to this politicized rhetoric that portrays
the goal of Christian religion as restoring and supporting a proper social order. Well,
I think that it is clear that it is clear principle throughout the Bible
that God deals with us as individuals, and he also deals with nations as
well. You know, the nations don't really have any any way that they
can. They typically wind up raging against God and his anointed, don't they.
But God does blessed nations that follow him. He does many times offer
them a chance to repent, as he did with Nineveh and sending Jonah to
Ninevah, and he held his hand of judgment until they returned to their ways,
and then he eventually did judge Nineveh. But you know, when we
look at this, it is the good news about this, I think besides
the best news about the grace of God and the forgiveness through Christ is the
fact that this is not something that is dependent on us having to do it
collectively. You know, we're just having that discussion back and forth about individualism.
Your relationship with God is individual. You know, everybody in your family
could have a relationship with God, but it's still up to you. Right,
That's not going to get you a relationship with God. You have to
establish that as an individual. And that's when we look at this collective issue.
God has blessed America, I think because Americans were looking to God.
That is a clear principle throughout the Bible that God does do that type of
thing, but it is not the sort of thing where we want to put
that kind of We don't put our hope in the elective reform of America.
Yes, it would be good if America were following that, because there will
be consequences if it doesn't. But we can still whatever happens with Trump,
whatever happens with this election and Biden and all the rest of this stuff,
it really does come back to us as individuals. Just like I said before,
all politics is local. Well, your religion and your relationship with God
is as local as it gets. It ultimately is between you and God,
and they can't take that away from you. No matter what happens. Things
can get very difficult and the circumstances, but our hope and our great expectation
is that we can have that relationship with God no matter what happens with Trump,
no matter what happens with Biden, no matter what happens with this election,
our life does not depend on it. And even if our life dependent
on in, our life is but a tiny little blip and eternity. And
so the key thing is you have to look at your relationship as a citizen
of the City of God. And that's what I think he's trying to say.
He's trying to say that the city of Man offers no hope. And
that's especially true when the city of Man is the District of Columbia going to
be any hope at all in the District of Columbia. It has turned its
back on the principles and the law that is there, as well as on
God. And there are consequences for us as individuals blessing and curses. There's
not any individual there's not some neutral area there, right, Everything is always
a blessing or curse. That's true of us individually. It's true of us
as a nation as well, I think. But yeah, the good news
is that the City of God is something that is far more important and outside
of the City of Man. I'll have a good night if you want to
watch. That's the debate. We'll talk about it tomorrow and do a post
mornem The common Man. They created common Core and dumb down our children.
They created common past track and control us. They're Commons project to make sure
the commoners own nothing and the communist future. They see the common man as
simple, unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in
the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is
what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception,
intimidation. They desire to know everything about us, while they hide everything
from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to
hide. Please share the information and links you'll find at the Davidnightshow dot com.
Thank you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support
us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot com