Speaker 1: In a world of deceit, Telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: As a clock strikes thirteen, it's Thursday, the nineteenth of March.
Speaker 2: You have our lord. Twenty twenty six. Well, Israel and
Speaker 2: the US attacked a liquid natural gas facility that was
Speaker 2: co owned by Iran and cutter daring Iran to set
Speaker 2: the Middle East on fire. And now that's what they
Speaker 2: are doing. All of these oil refineries, storage areas, ports,
Speaker 2: natural gas, they're all highly flammable. Is this the plan
Speaker 2: of Israel? The long term plan? So they can take
Speaker 2: it all. We're going to take a look at that. Meanwhile,
Speaker 2: we had yesterday Ram Paul on fire himself in a
Speaker 2: confirmation hearing. It's Mark Wayne Mullen, the guy that Trump
Speaker 2: wants to run ICE, is shown to be a thug,
Speaker 2: a bully, just like the rest of the people that
Speaker 2: Trump picks, especially the ones that he wants to run
Speaker 2: his standing armies foreign and domestic. He's another war peak.
Speaker 2: And then the Federal Reserve did not raise interest rates.
Speaker 2: He said we had zero jobs created, as stagflation already
Speaker 2: set in. I think we're going to have inflation regardless
Speaker 2: of what the FED does with interest rates. I think
Speaker 2: the nations are going to let it run so they
Speaker 2: can monetize the debt. When we talk about the impact
Speaker 2: on goal, because a lot of people are looking at
Speaker 2: what happens to gold. So that's what we've got on
Speaker 2: the agenda today. We're going to try to get through
Speaker 2: this quickly. Before we start, though, there was some CIA
Speaker 2: weather control files that have now been reduced. Yeah, those documents,
Speaker 2: not the Epstein documents, but the ones that talked about
Speaker 2: Kim trails. Yeah, this goes back to the Vietnam War.
Speaker 2: This goes back to Lyndon Johnson, and as we talked
Speaker 2: about many times, it was a general I forget the
Speaker 2: guy's name. I didn't look it up again. I've talked
Speaker 2: about it many times. The guy who was given an
Speaker 2: award for altering the weather as part of the Vietnam War,
Speaker 2: given an award by LBJ. And so they had a
Speaker 2: couple of projects CIA projects. One of them was Project
Speaker 2: storm Fury, the other one was Project Popeye. Got a
Speaker 2: lot of projects coming from the deep state, the CIA,
Speaker 2: And of course you had the quote that's famous from LBJ,
Speaker 2: He who controls the weather will control the world. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and controlling history and controlling speech. And these people are
Speaker 2: control freaks about everything. And so there was a letter
Speaker 2: as part of the documents from Lyndon Johnson expressing support
Speaker 2: for the activities. In nineteen sixty two speech when he
Speaker 2: was vice president, he remarked made that quote, he controls
Speaker 2: the weather, will control the world. So Project storm Fury
Speaker 2: was an experimental effort at tempted to weaken hurricanes by
Speaker 2: seating clouds with silver eyed eyde Think about the fact
Speaker 2: that they've been working on this for sixty some odd years, right,
Speaker 2: what do you think they're capable of doing? Now? This
Speaker 2: has been an open secret, and of course they very
Speaker 2: much want to push back. Oh, Kim drew the ultimate
Speaker 2: conspiracy theory, right, Well, they were. They've always been working
Speaker 2: on ways that they can modify the weather. KEM. Trell's
Speaker 2: frequently dismissed as a conspiracy theory, but RFK Jr. Has
Speaker 2: jumped in on it. He says they're real likely orchestrated
Speaker 2: by DARPA. Yeah, caused by materials mixed into commercial jet
Speaker 2: fuel other issues involved in that. Of course, don't expect
Speaker 2: them to do anything about it, just like he's not
Speaker 2: going to do anything about the vaccines. But you know
Speaker 2: what he's doing is he is embracing this and talking
Speaker 2: about it. But when it comes to action, whether or
Speaker 2: not he can do anything is one issue. Whether or
Speaker 2: not he will even try as another. As a matter
Speaker 2: of fact, when we look at the vaccines, it's not
Speaker 2: just the COVID vaccine in the mRNA that RFK Junior
Speaker 2: is really not stopping. What needs to be done is
Speaker 2: we need to get rid of this nineteen eighty six
Speaker 2: Childhood Vaccine Immunity Act that's there. And here's a good example.
Speaker 2: This is reported by the Children's Health Defense. They have
Speaker 2: stayed on target even while RFK Junior is playing his
Speaker 2: own personal political games. Routine vaccines paralyzed their toddler. This
Speaker 2: is the child, Travis is just about a month older
Speaker 2: than your son is right now, and he was given
Speaker 2: routine vaccines and all of a sudden, he's not moving anymore,
Speaker 2: getting very irritated. So they start trying to figure out
Speaker 2: what's happening. And after a short period of time, I
Speaker 2: had some physicians say, well, I think it's reaction to
Speaker 2: the vaccines, autoimmune reaction. And so that was in twenty
Speaker 2: and thirteen. They fought the system for eleven years to
Speaker 2: try to get any compensation. He's been paralyzed. Now he's
Speaker 2: in a wheelchair, paralyzed from the waist down and has
Speaker 2: many other issues as well, autoimmune diseases and things like that,
Speaker 2: and it has taken them eleven years. You get approval
Speaker 2: for a payout, and that's doesn't you know, a compensation
Speaker 2: is needed, but it doesn't restore him to what he was.
Speaker 2: And as they pointed out, this whole system, this childhood
Speaker 2: vaccine system, is designed to make you quit. That's exactly
Speaker 2: why they want to. They want to wear you out
Speaker 2: with the process of this and hold the vaccine companies
Speaker 2: that are harming children. Just think about this. You know,
Speaker 2: we talk about how outrageous it was that they would
Speaker 2: target school sloppy work. You could say, right, they're target
Speaker 2: to school and kill one hundred and sixty seventy kids.
Speaker 2: Trump did far more than that with his vaccine, probably
Speaker 2: his COVID vaccine that he's so proud of. He killed
Speaker 2: far more children than that, and they're still dying with
Speaker 2: sudden death heart attacks, Meyer car it's some long term
Speaker 2: effects of that. And so just imagine what these people do.
Speaker 2: They don't care about you and I. They don't care
Speaker 2: about children. People like Trump will sexually abuse them. He
Speaker 2: will put out programs that kill them, injure them for life,
Speaker 2: paralyze them, even to the extent that Maga thinks that
Speaker 2: he's going to protect children from this psychological gas lighting, mutilation,
Speaker 2: and sterilization. No. No, if the parents want to do it,
Speaker 2: that's fine. Does not protect children, doesn't protect us. None
Speaker 2: of this national security stuff is about our protection. It's
Speaker 2: about what they're doing. Look the people who are involved,
Speaker 2: who started this war, a bunch of real estate dealers.
Speaker 2: What does that tell you about this whole war in Iran?
Speaker 2: We're going to talk about that coming up. I think
Speaker 2: it's a real estate deal. Frankly, shortly after receiving the
Speaker 2: flu in pneumonia and DTP shot, they became fussy, suffered
Speaker 2: from fever, decreased energy levels. He stopped crawling, playing, he
Speaker 2: started throwing food. Said. While many practicing physicians and specialists
Speaker 2: suggested that he may have a genetic predisposition that his
Speaker 2: vaccinations exacerbated, retired physicians who were likely more at liberty
Speaker 2: to speak freely about vaccines, cold family members that vaccine
Speaker 2: poisoning was a likely cause. And so this is where
Speaker 2: we are in our society. This is the kind of
Speaker 2: criminality that we have. And as I said, there was
Speaker 2: a very long article. I didn't go into it and
Speaker 2: discuss it in detail on the program, but just to
Speaker 2: summarize that it was done by a physician who was
Speaker 2: on during the COVID stuff. He said he had four
Speaker 2: thousand interviews on TV and it's pretty amazing that he
Speaker 2: was out. I never had heard of him before. But
Speaker 2: he said that all this subtle science stuff and the
Speaker 2: intimidation that was there throughout. He said, we'd never seen
Speaker 2: this before. We always had people who were free to
Speaker 2: speak their mind and free to make a case for
Speaker 2: the appropriate treatment or what the cause of a disease was.
Speaker 2: Except that was all shut down. Never seen anything like
Speaker 2: that before. And you know why it was shut down
Speaker 2: because of money. That's the way it happens. Everybody said, oh,
Speaker 2: Trump didn't do it, it was the bad Democrat governors that
Speaker 2: did it. Well, the Republican governors were just as bad,
Speaker 2: and they were doing this because they were funded in
Speaker 2: the hospitals that were killing people at the beginning of this.
Speaker 2: That's the real pandemic, the ventilators, the rendezovira and things
Speaker 2: like that. That's the real pandemic, folks. And they were
Speaker 2: paid to kill people. And that's the way we got
Speaker 2: into this situation. When you get corporations, all they care
Speaker 2: about is money and they'll be more than happy to
Speaker 2: kill us for money. Whether you're talking about big pharma,
Speaker 2: big hospital, or whether you're talking about the military industrial
Speaker 2: complex or big agriculture. You know, big agriculture just wants
Speaker 2: to be able to produce stuff that looks like food.
Speaker 2: They don't care if it's got poison in it or not.
Speaker 2: So yeah, bring on the gliphas that we can produce
Speaker 2: more of the stuff and put on the shelves and
Speaker 2: make money. We don't care if it hurts you. This
Speaker 2: is the way these people operate. Well, we're going to
Speaker 2: take a quick break when we come back, we're going
Speaker 2: to take a look at the back and forth fight
Speaker 2: about what Joe Kent said and is there an imminent threat?
Speaker 2: Was there an imminent threat? This is the big issue
Speaker 2: that's been going on for thirty some odd years. We
Speaker 2: had Benjamin Netanyahu telling us that there was an eminent
Speaker 2: threat and now so that is still the issue that
Speaker 2: is being discussed. We're going to take a quick break,
Speaker 2: will be right back.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 3: APS Radio delivers multiple channels of music right to your
Speaker 3: mobile device. Get the APS Radio app today and listen
Speaker 3: wherever you go.
Speaker 2: Well, I guess I'll get in trouble for this here
Speaker 2: on Rumble. But Dan Bongino fired back at Joe Kent's
Speaker 2: claim that there was no eminent threat to the US.
Speaker 2: And you've also got Tulsea Gambard who has burned her
Speaker 2: last shred of credibility if she ever had any left.
Speaker 2: Here's what Tulsey Gabbard said.
Speaker 4: So, the assessment of the intelligence community is that Iran's
Speaker 4: nuclear enrichment program was obliterated by last summer's air strikes. Yes,
Speaker 4: And the opening statement you submitted to the committee last
Speaker 4: night also stated, quote there has been no efforts since
Speaker 4: then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability end quote correct.
Speaker 4: That's right, and that's the assessment of the intelligence community.
Speaker 5: Yes.
Speaker 4: The White House stated on March first of this year
Speaker 4: that this war was launched and was quote a military
Speaker 4: campaign to eliminate the imminent nuclear threat posed by the
Speaker 4: Iranian regime.
Speaker 2: End quote.
Speaker 4: That's a statement from the White House, quote the imminent
Speaker 4: nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime. Was it the
Speaker 4: assessment of the intelligence community that there was an imminent
Speaker 4: nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?
Speaker 6: The intelligence community assessed that Iran maintained the intention to
Speaker 6: rebuild and to continue to grow their nuclear enrichment.
Speaker 4: Was it the assessment of the intelligence community that there
Speaker 4: was a quote imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime?
Speaker 2: Yes or no?
Speaker 6: Senator, the only person who can determine and what is
Speaker 6: and is not an imminent threat is the president.
Speaker 4: False. This iside. This is the Worldwide Threats Hearing where
Speaker 4: you present to Congress national intelligence, timely, objective and independent
Speaker 4: of political considerations. You've stated today that the intelligence.
Speaker 2: Can political consideration.
Speaker 4: Clear enrichment program was obliterated, and that quote there had
Speaker 4: been no efforts since then to try to rebuild their
Speaker 4: enrichment capability. Was it the intelligence community's assessment that, nevertheless,
Speaker 4: despite this obliteration, there was a quote imminent nuclear threat
Speaker 4: posed by the Iranian regime.
Speaker 2: Yes or no.
Speaker 6: It is not the intelligence communities responsibility to determine what
Speaker 6: is and is not an imminent threat that is up here.
Speaker 6: Here's the problem, not a volume.
Speaker 4: No, it is it is precisely that, it is precisely
Speaker 4: your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the
Speaker 4: United States. This is the Worldwide Threats Hearing. Where As
Speaker 4: you noted in your opening testimony, quote you represent the
Speaker 4: ICs assessment of threats. You are here to represent the
Speaker 4: ICs assessment of threats. That's a quote from your own
Speaker 4: opening statement. And so my question is, as you're here
Speaker 4: to present the ICs assessment of threats, was it the
Speaker 4: assessment of the intelligence community that, as the White House
Speaker 4: claimed on March first, there was a quote imminent nuclear
Speaker 4: threat posed by the Iranian regime.
Speaker 2: Yes or no?
Speaker 6: Once again, Senator, the intelligence community.
Speaker 2: Has no credibility.
Speaker 6: Of inputs that make annual threat assessments. You want to
Speaker 6: answer the question nature of the imminent threat that the
Speaker 6: President has to make that determination based on a collection
Speaker 6: and volume. You're here to be intelligence that he is created.
Speaker 4: You're here to be timely, ob objective, and independent of
Speaker 4: political consideration.
Speaker 6: Exactly what I'm doing.
Speaker 4: No, you're evading a question, because to provide a candid
Speaker 4: response to the committee would contradict a statement from the
Speaker 4: White House.
Speaker 2: Yeah nothing but yes men and yes women around this guy.
Speaker 2: They're all afraid of him. They want their career so badly. Well,
Speaker 2: she just burned her career, burned it in front of everybody.
Speaker 2: She has absolutely not a shred of credibility left whatsoever. Yeah.
Speaker 2: If Trump says that we've obliterated their nuclear program, then
Speaker 2: we've obliterated it. If Trump says, no, we didn't, and
Speaker 2: now it's an eminent threat, it's an eminent threat. It's
Speaker 2: whatever Trump says, and it's pure politics. All the president's
Speaker 2: men and women can't put Trump de Gumpty together again. Right,
Speaker 2: It is like forced Gump. You know, for thirty five
Speaker 2: years you had BB telling us that a nuclear bomb
Speaker 2: and new threat was eminent. He was lying. Then Trump
Speaker 2: is lying now. And of course, uh, Trump had this
Speaker 2: to say about previous presidents. He thinks basically out of
Speaker 2: his own mouth. Trump thinks that Trump should be impeached.
Speaker 7: Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker, Well, you know, when she first
Speaker 7: got in and was named speaker, I met her and
Speaker 7: I'm very impressed by her. I think she's a very
Speaker 7: impressive person. I like her a lot. But I was
Speaker 7: surprised that she didn't do more in terms of Bush
Speaker 7: and going after Bush. It was almost it just seemed
Speaker 7: like she was going to really look to impeach Bush
Speaker 7: and get him out of office, which personally, I think would.
Speaker 8: Have been a wonderful thing.
Speaker 7: Absolutely for the war, for the war because of the
Speaker 7: conduct we lied. He got us into the war with lies.
Speaker 7: And I mean, look at the trouble Bill Clinton got
Speaker 7: into with something that was totally unimportant, and they tried
Speaker 7: to impeach him, which was nonsense. And yet Bush got
Speaker 7: us into this horrible war with lies by lying, by
Speaker 7: saying they had weapons of mass destruction, by saying all
Speaker 7: sorts of things that turned out not to be true.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly what Trump is doing right now. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, it's not just Tulsa Gabbard, it's also
Speaker 2: Dan Bongino, who was willing to lie for the president.
Speaker 2: Oh well, you know we know that that you know
Speaker 2: we have these Epstein documents. We need to release them.
Speaker 2: And they, oh, there's nothing at all there, We don't
Speaker 2: need to release it, said Dan Bongino. Now he's saying,
Speaker 2: I don't know what point you thought this wasn't an
Speaker 2: eminent threat after you read a lot of the stuff
Speaker 2: that I read. And so he said, the President, I
Speaker 2: promise you has a bevy of material that if he
Speaker 2: told you right now, you would come to the eminent
Speaker 2: threat conclusion in a snap. As Dan Bongino was pushing
Speaker 2: back against Joe Kent, the eminent threat was probably a
Speaker 2: threat from net to get money withheld from Trump. Look
Speaker 2: after Bongino lied about the Epstein documents, who would believe
Speaker 2: anything he has to say?
Speaker 9: You know?
Speaker 2: He says, well, you know, if you saw this stuff
Speaker 2: and I saw there's no child trafficking, nothing happening with
Speaker 2: the Epstein people. And now if you'd seen the documents
Speaker 2: that I saw, you would realize that Trump was telling
Speaker 2: us the early our weapons of mass destruction that we
Speaker 2: have to go after. Well, Tucker wasted no time in
Speaker 2: terms of getting Joe Kent on and this is what
Speaker 2: they said.
Speaker 10: I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran.
Speaker 10: Iran posed no imminent threat to our.
Speaker 2: Nation, not to US Iran, and they didn't have nuclear
Speaker 2: weapons to come after. How did you reach that? Really?
Speaker 1: There?
Speaker 8: I think this is this is key.
Speaker 11: I mean, this would be more challenging to explain had
Speaker 11: the Secretary of State, the President and the Speaker of
Speaker 11: House the House not come out and said that we
Speaker 11: conducted this attack at this time because the Israelis were
Speaker 11: about to do so. So that takes away the argument
Speaker 11: that there was an imminent threat, as in Iram was
Speaker 11: planning to attack us immediately. That just simply did not exist.
Speaker 10: May I ask you to pause? And so I've heard
Speaker 10: people say that and this just happened. But history has
Speaker 10: a way of getting rewritten in real time, and then
Speaker 10: you look back ten or fifteen, twenty twenty five years later,
Speaker 10: and no one seems to understand the things that you
Speaker 10: saw because they've been eliminated. So I think it's important
Speaker 10: to stop and say, here's what we actually know. So
Speaker 10: I'd like now if we could just to play one
Speaker 10: of the statements that you alluded to, and that's from
Speaker 10: Marco Rubio, the Secretary State, And this was shortly after
Speaker 10: this war commenced, and he was explaining in it, as
Speaker 10: has this happened in a thoughtful, precise way. Why here's
Speaker 10: Secretary State Marco Rubio.
Speaker 5: And so the President made the very wise decision. We
Speaker 5: knew that there was going to be an Israeli action.
Speaker 1: We knew that that.
Speaker 5: Would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew
Speaker 5: that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they
Speaker 5: launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties and perhaps
Speaker 5: even higher those kill and then we would all be
Speaker 5: here answering questions about why.
Speaker 8: We knew that and did.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 10: So that is his almost contemporaneous explanation, and it's not offhand.
Speaker 2: He reasons it out.
Speaker 10: He explains there's a logic chain there, and he says
Speaker 10: we knew, not that Iran was going to attack.
Speaker 2: He did not say that.
Speaker 10: He said we knew that Israel was going to attack Iran,
Speaker 10: and in retaliation for those attacks by Israel against Iran,
Speaker 10: Iran might attack American forces. So the imminent threat that
Speaker 10: the Secretary of the State is describing.
Speaker 2: Is not from Iran. It's from Israel, exactly.
Speaker 11: And I think this speaks to the broader issue. Who
Speaker 11: is in charge of our policy in the Middle East,
Speaker 11: Who is in charge of when we decided to go
Speaker 11: to war, not in this case with what the Secretary
Speaker 11: described and later on the President, later on the Speaker
Speaker 11: of the House, and the way the events played out,
Speaker 11: the Israelis drove the decision to take this action, which
Speaker 11: we knew would set off a series of events, meaning
Speaker 11: the Iranians would retaliate. Now, I think there's a potential
Speaker 11: there where we could have done several different things. We
Speaker 11: could have simply said to the Israelis, know you will
Speaker 11: not and if you do, then we will take something
Speaker 11: away from you. I think that it's fine that we
Speaker 11: offer defense to Israel, but when we're providing the means
Speaker 11: for their defense, we get to dictate the terms of
Speaker 11: when they go on the offensive. Otherwise they stand to
Speaker 11: lose that relationship. In the Israels, there's Raelis felt in
Speaker 11: Bolden that no matter what they did, no matter what
Speaker 11: situation they put us in, that they could go ahead
Speaker 11: and take this action and we would just have to react.
Speaker 2: Yeah, a couple one hundred million dollars from Miriam Edelson
Speaker 2: and a lot of other Zionist billionaires speaks volumes. Trump's
Speaker 2: not going to say no, you will not do this.
Speaker 2: And of course people like den Bongino are not going
Speaker 2: to stay silent if somebody is pointing out what our
Speaker 2: real relationship with Israel is that of servant, and so
Speaker 2: he's going to step up and start serving for them.
Speaker 2: Maw Bongino fired back against Kent's claim that is on
Speaker 2: the lobby where a major culprit. He said, I read
Speaker 2: a lot more intelligence than he did. Yeah, right, he said,
Speaker 2: I had access to just about everything, and including the
Speaker 2: Epstein stuff, which he told you lies about. And you
Speaker 2: come to the conclusion that the Israelis did it there
Speaker 2: was no eminent threat here. Really, how could you come
Speaker 2: to the conclusion, he said that the Israelis could do it. Well,
Speaker 2: it's based on not just what Joe Kent knows, but
Speaker 2: as he pointed out, it was made easy for him
Speaker 2: because you had Marco Rubio explain it to everybody. He said,
Speaker 2: here's what's going on. If they say we're going to
Speaker 2: attack and we don't really care what happens to you,
Speaker 2: and they said, well, we had to join in because
Speaker 2: they were going to do it. We don't have any
Speaker 2: control over them. They control us. Bon Gino listed reasons
Speaker 2: that Iran posed a threat. So they've got anti ship
Speaker 2: ballistic missiles. Yeah, is that a threat. Israel's got them
Speaker 2: as well, so's the US, so do most country. They've
Speaker 2: got a drone program, so to most countries now at
Speaker 2: this point, and they have enriched nuclear material and they
Speaker 2: shout death to America. Well, I've heard Netanyahu shout death
Speaker 2: to Iran for thirty some odd years, and he's finally
Speaker 2: gotten it because he's finally gotten a puppet regime in
Speaker 2: Washington that will do whatever he demands. Then you've got
Speaker 2: Rick Garnell. Rick Garnell is an interesting character. He was
Speaker 2: their ambassador to LGBT. But he's the guy that in
Speaker 2: Trump's first regime he had the job of Tultsey Gabbard.
Speaker 2: You got to wonder about this Director of National Intelligence
Speaker 2: position because after being the DNI in Trump's first regime,
Speaker 2: Trump put him in charge of the Kennedy Center. So
Speaker 2: he goes it goes from being d and I to
Speaker 2: head of the Kennedy Center theater. And I guess that's
Speaker 2: true because this is all just theater, isn't it. All
Speaker 2: this national security stuff, all this stuff about, oh, we
Speaker 2: have threats that are imminent and we got to do
Speaker 2: something about it. It's all just theater. And so he says.
Speaker 2: Rick Garnell says, I don't have any patients for these
Speaker 2: people who don't like the policy and don't want to
Speaker 2: implement the policy. He said, Joe Kent just needed to quote,
Speaker 2: shut up and salute. So if the president's going to
Speaker 2: tell us a lie about weapons of mass destructure, if
Speaker 2: he's going to tell us a lie about eminent threats,
Speaker 2: you need to shut up and salute, and you need
Speaker 2: to lie along with him, just like Chelsea Gabbert. Did
Speaker 2: you know that's what we're getting from our D and
Speaker 2: I people under the Trump administrations? He said, The problem
Speaker 2: is we've got a lot of people in Washington with
Speaker 2: big egos. He's got the biggest ego in Washington. You
Speaker 2: think that's right, President Gump. And so yeah, he he's
Speaker 2: got ego nomics, he's got ego politics. He doesn't do geopolitics,
Speaker 2: he does ego politics. He says, I don't mind that
Speaker 2: Joe Kent. I don't think that Joe Kent should be
Speaker 2: surprised at where the president of the United States is going. Well,
Speaker 2: I would agree. I mean, I sussed this guy out
Speaker 2: for what he was in twenty twenty. But what about
Speaker 2: the campaign promises that Trump had made that shouldn't surprise anybody. Well,
Speaker 2: Glenn Greenwall says a nine to eleven like mass casualty
Speaker 2: attack could trigger permanent emergency measures and he points back
Speaker 2: to nine to eleven, and it's like, well, and he says,
Speaker 2: you know, we have this permanent hangover from nine to eleven,
Speaker 2: you know, Homeland security and the Patriot Act and all
Speaker 2: the rest of this stuff. It's like, yeah, and you
Speaker 2: might also want to take a look at what Trump
Speaker 2: did with COVID because, as I said before, the pandemic
Speaker 2: mcguffin and the whole idea that they could lock us
Speaker 2: down for whenever they decide there's some kind of they
Speaker 2: declare a phony emergency. They don't have to doesn't have
Speaker 2: to be real. They have the power to lock us down.
Speaker 2: They've been putting these pieces in places in place for
Speaker 2: a very long time. And Dark Winter, which was a
Speaker 2: wargame plan, that was exactly what Trump did in twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: They did that two months before nine to eleven. Then
Speaker 2: they did a real attack of anthrax, but it was
Speaker 2: likely it was a false flag attack and it looks
Speaker 2: like it came from the CIA. They were the only
Speaker 2: ones who had that kind of anthrax, and of course
Speaker 2: the FBI covered that up for the CIA. That's their purpose.
Speaker 2: The FBI is Feds blocking investigations, especially when those investigations
Speaker 2: would show what the federal government is doing. And so
Speaker 2: they continue to practice that for twenty years and then
Speaker 2: they rolled it out. These things are all part of
Speaker 2: taking absolute totalitarian control over our society. And everything that
Speaker 2: Trump does is emergency. Everything he declares it to be
Speaker 2: an emergency, whether it is or not, and then that
Speaker 2: allows him to completely avoid following the law of the
Speaker 2: constitution anything. And he dares people then to take him
Speaker 2: to court, and that takes a very long time.
Speaker 1: As we saw with the tariffs, that was an.
Speaker 2: Emergency, right, And so a President Trump and his COVID stuff,
Speaker 2: it would not be surprised to see a false flag attack.
Speaker 2: I mean, quite frankly, the whole COVID thing was not
Speaker 2: necessarily a false flag attack, but it certainly was false,
Speaker 2: wasn't it. And he presides over the emergency branch, he's
Speaker 2: got ice and the police surveillance state. He wants minlitarized
Speaker 2: federal police. And we're going to after this, We're going
Speaker 2: to take a look at this back and forth of
Speaker 2: Mark Waynemullen, because that's the real subtext there, folks. The
Speaker 2: Trump is looking for people like Mark Wayne. He's looking
Speaker 2: for people like Warpeat. These are people who will do whatever,
Speaker 2: he says, who are spoiling for a fight, their brawlers,
Speaker 2: their thugs, their bullies, and he wants people like that
Speaker 2: to run the military. He wants people like that to
Speaker 2: run his federal police, the domestic Standing Army. Greenwall laid
Speaker 2: out a sombering, sobering scenario. He said a mash casualty
Speaker 2: attacks on US soil could trigger sweeping emergency measures that,
Speaker 2: once imposed, become fixtures of life, just as the Patriot
Speaker 2: Act did. After nine to eleven, the conversation opened with
Speaker 2: Greenwall addressing a noticeable imbalance and what passes for acceptable
Speaker 2: criticism in public life. He said, it's interesting that there's
Speaker 2: no criticism of our country that is banned or even discouraged.
Speaker 2: But you can't criticize one particular foreign country. Right as
Speaker 2: ziel saying goes, whn't know who controls you. You look
Speaker 2: at who you're not allowed to criticize. So we have
Speaker 2: an occupied government. Just as Carrie pre Gene Baller said,
Speaker 2: he said, if you can't criticize a foreign government, then
Speaker 2: that country is in charge. What other conclusion should I
Speaker 2: draw from that? I can't really provide you with any
Speaker 2: other option, And so he said, I feel like there
Speaker 2: was already an attack in the US, that Austin shooting,
Speaker 2: but we haven't heard much about it, but it seemed
Speaker 2: pretty clearly linked to the Iran war. Well, they're going
Speaker 2: to come up with something that is bigger, so he said.
Speaker 2: Patriot Act was this radical, extremist, un American law that
Speaker 2: we needed. Supposedly in the wake of nine to eleven.
Speaker 2: They assured us, Oh, don't worry, it'll be temporary. Well,
Speaker 2: here we are twenty twenty six. It's part of the woodwork,
Speaker 2: and nobody even talks about it anymore. That's how quickly
Speaker 2: these things get normalized. Yeah, just like the pandemic measures
Speaker 2: that Trump did, And whether or not the stuff gets
Speaker 2: put into enshrined into law or regulations, it still gets
Speaker 2: enshrined into people's minds. You still have this overturned window
Speaker 2: that has been moved, the normalization of universal basic income,
Speaker 2: the normalization and being able to lock us all down
Speaker 2: just like that. And when you look at what is
Speaker 2: happening with cars, it's not just gasoline, it's the insurance,
Speaker 2: it's the mandated regulations on automobiles. They've become unaffordable. They're
Speaker 2: going to squeeze us out of cars. If we don't
Speaker 2: push back. There needs to be some move at the
Speaker 2: state level, just like people in Wyoming tried to do
Speaker 2: with the gun control laws. They said, we're not going
Speaker 2: to allow any gun control here in Wyoming, and of
Speaker 2: course you have the Republican governor pushing back on that,
Speaker 2: and he's now pushedshing back on. He also had the
Speaker 2: Republican legislature in Wyoming set up a gold reserve, and
Speaker 2: the Republican governor's pushing back on that. He doesn't want
Speaker 2: you to have guns. He doesn't want you to have gold.
Speaker 2: And you bet that these people don't want us to
Speaker 2: have cars either. Cars need to be something we need
Speaker 2: to do the opposite of what California has done. California
Speaker 2: is trying to ban cars nationwide. Because they are such
Speaker 2: a large market, they can do that. We need to
Speaker 2: pick the other direction. We need to encourage automotive freedom
Speaker 2: and liberty and mobility.
Speaker 1: Liberty. It's your move.
Speaker 3: And now the David Knight Show, Elvis, the Beatle, and
Speaker 3: the Sweet Sounds of Motown. Find them on the Oldies
Speaker 3: Channel at apsradio dot com.
Speaker 2: Well we're back. I guess we've got a lot of
Speaker 2: computer problems there right here and that are crashing. But
Speaker 2: I'm going to try to play for you the back
Speaker 2: and forth it happened with Rampaul the confirmation hearing from
Speaker 2: Mark Wayne Mullen. This is a guy who is a
Speaker 2: congressman then a Senator, and Trump wants an angry guy
Speaker 2: to run Ice as we have seen. And ram Paul
Speaker 2: was question saying why somebody who's got, as he puts it,
Speaker 2: anger issues should be put in charge of Ice and
Speaker 2: border patrol, As if we don't know that's exactly what
Speaker 2: Trump wants. He wants a civil war.
Speaker 12: I entered the Senate the same year that Representative Gaby
Speaker 12: Giffords was shot. I knew then that the state of
Speaker 12: political rhetoric was encouraging violence. I think it's imperative now
Speaker 12: more than ever that the leaders in our country disavow
Speaker 12: violence and lead by example. Through the years, I've personally
Speaker 12: been exposed multiple times to political violence. I was in
Speaker 12: the right field batting cage when the Craze shooter unleashed
Speaker 12: nearly two hundred shots at our congressional baseball practice. I'll
Speaker 12: never forget Steve's calise, valiantly trying to drag his body
Speaker 12: away as the gunman continued. Later that year, a trump
Speaker 12: hating fellon attacked me from behind in my yard. I
Speaker 12: was just straightening up from picking up a tree limb.
Speaker 12: I was wearing noise cancelation headphones, so I'm coming running pell.
Speaker 8: Mell down the hill. I was struck in the back.
Speaker 12: The force of the blow sent us through the air
Speaker 12: nearly ten feet down the hill until his shoulder impaled
Speaker 12: me as we hit the ground.
Speaker 8: Six of my ribs were broken.
Speaker 12: Three of the ribs were completely separated, such that for
Speaker 12: weeks the ends of the ribs would grind upon each other.
Speaker 8: My lung was damaged.
Speaker 12: For weeks, I could inhale, but not have the rib
Speaker 12: strength to exhale.
Speaker 8: I developed two pneumonias.
Speaker 12: The pain was such that I could only sit up
Speaker 12: in bed by tying a rope to the foot of
Speaker 12: the bed and pulling myself up.
Speaker 8: But even then the pain was that of a thousand knives.
Speaker 12: Over the year of recovery, I began to cough up
Speaker 12: blood removal a part of my lung complications led to
Speaker 12: an infection in the space between my lung and chest wall.
Speaker 12: I spent a week in the hospital having the infection
Speaker 12: levaged every six hours through a chest tube recently sentatormolin.
Speaker 12: If you have time to listen, You were confronted by
Speaker 12: constituents that were angry because you voted against my amendment
Speaker 12: to stop all funding for refugee welfare programs. Instead of
Speaker 12: explaining your vote to continue these welfare programs for refugees,
Speaker 12: you decided to transfer the blame. You told the media
Speaker 12: that I was a freaking snake and that you completely
Speaker 12: understood why I had been assaulted. I was shocked that
Speaker 12: would justify and celebrate this violent assault that caused me
Speaker 12: so much pain in my family, so much pain. I
Speaker 12: just wonder if someone who applauds violence against their political
Speaker 12: opponents is the right person to lead an agency that
Speaker 12: has struggled to accept limits to the proper use of force.
Speaker 12: You might argue you were mad and upset about being
Speaker 12: confronted by your constituents. The Senator, all your constituents are
Speaker 12: justifiably upset with you. By now, most of America knows
Speaker 12: that the Somali welfare fraud in Minnesota stole over nine
Speaker 12: billion dollars.
Speaker 8: But instead of defending your.
Speaker 12: Vote, you took to continue the vote to continue these
Speaker 12: refugee welfare programs.
Speaker 8: You chose to lash out at me.
Speaker 12: You went on to brag that you'd already told me
Speaker 12: to my face that you completely understood and approved of
Speaker 12: the assault.
Speaker 8: Well, that's a lie. You got a chance today.
Speaker 12: You can either continue to lie or you can correct
Speaker 12: the record. You have never had the courage to look
Speaker 12: me in the eye and tell me that the assault
Speaker 12: was justified.
Speaker 8: So today you'll have test to clear with me today.
Speaker 12: Why you believe I deserve to be assaulted from behind,
Speaker 12: have six ribs broken and a damage lung. Tell me
Speaker 12: to my face why you think I deserved it. And
Speaker 12: while you're at it, explained to the American public why
Speaker 12: they should trust a man with anger issues to set
Speaker 12: the proper example for Ice and Border Patrol agents. Explain
Speaker 12: to the American public how a man who has no
Speaker 12: regrets about brawling in a Senate committee consider a proper
Speaker 12: example for over two hundred and fifty thousand men and
Speaker 12: women who work at the Department of Homeland Security.
Speaker 8: Senator Peters, you're recognized for your opening comment.
Speaker 2: Well, and I don't know, we're still having some problems
Speaker 2: with the board. It got out of sync there and
Speaker 2: ended the video early, but as you get here what
Speaker 2: he was saying, Mark Wayne Mullin was called on his
Speaker 2: votes again. Rampaul introduced something to stop the funding or
Speaker 2: to reduce the funding. I don't know exactly what his
Speaker 2: bill said. The funding that was part of the refugee
Speaker 2: program which brought in the Somalies. They didn't walk across
Speaker 2: the border, and it subsidized them to a lot of
Speaker 2: these other institutions. And I had pointed out before that
Speaker 2: not only did they not even reduce this program, let
Speaker 2: alone stop it, but they nearly doubled it. They went
Speaker 2: from five billion dollars to Trump just put it in
Speaker 2: at eleven billion. He did this as all of this
Speaker 2: stuff is happening with the Somali fraud. They nearly double it.
Speaker 2: So we're going to give eleven billion dollars to more
Speaker 2: people like the Smalies to come in. I don't know
Speaker 2: if they're expecting Ukrainian mafia people to come in next
Speaker 2: or what the purpose of that was. Mark Wayne Mullen
Speaker 2: voted to not only not reduce it, but to increase it,
Speaker 2: and so his consistuents were angry with him, and then
Speaker 2: he basically attacked ran Paul for introducing a bill to
Speaker 2: stop the welfare magnet. He doesn't want to stop the
Speaker 2: welfare magnet. He wants people to come here so they
Speaker 2: can have an excuse to have a totalitarian federal police
Speaker 2: force to bully people. And so again the real solution
Speaker 2: is welfare magnet. And he is against stopping any aspect
Speaker 2: of the welfare magnet. And he attacked ran and so
Speaker 2: this is that was just the introduction to the hearing
Speaker 2: because Ram Paul is the chairman of the hearing. And
Speaker 2: then it got to the point where they had their
Speaker 2: back and forth.
Speaker 12: You offer no apology, sir, and you offer no apology today,
Speaker 12: and no regrets.
Speaker 8: Haven't I known the word apologize? Haven't heard the word regret.
Speaker 12: Haven't heard I misspoke and it was heated and I
Speaker 12: made a mistake, Actually any of those words, sir.
Speaker 13: I actually it wasn't heated. And I'm not apologizing for
Speaker 13: point not.
Speaker 12: Your good or goodn't So you're you're jolly well fine,
Speaker 12: And you want the American public and the people up
Speaker 12: here to vote that may or may not vote for you,
Speaker 12: to know that you supported the felonious violent attack on
Speaker 12: me from behind.
Speaker 13: I did not say I supported it. I said I
Speaker 13: understood it. There's a difference, so.
Speaker 12: That means you really didn't approve of it, just completely
Speaker 12: understand it. What do you think most people would interpret
Speaker 12: completely understand to be support for or a condemnation of
Speaker 12: the violence.
Speaker 13: You know where to find me any place, anytime, cowboy. Sorry,
Speaker 13: this is a time, and this is a place. If
Speaker 13: you want to run your mouth, we can be too
Speaker 13: consenting adults. We can finish it here.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's fine, perfect, you.
Speaker 13: Want to do it now.
Speaker 1: I'd love to do it right now.
Speaker 13: Let's stand your butt up.
Speaker 8: Then you stand up, but.
Speaker 14: Them'll hold stop it?
Speaker 1: Oh no, sit down?
Speaker 3: You know you're United States at Okay, down?
Speaker 2: Please?
Speaker 10: All right?
Speaker 8: Can I respond it?
Speaker 1: Hold it?
Speaker 15: If he got up to a tru thug gone at
Speaker 15: it right there in the area.
Speaker 13: I would have probably jump over the dice at that point,
Speaker 13: you have to be called out of If not, this
Speaker 13: guy continues to get away with this stuff. And it's
Speaker 13: just you know, it's silly, it's stupid. But every now
Speaker 13: and they need to get a.
Speaker 1: Punch in the face.
Speaker 13: Well, go back to the eighteen hundreds and seventeen hundreds.
Speaker 13: They used to have canes and duels and yeah, and
Speaker 13: there's a way that men used to settle their differences.
Speaker 13: I ignored him four times to be part of that.
Speaker 13: And people say, yes, you're supposed to ignore it. Well,
Speaker 13: you know, I'm I'm not a very good Christian. I
Speaker 13: try to be a good Christian. And I know people
Speaker 13: say you're supposed to turn the other cheek. I prefer
Speaker 13: the David method, but.
Speaker 16: We need to move from an almost.
Speaker 13: I'm not afraid of biting.
Speaker 8: I will bite biting.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I'm gonna fight, I'm gonna buy. I'll fight dirty,
Speaker 2: just like Pete Hegseth says he does in hindsight.
Speaker 13: Any regrets, No, I really don't.
Speaker 8: So no regrets.
Speaker 12: In fact, even after your anger had cooled, you were
Speaker 12: still bragging that if he had only been brave enough
Speaker 12: to stand up, you jumped over the days and tardy Molessen,
Speaker 12: because that's how men should settle their differences. Do you
Speaker 12: think fighting as a resolution for political difference is a
Speaker 12: good example for the men and women of Ice and
Speaker 12: Border Patrol.
Speaker 2: That's exactly what Trump wanted.
Speaker 12: Half a dozen victory lap interviews where you pointed out
Speaker 12: that the union guy was just lucky that fear kept
Speaker 12: him from standing up. Dana Bash ask you if you
Speaker 12: have any regrets about bringing violence to a Senate committee,
Speaker 12: and you replied that you have no regrets. Today you've
Speaker 12: said you have no regrets about being happy, being completely understanding.
Speaker 8: Why I was attacked from behind.
Speaker 12: You had no regrets about, you know, instigating a brawl
Speaker 12: in a Senate committee hearing.
Speaker 8: Are those still your opinions.
Speaker 13: Mister chairman, You're going to have your opinion. I'm going
Speaker 13: to have mine as to Secretary of Homeland Security. I'm
Speaker 13: going to super mind and security to this country, and
Speaker 13: I'm going to stay laser focused on that.
Speaker 8: Senator Peters.
Speaker 2: Is not that amazing. That's the kind of character. And
Speaker 2: I don't mean that he's got character. I mean a
Speaker 2: kind of actor that Donald Trump wants. Donald Trump wants
Speaker 2: people who are authoritarian because he wants a tutalitarian society.
Speaker 2: He wants somebody like Mark Wayne Mullen put in charge
Speaker 2: of an institution that shouldn't even exist, going back to
Speaker 2: nine to one, want right, going back to nine to eleven.
Speaker 2: It's part of the Patriot Act. The Department of Homeland
Speaker 2: Security should not even exist. And he wants to put
Speaker 2: a thug like Mark Wayne Mullen in as the person
Speaker 2: who's going to run. That absolutely inappropriate, But that's characterization
Speaker 2: of the entire Trump regime you have, And Culture said
Speaker 2: in an op ed piece here she said, how can
Speaker 2: any Republican vote to confirm Mark Wayne Mullen. I don't understand,
Speaker 2: and certainly I don't think the Democrats are going to
Speaker 2: vote to confirm him, a long time immigration hawk. Culture
Speaker 2: later added, amazingly, DHS nominee Mark Wayne Mullen voted against
Speaker 2: cutting welfare for non citizens not years ago, that was
Speaker 2: his vote this month. They still don't want to stop
Speaker 2: the welfare magnet. And of course, as you've got people
Speaker 2: who are pushing for just these thuggish tactics of ICE
Speaker 2: on the street, it is the reality is not that
Speaker 2: they're getting the worst of the worst out there. The
Speaker 2: Reason talks about this, they point out that seventy three
Speaker 2: percent of the people that ICE has picked up don't
Speaker 2: have any criminal record. As a matter of fact, do
Speaker 2: you remember the guy we used to play this clip
Speaker 2: a lot sheriff Moonpie.
Speaker 17: So just chill out, you know, drink your seven up,
Speaker 17: eat a moonpie, quit murdering people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, that'd be good advice for Ice, wouldn't it.
Speaker 2: Ice and border patrol chill out, have a moon pie,
Speaker 2: stop murdering people. Well, he has pushed back against Ron
Speaker 2: Desantist and DeSantis in Florida. And this guy is not
Speaker 2: a liberal at all. As a matter of fact, he's
Speaker 2: an interesting sheriff from Polk County, Grady Judd, and he
Speaker 2: will get out there saying, hey, somebody breaks into your house,
Speaker 2: please do us a favor and kill them. He's a
Speaker 2: pretty conservative judge, but he's not about rounding up all
Speaker 2: the people that are here that have not committed crime.
Speaker 2: He said, we don't have that's a couple of lifetimes
Speaker 2: worth of work to do that. We need to focus
Speaker 2: on the people who are criminals, who are committing crimes.
Speaker 2: And so there was a council of Florida law enforcement
Speaker 2: leaders appointed to advise on the state's hardline immigration policies,
Speaker 2: but instead of calling for a pathway for citizenship or
Speaker 2: certain immigrants who entered the country illegally, Polk County Sheriff
Speaker 2: Grady Jed said that while he had no problems working
Speaker 2: with federal authorities to deport illegal immigrants with criminal records,
Speaker 2: he was concerned about stories from constituents about long time
Speaker 2: residents who had been brought to the US illegally as
Speaker 2: children and who had no other criminal record, but were
Speaker 2: detained while checking in at ice Field offices. And this
Speaker 2: is happening because again Trump put out quotas for these people.
Speaker 2: So they're going in for the low hanging fruit. Somebody's
Speaker 2: going in trying to get their paperwork together. Let's just
Speaker 2: pick him up when they have their appointment. We do
Speaker 2: not have to try to find him on the streets,
Speaker 2: he says, while Congress sits on their hands and does
Speaker 2: nothing about this. We're on the ground floor with this
Speaker 2: day in and day out. We're looking in the eyes
Speaker 2: of these folks that, yes, came here inappropriately, but some
Speaker 2: came here inappropriately only to do better for themselves and
Speaker 2: their families. And again, cut off the welfare. But Mark
Speaker 2: Wayne Mullen doesn't want to cut off the welfare. That's
Speaker 2: what I've said. The problem is the welfare. He doesn't
Speaker 2: want that. He wants to have a reason to fight,
Speaker 2: just like Trump. That's why Trump has picked somebody like him.
Speaker 2: So Grady Judd held a press conference on Tuesday to
Speaker 2: clarify his position he stressed that he fully supports the
Speaker 2: Trump administration and ICE, but he didn't back down from
Speaker 2: his position that immigrants who entered the country illegally but
Speaker 2: otherwise lived as law abiding, contributing members of society said
Speaker 2: should have a path to citizenship. He's a very notably
Speaker 2: conservative judge and a longtime ally of Ron de Santis,
Speaker 2: often appearing with the governor press conferences to tout the
Speaker 2: Santas's criminal justice policies. In fact, he has been the
Speaker 2: subject of numerous critical Reason stories over the years for
Speaker 2: his office's dubious human trafficking stings and his questionable statements,
Speaker 2: such as claiming on Fox and Friends that marijuana is
Speaker 2: quote killing people every day across the US. So he's
Speaker 2: a drug warrior and he's got some issues for and
Speaker 2: Recess called him out on that. But still, this is
Speaker 2: a bridge too far, even for somebody who's a drug warrior,
Speaker 2: even for somebody who is a conservative sheriff. And the
Speaker 2: comments are awkward because DeSantis has positioned Florida as one
Speaker 2: of the Trump administration's strongest allies and its mass deportation campaign.
Speaker 2: DeSantis has made cooperating with federal immigration authorities mandatory for
Speaker 2: county and local officials under threat of him DeSantis removing
Speaker 2: them from office. For example, Party attorney Florida Attorney General
Speaker 2: James Untermeyer recently sent a letter to the mayor of
Speaker 2: Tampa warning that DeSantis would quote remove the mayor from
Speaker 2: office unless the city rescinded a policy banning the Tampa
Speaker 2: Police Department from participating in broad immigration sweeps such as
Speaker 2: construction site raids and traffic checkpoints. And so the city
Speaker 2: quickly rewrote its policy. And I don't agree with that either.
Speaker 2: I think we need to have a separation of powers,
Speaker 2: certainly in Washington and certainly between Washington and the States,
Speaker 2: and even within the States. I don't like this kind
Speaker 2: of thuggish behavior from Ronda Santa's. This is another black
Speaker 2: mark against Rononda Santa's. He got several things right. He
Speaker 2: was early on in terms of identifying the issue with
Speaker 2: the CBDC and a solution for it. And he's been
Speaker 2: there with some other issues like that, some pro life issues.
Speaker 2: But remember he went to Israel to sign a censorship bill.
Speaker 2: Don't talk about this foreign government. So the guy is
Speaker 2: completely owned. And then he has the same kind of
Speaker 2: attitude in terms of Donald Trump and so the reason
Speaker 2: is saying this sheriff, even though he's conservative, he's standing
Speaker 2: his ground on this, and he's absolutely right. If somebody's
Speaker 2: a criminal, absolutely deport them. They shouldn't be released in
Speaker 2: the first place. This is one of the things that
Speaker 2: we say, well, here's this guy who's got a long
Speaker 2: criminal record and he's out on the streets. Why is that.
Speaker 2: So we need to stop the welfare magnet. And then
Speaker 2: we also need to fix our government court system. It's
Speaker 2: the government that is letting these people loose. They came
Speaker 2: in once, but when you look at somebody who has
Speaker 2: a long wrap sheet, that means that our own government
Speaker 2: is releasing them repeatedly. Right, these catch and release programs,
Speaker 2: you need to release them into another country is what
Speaker 2: you need to do. But they're not doing that. And
Speaker 2: so the problem when you look at immigration, the problem
Speaker 2: really is one that needs to be reformed. And rather
Speaker 2: than sending out a bunch of thugs, thuggish cops that
Speaker 2: are going to pick fights with people kill people on
Speaker 2: the streets. Instead of that, why don't you keep the
Speaker 2: criminals locked up? Why don't you get rid of the
Speaker 2: criminals deport them out of the country. That would be
Speaker 2: the rational thing to do, but they're not going to
Speaker 2: do that. Judd said law enforcement should continue focusing on
Speaker 2: undocumented immigrants who commit crimes. He said, otherwise, there's two
Speaker 2: lifetimes worth of work for law enforcement to deal with.
Speaker 2: There's so many people that are here at this point
Speaker 2: in time. Well, we're going to take a quick break
Speaker 2: and we will be right back there.
Speaker 9: We are.
Speaker 1: Making sense common again. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 3: Elvis, a Beatle and the Sweet Sounds of Motown. Find
Speaker 3: them on the Oldies channel at APS radio dot com.
Speaker 2: Well, it looks like the fertilizer is about to hit
Speaker 2: the fan, and this is something else that is coming.
Speaker 2: I just oil, but also the basis for much of
Speaker 2: the fertilizer that we get worldwide happening right now at
Speaker 2: planting season time. You've got people in the United States
Speaker 2: saying they're having a difficult time getting fertilizer and the
Speaker 2: fertilizer of the elements that they're getting from this to
Speaker 2: make nitrogen based fertilizer. One half of all globally traded
Speaker 2: sulfur and one third of all globally traded nitrogen fertilizer
Speaker 2: passes through the Strait of Hormoves. But it's worse than that,
Speaker 2: because they're going after the facilities that actually produce the
Speaker 2: stuff that they then transit through the Strait of Hormos
Speaker 2: to produce the chemicals needed to grow much of the
Speaker 2: plant's crops. Natural gas is broken down to extract hydrogen,
Speaker 2: which is combined with nitrogen to make ammonia and then
Speaker 2: mixed with other elements carbon dioxide. For example. All told,
Speaker 2: nearly a third of global trade for nitrogen fertilizer passes
Speaker 2: through the Straight of Hormuz, which almost half of the
Speaker 2: world's sulfur essential and producing phosphate fertilizers also travels through
Speaker 2: the corridor. But it's worse than just not being able
Speaker 2: to get the stuff through, because we had yesterday, actually
Speaker 2: two days ago, we had Israel and its puppet, the
Speaker 2: Trump regime, attacked a natural large natural gas facility that
Speaker 2: is co owned by Iran and cutter our ally supposed
Speaker 2: an ally, what are they doing that for? And that
Speaker 2: is absolutely insane that you're going to attack something that
Speaker 2: is vital and essential for world production of a fertilizer
Speaker 2: and something that is co owned by one of our allies.
Speaker 2: But that's what Israel is doing now. Israel wants to
Speaker 2: burn the world down, and there's a reason for that,
Speaker 2: I believe. I believe that they want to take the
Speaker 2: entire Middle East, and one of the ways that you
Speaker 2: do that is to destroy their economies. That makes it
Speaker 2: very viable, but it's going to destroy everybody's economies here.
Speaker 2: Fertilizer producers in other countries we be forced to shut
Speaker 2: down if they're not able to get the liquefied natural
Speaker 2: gas that normally comes to them to the state of Hormeos.
Speaker 2: But see, even if they were to open up the
Speaker 2: Strait of Hormoz, if Israel and Iran just destroy all
Speaker 2: of these different facilities that produce the natural gas. If
Speaker 2: they destroy the facilities that are the oil refineries, the
Speaker 2: oil wells, the ports, and all the rest of this stuff,
Speaker 2: it doesn't matter if the strait is open. If they
Speaker 2: destroy the means of production, we have a long wait
Speaker 2: before we could even get that back up again, even
Speaker 2: after all the hostilities stop. In Virginia, a farmer named
Speaker 2: John Boyd recently admitted to NBC News that local dealers
Speaker 2: are telling him we can't get the fertilizer that we
Speaker 2: need at this time of year, they'll call them. A
Speaker 2: farm Bureau says, we're really facing a worst case scenario.
Speaker 2: The war in Iran has led to the closure of
Speaker 2: the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping route not only
Speaker 2: for oil and gas, but also for fertilizers needed to
Speaker 2: produce the world's food. And yet Israel and the US
Speaker 2: just bombed one of the facilities that produces a fertilizer.
Speaker 2: That's how insane this is all becoming. So we have,
Speaker 2: as the Trump administration said, glyphaset is essential, and we're
Speaker 2: going to compel the production of glyphast, and we're going
Speaker 2: to give them legal immunity from the cancer that it
Speaker 2: causes so many people.
Speaker 4: You know, your product is good when you have to
Speaker 4: have the government come in and mandate that people use it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and protect them from liability like they did the
Speaker 2: vaccine people. And so glyphast, this poison is a defense emergency, right,
Speaker 2: But fertilizer to grow food is not. That's the logic
Speaker 2: of Donald Gump, this idiot who is running our country
Speaker 2: right now, running it like a king, like a dictator.
Speaker 2: Fertilizer that would normally be traveling through the straighth hor
Speaker 2: moves is not going to be getting the hands of
Speaker 2: farmers around the world in the middle of April, and
Speaker 2: so this is going to lead to more Donald Gump
Speaker 2: supply chain disruptions. It's not just not being able to
Speaker 2: ship it, but it's being able to make it. Or
Speaker 2: the New American is writing about as well, raising the
Speaker 2: risk of food inflation and worsening global hunger. You think
Speaker 2: Trump cares about any of that. So again, American farmers
Speaker 2: always going to be taking a beating from the guy
Speaker 2: they love, Donald Trump, whether it's the terraces now, the
Speaker 2: fertilizer and the diesel fuel that they need to run
Speaker 2: their tractors and bucks. All of this Trump is focused
Speaker 2: on making sure. Of course he'll look out for the
Speaker 2: big agg producers, but the little guys, you know, just
Speaker 2: like Hillary Clinton said, I can't be bothered all of
Speaker 2: you under capitalized small businesses. If you can't handle this
Speaker 2: by printing money on Wall Street, we don't really care
Speaker 2: about you. Core agricultural inputs, including urea, ammonia, sulfur, nitrogen phosphates,
Speaker 2: have surged in price as the war disrupts shipping through
Speaker 2: the strait over moves. The timing is critical despite comes
Speaker 2: during spring planting. Business Insider notes that nearly half of
Speaker 2: global urea and sulfur shipments move through the Strait. About
Speaker 2: twenty percent of natural gas used for nitrogen fertilizers also
Speaker 2: transits the region, According to the Fertilizer Institute, this creates
Speaker 2: a clear bottleneck, and when transit slows, supply contracts very
Speaker 2: quickly and input costs rise. And again, all of this
Speaker 2: stuff was written before Israel in the United States attacked
Speaker 2: the places that produce it. This is just about transporting it.
Speaker 2: Katherine Austin Fitz has already dubbed this economic effect COVID
Speaker 2: two point oh. Again, when you have Trump two point oh,
Speaker 2: you're going to get COVID two point oh. Everything is
Speaker 2: about destroying our global supply chain. Everything the man has done,
Speaker 2: whether you're talking about these ridiculous terrorifts that he put
Speaker 2: on his tariff tantrums that he had, she said. She
Speaker 2: questioned Katherine Austin fits question whether the prolonged blockades really
Speaker 2: rooted in America's inability to solve it, implying the a
Speaker 2: degree of intent. She also stressed the timing of cuts
Speaker 2: to food assistance programs by the Trump administration, raising concerns
Speaker 2: about how such decisions intersect with a rapidly worsening global
Speaker 2: supply shock. She said, the federally domestic and international food
Speaker 2: assistant systems are unconstitutional. Yet the reality is that millions
Speaker 2: have become dependent upon them, and so now you pull
Speaker 2: that away from them if you want conflict and chaos
Speaker 2: for your great reset. Global supply chains are being disrupted
Speaker 2: yet again. Food systems are coming under pressure yet again,
Speaker 2: Trump two point zero, just like you did the first time.
Speaker 2: Prices for essentials are rising to conserve energy. Some countries
Speaker 2: and firms are reintroducing remote work policies. The situation may
Speaker 2: be used as an excuse to shut down and impose
Speaker 2: other forms of control, said Katherine austen Fitz, and she's
Speaker 2: absolutely right about that. Well, let's take a look at
Speaker 2: the policies of President Gump. Are low iq President. This
Speaker 2: is an up ed piece from the Bulwark said, you
Speaker 2: won't believe Trump's dumbest iran mistake. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: He's got a lot of them. We could spend a
Speaker 2: lot of time on these things. I mean, even when
Speaker 2: you've got people like John Bolton who loved war, like
Speaker 2: Lindsey Graham, complaining about it.
Speaker 14: Well, I think it's clearly critical to reopen the Straight,
Speaker 14: and I'm still surprised that it wasn't a priority. Toward
Speaker 14: the beginning of the military operation, what we did, in
Speaker 14: addition to taking out air defenses was go after Iran's
Speaker 14: retaliatory strike capabilities, its ballistic missiles, production facilities and.
Speaker 2: That sort of thing.
Speaker 14: This is exactly right, but closing the Straight was another
Speaker 14: of Iran's retaliatory capabilities, and Trump and others Secretary of
Speaker 14: Energy have said publicly they really hadn't thought about the
Speaker 14: effect on oil prices. They didn't think it would be
Speaker 14: that great. All I can say is every time I
Speaker 14: raised regime change in the first term, one of the
Speaker 14: first things people who oppose that option would say was,
Speaker 14: but they'll close the Straight of horror moves. So, both
Speaker 14: politically and militarily, I think this should have been done earlier,
Speaker 14: among other things that should have been done differently. But
Speaker 14: right now I don't think there's any choice, and I
Speaker 14: don't think the regime wants to negotiate at all this.
Speaker 14: They see this as an existential threat. There proving to
Speaker 14: the world what we already knew that they could close
Speaker 14: the Strait, and that would cause economic trouble. And the
Speaker 14: way to open the strait is just to continue to
Speaker 14: do what we're doing militarily until the conditions make it
Speaker 14: safe to go through.
Speaker 2: So again you have the guy who has no moral
Speaker 2: or legal qualms about war. He loves war everywhere, but
Speaker 2: he's looking at this and saying, well, this is stupid.
Speaker 2: If we want to win this war, and it is,
Speaker 2: I guess President Gump, you should do a clip of
Speaker 2: him something. You know, war is like a box of chocolates.
Speaker 2: It's not just that you don't know what you're going
Speaker 2: to get, but you never know what you're going to
Speaker 2: do next. Because that's the way the Trump is conducting
Speaker 2: this war. They never know what they're going to do next.
Speaker 2: They're just going to have to see what comes out
Speaker 2: of the box. The Pandora's box. Actually well as a
Speaker 2: Bullwark points out, stupid moves, not just securing the straight
Speaker 2: of her moves, but even when you look at mine sweepers,
Speaker 2: he said, low grade reports about Iran mining the straight
Speaker 2: of her moves. He says, I'm skeptical about this for
Speaker 2: two reasons. First of all, these claims seem to come
Speaker 2: from some American officials, and he said they're no longer
Speaker 2: a trustworthy source of information. But secondly, it's not in
Speaker 2: Iran's interest to lay minds, not yet, he said, because
Speaker 2: mines are a dead man's switch. Iran is currently looking
Speaker 2: to strike side deals for passage with China. They want
Speaker 2: to allow some like China and others to go through,
Speaker 2: so by relying on drones and missiles to close the straight,
Speaker 2: retains the flexibility to offer selective passage, which gives it
Speaker 2: both a bargaining chip and a wedge. Once mines are deployed,
Speaker 2: that strategic avenue is cut off and the strait is
Speaker 2: closed semi permanently. For that reason, deploying mines is a
Speaker 2: strategic escalation, the economic equivalent of a tactical nuke. I
Speaker 2: would expect Iran to hold that card in reserve, but
Speaker 2: he said still, he said, making it mining the strait
Speaker 2: of her moves is the single biggest danger America faced
Speaker 2: heading into any conflict with Iran. How did the commander
Speaker 2: in chief plan to deal with it? Well? He said.
Speaker 2: Six months ago, the Navy decommissioned it's four Adventure class
Speaker 2: mine sweepers that had been stationed in Bahrain. Precisely to
Speaker 2: deal with Iranian mines in the Strait of hor Moves.
Speaker 2: And that's six months ago, and he said it gets
Speaker 2: even dumber. Those four final American mine sweep left the
Speaker 2: theater in mid January, while war planning for this current
Speaker 2: operation was already underway. And of course we can look
Speaker 2: at just the strategic patrol mus are, the fact that
Speaker 2: they go to war with it forty percent empty. They
Speaker 2: had absolutely no idea, no strategic plans for any of
Speaker 2: this stuff. Well, there was an interesting op ed piece
Speaker 2: on Asia Times saying that Iran may be where the
Speaker 2: US led world order ends. American hegemony is unraveling in
Speaker 2: real time as Iran strikes Gulf States and US security
Speaker 2: guarantees proved to be hollow. Yeah, the regime that Trump
Speaker 2: may be changing might be his own.
Speaker 15: Our current stress take in Chiming, mister chairman, if you'd
Speaker 15: like it.
Speaker 7: All current strategy of nation building and regime change is
Speaker 7: a proven absolute failure.
Speaker 2: We won't bring design.
Speaker 16: We must abandon the failed policy of nation building and
Speaker 16: regime change that Hillary Clinton pushed in Iraq, in Libya,
Speaker 16: in Asia and in Syria.
Speaker 8: Regime change takes chaos. You've seen how that works. Over
Speaker 8: the last twenty years, that hasn't been too good.
Speaker 2: But of course everything Trump does is about chaos.
Speaker 8: We're getting out of the nation building business.
Speaker 2: Yeah, except in gods and other places like that for Israel. Right, Well,
Speaker 2: this essay points out that really the purpose of a
Speaker 2: large part of the basis of American power has been
Speaker 2: to leverage these Petro states, right, the Gulf States, the
Speaker 2: petro dollar, among other things. And how did that operate, Well,
Speaker 2: it was a Pax Americana, the fact that we could
Speaker 2: produce stability and keep peace and keep everything moving. And
Speaker 2: yet everything that Donald Trump has done has been designed
Speaker 2: to throw monkey wrenches into that machinery that was set
Speaker 2: up to produce prosperity and peace, especially for the Gulf States.
Speaker 2: And that's what this war has done. And so their
Speaker 2: point is is that, you know, just as the the
Speaker 2: Golf States were the key support for the petro dollar,
Speaker 2: it's also the key support for their American empire. And
Speaker 2: I say their American empire because I don't want anything
Speaker 2: to do with it, and I don't think most Americans
Speaker 2: want an empire. I think we'd be happy to see
Speaker 2: it collapse. Except for the economic costs that's going to
Speaker 2: be imposed on US when the petro dollar does collapse.
Speaker 2: The region possesses vast oil reserves, and they're now in
Speaker 2: the process of destroying that because of the wishes of Israel.
Speaker 2: The strategic bargain was that Golf states would get security
Speaker 2: protection and a region that was marked by geopolitical rivalry,
Speaker 2: the US would secure both energy stability and financial influence.
Speaker 2: And yet what is happening now, Well, now the US
Speaker 2: is attacking major petro production facilities along with Israel, even
Speaker 2: as Iran threatens, you destroy anything that we've got here,
Speaker 2: We're going to set the whole place on fire, and
Speaker 2: they've already proceeded to start doing that as of today.
Speaker 2: One major concern relates to diplomatic trust. Negotiations between the
Speaker 2: US and Iran were ongoing in Oman when the first
Speaker 2: strike occurred. Again, treachery, perfidy. How can you trust Packs
Speaker 2: Americana when they operate like Israel. Legitimacy of this operation
Speaker 2: has been widely debated. Reportedly, it lacked formal authorization from
Speaker 2: the US Congress, no approval from the UN Security Council.
Speaker 2: And of course this is even worse than Panetta, right,
Speaker 2: even Leon panetto when in that exchange with Jeff Sessions,
Speaker 2: Jeff Sessions said, well, you have put troops in Syria
Speaker 2: without talking to us. All right, Well, we will consult
Speaker 2: with our allies. We'll talk to NATO, we'll talk to
Speaker 2: are you and people we'll get We'll let you know
Speaker 2: what we decide. He goes, Oh, that's not the way
Speaker 2: the constitution work. She got to get Congress's approval first. Well, senator,
Speaker 2: will let you know what we decide. Trump is acting
Speaker 2: even without going to the UN or to NATO, not
Speaker 2: that he should, but he doesn't care what anybody thinks.
Speaker 2: And then when he gets into trouble, he starts calling
Speaker 2: out like help, mister wizard, I want to go home.
Speaker 2: You know. It's so he's calling for help. And then
Speaker 2: when they say go pound sand, then he starts threatening
Speaker 2: them through NATO. That's the way this president operates. So
Speaker 2: he's even worse than Lion Leon Panetta. So Ron's retaliatory
Speaker 2: actions have targeted infrastructure and strategic locations associated with Gulf States. Meanwhile,
Speaker 2: we do whatever BB wants. Whatever. Miriam Adelson and the
Speaker 2: other Zionist billionaires have paid Trump hundreds of millions of
Speaker 2: dollars to do so for decades. American strategy in West
Speaker 2: Asia arrested on three pillars, containing Iran, maintaining the petro
Speaker 2: dollar system, and guaranteeing the security of golf partners. Well.
Speaker 2: The foundation of this system is now crumbling. The strike
Speaker 2: in Iran has raised serious questions about both the credibility
Speaker 2: and the sustainability of US leadership in the region. One
Speaker 2: major concern relates to the diplomatic trust and the betrayal
Speaker 2: of the perfidy of saying, because that's the perfidy is
Speaker 2: actually the legal term for what the US and Israel
Speaker 2: did with these negotiations in Oman. They had a very detailed,
Speaker 2: very thorough agreement that would have stopped any possible nuclear
Speaker 2: construction from the Iranian side, But that's not what Israel wanted.
Speaker 2: They wanted to set the whole region on fire. If
Speaker 2: the US can't shield these golf states from regional escalation,
Speaker 2: can it still serve as a reliable security guaranteur. These
Speaker 2: concerns have been developing gradually. The golf sites have increasingly
Speaker 2: diversified their strategic relationships. China's expanding economic presence in the
Speaker 2: region has created alternative partnerships that were previously limited. China
Speaker 2: has also begun to play a diplomatic role. A twenty
Speaker 2: to twenty three agreement restoring relations between Saudi Arabia and
Speaker 2: Iran was facilitated by Beijing. Alternative diplomatic actors are emerging
Speaker 2: in a region that historically has been dominated by American mediation.
Speaker 2: So Trump risks undermining the very system that once sustained
Speaker 2: American leadership and their empire, which again I don't give
Speaker 2: two figs about that. The post war order commanded legitimacy
Speaker 2: because it appeared to promote stability, predictable rules, and economic growth.
Speaker 2: Think about this. Stability, economic growth, and predictable rules. Trump
Speaker 2: has worked against all three of those things from the
Speaker 2: very beginning globally, not just in the Golf area, but globally,
Speaker 2: he's worked against all of those things. If the credibility
Speaker 2: of US security guarantees continues to erode in regions that
Speaker 2: once anchored its influence, and again, we've had so many
Speaker 2: wars over oil and that has been fundamental to our
Speaker 2: petro dollar, and the petro dollar is crumbling as part
Speaker 2: of this as well, the global order may gradually shift
Speaker 2: toward a multipolar structure. History suggests that moments of strategic
Speaker 2: overreach like this can accelerate deeper transformations. For the US,
Speaker 2: the challenge will be whether it can adapt its leadership
Speaker 2: to a changing world or risk witnessing the slow erosion
Speaker 2: and eventual passing of the very order that it once built.
Speaker 2: That is truly what is happening right now. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, as they focus on this, you hear
Speaker 2: all this talk from Lindsey Graham and others, and we
Speaker 2: got to seize carg.
Speaker 8: Island longer than he has to.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's going to be much longer now.
Speaker 18: We're not going to invade a Roan there's no reason to.
Speaker 18: We're going to destroy their ability to hurt us, have
Speaker 18: a nuclear weapon bill missiles diit America and terrorize the region.
Speaker 18: Car Galland ninety percent of their income comes from oil
Speaker 18: and gas revenue. One hundred percent of that revenue generating
Speaker 18: capabilities on a single allant, mister President, take car Gallan
Speaker 18: this war is over.
Speaker 2: Well, that's not true. It's not one hundred percent of
Speaker 2: their their production there. But as one person, Danny trenowitz
Speaker 2: I said, would seizing carg Island in the war, He
Speaker 2: says not even close. He said, Iran's Carg Island the
Speaker 2: terminal through which roughly ninety percent of its oil exports flow.
Speaker 2: Could that bring the conflict to a swift end? That
Speaker 2: is a dangerously simplistic idea, he said, because that's the
Speaker 2: kind of idea is that we get from Lindsey Graham.
Speaker 2: Dangerously simplistic from Lindsey Graham, from Donald Trump, he said,
Speaker 2: it reflects a narrow economic reading of the war. First
Speaker 2: of all, the operation itself would not even be easy.
Speaker 2: Carg Island is defended, and even if seized, holding it
Speaker 2: would be an ongoing challenge. And by the way, in
Speaker 2: case you haven't looked at the map, Carg Island is
Speaker 2: a long way from the Strait of Hormuz. There's little
Speaker 2: reason to believe that Iran would end the war after
Speaker 2: losing such a strategic sight. On the contrary, the loss
Speaker 2: of territory would likely harden its resolve. Tehran has historically
Speaker 2: absorbed significant blows without capitulating. There's no indication that this
Speaker 2: case would be any different. Third, the control of carg
Speaker 2: would not neutralize Iran's most important lover, its ability to
Speaker 2: disrupt the Strait of Hormone. Even without direct control over
Speaker 2: key nodes, Iran retains asymmetric tools that can threaten maritime
Speaker 2: traffic and global energy flow. So, while karg Is Central
Speaker 2: is not Iran's only option, alternative and more limited export
Speaker 2: routes exist, and they are less efficient and more vulnerable,
Speaker 2: but they are also sufficient to prevent total economic paralysis.
Speaker 2: The idea that there's some kind of a silver bullet
Speaker 2: that is a solution of this conflict reflects a recurring
Speaker 2: misunderstanding of Iran as a system, a misunderstanding of its resilience.
Speaker 2: Seizing KRG is far more likely to complicate the war,
Speaker 2: to intensify Iranian responses, and to push any resolution further
Speaker 2: out of reach. And so Lindsey Graham says, we're not
Speaker 2: going to invade Iran, we don't need to. We just
Speaker 2: get rid of carg Island. Well, good luck with that.
Speaker 2: It's going to cost a lot of lives and it's
Speaker 2: not going to be effective either. Dangerous and simplistic, Lindsey Graham.
Speaker 2: And it's amazing to look at these two chicken hawks,
Speaker 2: Lindsey Graham and Sean Handy talking about sending other people
Speaker 2: to their death for what for Israel. That's exactly what
Speaker 2: this is all for. It's not going to be an
Speaker 2: effective strategy whatsoever. And we know that. Let's take a
Speaker 2: look at Ben Shapiro and his op ed piece a
Speaker 2: week ago. It has not aged very well been As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, I'm going to contrast what Ben
Speaker 2: Shapiro says with what David Stockman says. David Stockman was
Speaker 2: there when you had the marine barracks was bombed, the
Speaker 2: couple hundred marines were killed. Iron was behind that, and
Speaker 2: he said, that is something that is really that along
Speaker 2: with the embassy takeover or the two events in the
Speaker 2: minds of Americans that everybody goes back to. But when
Speaker 2: we look at what is really happening here, the US
Speaker 2: has lost about a dozen of these MQ nine Reaper
Speaker 2: drones in the Iran war. Now what's going on with that?
Speaker 2: How are they shooting down that many of them? That's
Speaker 2: about three hundred and sixty million dollars right there, and
Speaker 2: these things should tell us something about Iran's military cap
Speaker 2: building when they're able to take down these drones that
Speaker 2: operate at such a high level. Each of these drones
Speaker 2: cost about thirty million, So the US has lost several
Speaker 2: manned aircraft as well, including three F thirty five I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: F fifteen fighter jets and one case, one thirty five
Speaker 2: refueling tanker, which there's a dispute over that. They say
Speaker 2: that it crash landed, others say that it was shot down.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, I seeing one guy who
Speaker 2: was a former military guy said, when you look at this,
Speaker 2: he said, the two dangerous times when you have a
Speaker 2: plane or when you're landing and taking off. But he said,
Speaker 2: typically it's shot down if it goes down mid flight,
Speaker 2: as this one did. So it's questions about that. Would
Speaker 2: they lie to us about that? Of course they would.
Speaker 2: The investigators died suddenly have suddenly received a very concerning
Speaker 2: piece of intel. They said, we wanted to share with
Speaker 2: our followers regarding the war with Iran. Of the course,
Speaker 2: in the last four years, this same source has given
Speaker 2: us intel that we've shared and they've never been wrong.
Speaker 2: What they're saying is America only has about a week
Speaker 2: of missiles left to defend allies in the Middle East,
Speaker 2: and that is the key issue. So everybody said from
Speaker 2: the very beginning, who's going to run out of missiles? First? Well,
Speaker 2: nobody knows how many of the other side has to
Speaker 2: start with with any certainty. However, what we do know
Speaker 2: is that with these systems they had to anti missile systems,
Speaker 2: they had to fire two or three missiles for every
Speaker 2: missile that the Iranians fired. So unless we've got two
Speaker 2: or three times the amount of missiles that they had,
Speaker 2: and they're already talking about that, of course they'll come
Speaker 2: back and say, no, we have virtually unlimited amounts of
Speaker 2: conventional bombs and other things like that, but these very
Speaker 2: very expensive anti ballistic missile systems that we have, we
Speaker 2: don't have that many of them. And so what it's
Speaker 2: looking like now is that, as many people said, from
Speaker 2: the beginning, you had people like Scott Ridder, people like
Speaker 2: Colonel McGregor were saying that the Iranians were using their
Speaker 2: older missiles at the very beginning of the conflict, sending
Speaker 2: masses of them in to exhaust the supply of defending
Speaker 2: anti missile systems that they had, at the same time
Speaker 2: attacking the radar sites that gave them early warning. They said,
Speaker 2: they're most sophisticated stuff they were holding in reserve to
Speaker 2: use after all the defense systems were gone. And when
Speaker 2: you look at the claims that Iran has hypersonic missiles.
Speaker 2: If they have hypersonic missiles, even though it's about one
Speaker 2: thousand miles between the center geographical center of Iran and
Speaker 2: the geographical center of Israel, even that's about one thousand miles,
Speaker 2: it only takes about four or five minutes for the
Speaker 2: missiles to get in from launch. And I remember going
Speaker 2: back to the Cuban missile crisis. I was in second
Speaker 2: grade in Florida, and everybody was talking about how little
Speaker 2: warning we would have. So I went back and look
Speaker 2: that up. And to go from Cuba, which is like
Speaker 2: ninety miles away from Florida, into Florida with a missile
Speaker 2: at that time sixty years ago, it would take about
Speaker 2: ten minutes. So think about that. You know, ninety miles
Speaker 2: in about ten minutes. This has now compressed it to
Speaker 2: where you could go one thousand miles in four or
Speaker 2: five minutes. So there's no early warning with this, and
Speaker 2: that's why. And the things are moving fast enough that
Speaker 2: there is no defense against them. So we don't know,
Speaker 2: but it appears that this is going to escalate. And
Speaker 2: if you look at the number of missiles and the
Speaker 2: number of drone strikes, there was a huge amount at
Speaker 2: the very beginning on the first day of the war,
Speaker 2: and then it tapered off very quickly, but now it
Speaker 2: is starting to pick back up again. So it doesn't
Speaker 2: look like all the hubrists and bragging from Trump and
Speaker 2: warpete doesn't look like that's true. It doesn't look like
Speaker 2: they took out all of their missile sites. And then,
Speaker 2: of course, one of the other things that this post
Speaker 2: had up from their sources said, China is weighing an
Speaker 2: invasion of Taiwan by July of this year because of
Speaker 2: the very real distraction and depletion of US military stockpiles
Speaker 2: of troops resources for the Iran conflict. And of course
Speaker 2: they're watching what is happening in the Strait of her
Speaker 2: moves and saying, well, look at this, the US can't
Speaker 2: really operate here. They don't know how they can. You know,
Speaker 2: they don't really have a good path for controlling that,
Speaker 2: and we could do the same thing the Strait of Taiwan.
Speaker 2: They also say US casualties have easily reached five hundred,
Speaker 2: with many injured and dead that have not yet been
Speaker 2: admitted by the Pentagon. As a matter of fact, it's
Speaker 2: kind of interesting somebody posted this report from Fox News
Speaker 2: and said, have we entered the hide the bodies stage
Speaker 2: yet of this.
Speaker 6: War military base?
Speaker 9: When the remains of these six US service members killed
Speaker 9: in the crash of that refueling aircraft are returned to
Speaker 9: their families? Obviously a very solemn moment. John, This, of course,
Speaker 9: the second time since launching the war with Iran that
Speaker 9: the President will attend the solemn military ritual known as
Speaker 9: the Dignified Transfer.
Speaker 17: We should point out that at the request of the families,
Speaker 17: the Dignified Transfer is going to remain private. There will
Speaker 17: not be any cameras there, so, unlike we have seen
Speaker 17: in the past, we will not see scenes of the
Speaker 17: president welcoming the heroes back home.
Speaker 2: Do you think that is that the request of the families?
Speaker 2: You think the Pentagon is pushing that. Well, let's take
Speaker 2: a look at what Ben Shapiro said a week ago
Speaker 2: March the twelfth. He said, the three big lies about
Speaker 2: the Iran war. This is a week ago, hasn't aged
Speaker 2: very well, it's totally laughable. Quite frankly, even then it was.
Speaker 2: And so he's got three reasons here. And I got
Speaker 2: to say, if this doesn't destroy the credibility of Mark
Speaker 2: Levin and Ben Shapiro. I don't know what will certainly
Speaker 2: what they have done in terms they revealed themselves just
Speaker 2: to be an apologist and influencers and propagandists for Zionism.
Speaker 2: They don't care about the truth and they certainly don't
Speaker 2: care about America. So line number one, says Ben Shapiro,
Speaker 2: is that the war is a quagmire. Oh yeah, we
Speaker 2: don't have to worry about it being a quagmar. Dewey,
Speaker 2: why would anybody think it's a quagmar? Well, he said
Speaker 2: this is absurd. At the time of this writing the conflict,
Speaker 2: this is a week ago. The conflict is less than
Speaker 2: two weeks old. So how can we talk about it
Speaker 2: being a quagmire? Do you think Bennett might have to
Speaker 2: do with the understanding that everybody has that Trump A
Speaker 2: didn't have any plans. They hadn't even thought about the
Speaker 2: Strait of Hormuz. These guys really hadn't thought it through.
Speaker 2: How about maybe a quagmar is because they haven't defined
Speaker 2: what winning looks like. And if you don't have an objective,
Speaker 2: then war just goes on and on and on. And
Speaker 2: perhaps that is the objective for Israel's purposes, and so
Speaker 2: it may also be a quagmar because all of their
Speaker 2: chest beating and braggadocio is shown to not be true.
Speaker 2: And it might be a quagmar because now they are
Speaker 2: planning to try to have assaults with marines on land,
Speaker 2: boots on the ground and boots in the ground, going
Speaker 2: to get a lot of people killed. Maybe that's what
Speaker 2: has everybody asking whether or not this is going to
Speaker 2: be another Vietnam regimes, philostein news If you put boots
Speaker 2: on the grounds in Iran, it will be another Vietnam?
Speaker 1: Are you afraid of that?
Speaker 8: No, I'm not afraid of I'm really not afraid of anything.
Speaker 2: Yeah. You got to love those Irish reporters and not
Speaker 2: afraid to ask the pointed questions there. So again he says,
Speaker 2: somehow Iran is winning. Well, really, you know, when we
Speaker 2: look at what is going on with warpete, why would
Speaker 2: we think that Iran is winning. Well, look at the
Speaker 2: explanations that we get from war Pete. I'll played this
Speaker 2: clip before you know, the straight of horror moves. He says,
Speaker 2: it's not really closed.
Speaker 15: Oh really, I'll take it in chime in, mister chairman,
Speaker 15: if you'd like it all. I want to emphasize what
Speaker 15: the Chairman said about that the only thing prohibiting transit
Speaker 15: in the streets right now is Iran shooting at shipping.
Speaker 15: It is open for transit. Should Iran not do that?
Speaker 15: Now there's a reason why we show as one of
Speaker 15: our primary objectives.
Speaker 1: Destroy the navy.
Speaker 15: We understood the ability to interdict shipping is something Iran
Speaker 15: has done for forty years. It's key terrain. They've used
Speaker 15: it as leverage. The world is seeing what they'll do
Speaker 15: to fight back in that context, and so we've heard
Speaker 15: them talk about taking various measures, and we're planning for
Speaker 15: all of them. So we have a plan for every
Speaker 15: option here. We're working with our internet plan for every option,
Speaker 15: and that's not a straight we're going to allow to
Speaker 15: remain contested or with a lack of flow of commercial goods.
Speaker 1: So we're aware of that.
Speaker 15: We're laser focused on our military objectives, but also want
Speaker 15: to make sure our partners across this government understand we're
Speaker 15: working with you to make sure that energy flows and
Speaker 15: that's an important.
Speaker 2: Part except it's not. And of course the war is
Speaker 2: like a box of chocolates. Pete never knows what he's
Speaker 2: going to get next, right, And he said, we had
Speaker 2: to make sure that we destroy their navy first. They
Speaker 2: didn't have much of a navy to destroy. Bottom line,
Speaker 2: Iraq didn't have a navy. Afghanistan didn't have a navy.
Speaker 2: They didn't need one to defeat the US, and they
Speaker 2: don't need one either. You know, the navy is not
Speaker 2: really what is going to be closing the Strait of Hormuz.
Speaker 2: And even if it was the navy, the US destroyed
Speaker 2: their own mind sweeping abilities. I just reported in January
Speaker 2: they had decided six months ago they were going to
Speaker 2: decommission their mine sweepers, and they removed them in January
Speaker 2: as they were planning what they might do with this.
Speaker 2: So none of this makes any sense. So that's why
Speaker 2: Ben Shapiro, everybody thinks that Iran is somehow winning with this.
Speaker 2: And then he says, and then the third thing is
Speaker 2: that the oil shock will break the United States. Well,
Speaker 2: Ben Shapiro is not old enough to remember the Opeq
Speaker 2: oil embargo, but those of us who are those of
Speaker 2: us who remember Vietnam, those of us who remember the
Speaker 2: oil embargo, know how much this looks like that. And
Speaker 2: that's why we are looking at this, He said. Right now,
Speaker 2: critics are just spinning worst case scenarios. Well, what he's
Speaker 2: doing is he's spinning a best case scenario for Israel,
Speaker 2: not for US. And when you go back and contrast
Speaker 2: what he had to say with what David Stockman had
Speaker 2: to say. Now, David Stockman was in the Trump administration
Speaker 2: and he was in the meetings when they were talking
Speaker 2: about what happened with the US Marines and the Barute
Speaker 2: Barracks in September nineteen eighty three. He said that attack
Speaker 2: was on armed US Marines that were there to fight.
Speaker 2: He said it didn't flow from Iran's hatred of American
Speaker 2: freedoms way over here. It was in retaliation for Washington's
Speaker 2: help to Saddam Hussein to slaughter their armed teenage conscripts
Speaker 2: way over there in their own backyard. He said, Washington's
Speaker 2: utterly gratuitous nineteen eighties alliance with a very in same
Speaker 2: Saddam Hussein, who twenty years later was swinging from the
Speaker 2: end of an American rope. And so we were there
Speaker 2: with armed troops to support Saddam Hussein and what he
Speaker 2: was doing, and we're also supporting what was happening in
Speaker 2: the rock Iran War and getting involved in the Lebanon War.
Speaker 2: He said, So contexts and history make a difference. The
Speaker 2: Maga propagandists who always opened their Iran forty seven years
Speaker 2: of war on America a big lie. They cite the
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty three Marine Barracks bombing. They have no clue
Speaker 2: about how or why or when it happened, he said.
Speaker 2: As a member of the National Security Council, I saw
Speaker 2: it all up close and personal. Needless to say, our
Speaker 2: viewing was also to the proverbial visit to the sausage factory.
Speaker 2: That is, it was unappetizing in the extreme. The errors
Speaker 2: that led to the stationing of Marines and Beirut and
Speaker 2: the tragic deaths of one hundred and eighty one soldiers
Speaker 2: in September eighty three stemmed from the same old, same old,
Speaker 2: the imperatives of empire and the utterly mistaken notion that
Speaker 2: America needed allies in the Middle East and had to
Speaker 2: engage in active policies of the region in the name
Speaker 2: of national security, he said, even more visible today as
Speaker 2: we look back at it. He said, After all, nineteen
Speaker 2: eighty three marked the fading hours of the Soviet Empire
Speaker 2: that was collapsing from the sheer dead weight of Communism internally,
Speaker 2: and so he said, here's the thing. And virtually all
Speaker 2: of the urgent National Security Council discussions, which transpired on
Speaker 2: nearly a daily basis, it was never explained to us
Speaker 2: as to how America's security would be enhanced by getting
Speaker 2: in the middle of this new Israeli spat with Lebanon,
Speaker 2: which has now opened up yet again. So he says,
Speaker 2: as the crisis heated up, needless to say, we began
Speaker 2: to wonder about why we were there at all. So
Speaker 2: we took the trouble to get a series of private
Speaker 2: briefings from CIA analysts with regards to these matters. We
Speaker 2: recalled these briefings quite vividly because they showed that it
Speaker 2: was well understood and the bowels of National security apparatus
Speaker 2: then that the Reagan administration was plunging into a veritable
Speaker 2: hornet's nest of historical, religious, political, and ethnic animosities that
Speaker 2: were almost beyond comprehension alas the predicates of empire simply
Speaker 2: overruled any influence of plain facts and common sense. The
Speaker 2: predicate was that America needed to assist its ally Israel,
Speaker 2: even as it attempted to stabilize the surrounding region, which
Speaker 2: was afire with essentially irrelevant conflict. Stated differently, even the
Speaker 2: National Security Council of Ronald Reagan was blinded by the
Speaker 2: imperatives of empire. Accordingly, in the aftermath of the Barracks bombing,
Speaker 2: the National Security Council deliberations reached a low point of absurdity,
Speaker 2: which is a reminder of why a global empire should
Speaker 2: not be run from the banks of the Potomac. And again,
Speaker 2: so I was just pointing out the stability and prosperity
Speaker 2: of the region was a key foundation of the American
Speaker 2: empire and of the Petro dollar, and we have now
Speaker 2: destroyed all of those things. The US is showing that
Speaker 2: it can't be trusted as a negotiator because we engaged
Speaker 2: in perfidy and treachery. We don't care about peace, we
Speaker 2: don't care about prosperity. So that is where we are
Speaker 2: right now. I've got a couple of comments before we
Speaker 2: take a break. Guard Goldsmith can see a Guard liberty conspiracy.
Speaker 2: So DeSantis was identified by GEPMO prisoners who were tortured there. Yes,
Speaker 2: another thing, when he was a jag, he visited the
Speaker 2: base and saw the torture, did nothing to report the
Speaker 2: war crimes. Yeah, that's another big mark against him as well.
Speaker 2: Mav twenty twenty two says, now thugs are showing up
Speaker 2: at people's houses in Florida and questioning them about social
Speaker 2: media posts if they question Israel. That's right. I mean,
Speaker 2: just think about this as a governor. First of all,
Speaker 2: he's going to work sign a law that contradicts the
Speaker 2: plane reading of the First Amendment, right, but then he
Speaker 2: goes to this foreign country to sign it. That's just
Speaker 2: an amazing display. It shows that he really doesn't care.
Speaker 2: He's just like Donald Trump when it comes to that.
Speaker 2: We need to have somebody that is not beholden to Israel,
Speaker 2: that is not a puppet of Israel. Swamp Lover says,
Speaker 2: New York States made it almost impossible to get ammunition,
Speaker 2: no mail order and you need a background check at
Speaker 2: the counter to buy locally. That's something that goes back.
Speaker 2: Really first saw that with the Obama administration. They realized
Speaker 2: that they need to focus on ammunition even more so
Speaker 2: than on gun control. And what they did was they
Speaker 2: started going after it from a supply standpoint. Even they
Speaker 2: stopped momentarily, they got restarted, but they tried to stop
Speaker 2: the recycling of brass for ammunition from the military, so
Speaker 2: when the military had spent brass, they could sell it
Speaker 2: and to people who are making private ammunition and they
Speaker 2: could make a lot more money with that. Instead, what
Speaker 2: they did was they and I remember it was up
Speaker 2: in New York as Fort Trump, they crushed the brass
Speaker 2: and then sold it as scrap to China for a
Speaker 2: fraction of why they could have sold it as spent brass.
Speaker 2: North American house supposed as no cop nor anybody else
Speaker 2: under the age of forty ever knew America as something
Speaker 2: approaching a free country. That's right, I agree, Marky, Mark
Speaker 2: New Jersey said, Dave. The USMC troops Marines are guarding
Speaker 2: the barracks, they were guarding the barracks in eleven in
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty three, weren't allowed to have their guns loaded.
Speaker 2: Had they been loaded, they could have stopped the truck
Speaker 2: and its bomb. That's right. That's the other part of
Speaker 2: the absurdity of this stuff. They don't know how to
Speaker 2: fight a war, and they don't really care about the
Speaker 2: lives of their soldiers. And I think we're going to
Speaker 2: see that in a big way once Trump gets that
Speaker 2: the Marines and that amphibious disaster that is waiting to happen.
Speaker 2: Once he gets that, they we're going to see it.
Speaker 2: Yet again. We're gonna take a quick break, folks, We'll
Speaker 2: be right back.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 3: Whether you're feeling like the blues or blue grass, ATS
Speaker 3: radio has you covered. Check out a wide variety of
Speaker 3: channels on our app at apsradio dot com.
Speaker 2: Well, while we're talking about the economic consequences of all
Speaker 2: this stuff on petro dollar being undermined, even more so
Speaker 2: in the oil region, Key oil region being set on fire,
Speaker 2: let's take a look at what's going on with gold.
Speaker 2: Why is Wyoming stashing gold inside this old newspaper building
Speaker 2: and they're wrapping it in old newspapers. Who knows Trump's
Speaker 2: occasional tough talk about slashing the US's monstrous thirty eight
Speaker 2: point nine trillion dollar debt bomb, his administration has zero
Speaker 2: real political will to slam the brakes on Washington's out
Speaker 2: of control spending spree. As a matter of fact, they
Speaker 2: can't even reduce the amount of money that they're giving
Speaker 2: to refugees coming here, like the Smalllies, they double that
Speaker 2: in the face of all this stuff. So Wyoming Republicans
Speaker 2: are gearing up for the inevitable economic train wreck when
Speaker 2: the day comes that America can no longer just print
Speaker 2: its way out of paying the interest on that colossal tab.
Speaker 2: Those one of the things that Frank Nicely was very
Speaker 2: big on here in Tennessee. He said, we need to
Speaker 2: get a regional agreement here to stockpile goal for this
Speaker 2: this very issue, and he was working with Katherine Austin
Speaker 2: Fitz and others to try to do that. I don't
Speaker 2: know what the state of that is anymore here in Tennessee.
Speaker 2: In January, Wyoming lawmakers shelled out ten million dollars to
Speaker 2: snap up twenty three hundred and twelve troy ounces of
Speaker 2: gold bars, now worth eleven point six million. So so
Speaker 2: far it's been a good investment. But as I said before,
Speaker 2: they've got pushback from this rhino. Mark Gordon, who's a
Speaker 2: Republican governor, the guy who doesn't like the tenth Amendment.
Speaker 2: I talked about that. Yesterday they had put together some
Speaker 2: legislation saying we're going to nullify federal gun control. That's
Speaker 2: to finance the Second Amendment. And we're going to do
Speaker 2: that by non commandeering, which is perfectly fine way to
Speaker 2: nullify these issues. And he doesn't like that. No, no,
Speaker 2: you do what Washington says. So he also doesn't like
Speaker 2: people making preparations for an out of control meltdown of
Speaker 2: the Fiat dollar. The move came after the legislature passed
Speaker 2: the Wyoming Gold Act, forcing the state's investment portfolio to
Speaker 2: load up on precious metals as a hedge against economic
Speaker 2: chaos including skyrocketing federal debt, raging inflation, a weakening dollar,
Speaker 2: and other doomsday scenarios. I can't put a timeline on it,
Speaker 2: said the lead sponsor, but there's going to be a
Speaker 2: sovereign debt crisis. There is no will in Washington to
Speaker 2: reign and spending. So the goal is sitting. The gold
Speaker 2: is sitting locked in a high security vault being run
Speaker 2: by private firm inside a beige, single story building that
Speaker 2: once housed the Casper, Wyoming Star Tribune. The vault is
Speaker 2: structured like an onion layer, they said, moored to bedrock
Speaker 2: and closely guarded. According to the company chief executive this There,
Speaker 2: he testified in support of the gold buying bill, which
Speaker 2: he said would help the state become a precious metal's
Speaker 2: hub for the country. While state lawmakers mused about the
Speaker 2: logistics of transporting precious metals to Wyoming via aircraft and
Speaker 2: armored vehicle, the state ultimately bought gold from a bank
Speaker 2: that had already had a stockpile in the reserve. The
Speaker 2: storage fees there had been at seven thousand dollars a
Speaker 2: year when the state purchased the gold, but cost fluctuates
Speaker 2: daily depending on gold's value, according to the state Treasurer's office.
Speaker 2: And this is all being pushed back against by the governor,
Speaker 2: who doesn't like it at all. Yeah, no gold and
Speaker 2: no reparation for a Catastphe shouldn't own guns, you shouldn't
Speaker 2: own gold, says the Republican governor. But you know what
Speaker 2: the truth is about all this, And so we just
Speaker 2: had the Federal Reserve chair Jerum Powell say, this is
Speaker 2: the time that we're going to skip changing the interest rates,
Speaker 2: not going to reduce the interest rates, even though, as
Speaker 2: he pointed out, we had zero private job creation. The
Speaker 2: only jobs being created are bureaucracies that are going to
Speaker 2: be standing on our necks and keeping us from being
Speaker 2: able to do anything productive. Zero job creation. And he
Speaker 2: said in his report, he said, we have never had
Speaker 2: this before in our history. Zero job creation. You know,
Speaker 2: we look at the stagflation that happened when the Opeque
Speaker 2: oil embargo happened. This Trump oil embargo that is there
Speaker 2: is going to be much more disruptive in terms of
Speaker 2: the quantity of oil that is disrupted in all this.
Speaker 2: And when we look at what happened in the nineteen seventies,
Speaker 2: a stagflation, well, it looks like the stag part of
Speaker 2: it is already here, already stagnant, and the inflation is
Speaker 2: going to be following very quickly. Here, how did gold
Speaker 2: perform back then? As I pointed out the other day,
Speaker 2: from the time that they did the opek Gol embargo
Speaker 2: to the time that it peaked in January nineteen eighty,
Speaker 2: it went up about eight and a half times. We're
Speaker 2: talking about what forty thousand dollars goal if that were
Speaker 2: to gold, if that were to happen today. Of course,
Speaker 2: past performance is no predictor of a future performance. But
Speaker 2: when we look at the factors that drove that, the
Speaker 2: things that created the stagflation looks very similar. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, even if you look at what it
Speaker 2: fell back to right after the peak of eight hundred
Speaker 2: dollars an ounce, it fell back into the mid five
Speaker 2: hundred dollars announce area. So I mean it was still
Speaker 2: up about a factor of five. So looking at it
Speaker 2: from today, that'd be twenty thousand dollars gold. But again,
Speaker 2: who knows what's going to happen. We do know that
Speaker 2: what they're doing is very reckless and there is a
Speaker 2: great physical realignment, says one set of analysts. This is
Speaker 2: from a bank that operates out of Belgium and France.
Speaker 2: They're analysts who look at commodities, are predicting gold at
Speaker 2: ten thousand dollars, in silver at two hundred dollars, and
Speaker 2: the death of the paper market. This is a chief
Speaker 2: strategy officer at BNP Parabas Fortis, which is as I
Speaker 2: said before. Belgium and French bank said, while the paper
Speaker 2: markets are currently in a state of panic, the physical
Speaker 2: world is just waking up to what will be the
Speaker 2: largest bull market in history. They said. The fundamental case
Speaker 2: for hard assets being bolstered by stagflation environment, where central
Speaker 2: banks may be forced to abandon price stability to prevent
Speaker 2: a broader economic collapse. They said they are quote absolutely
Speaker 2: convinced that central banks eventually will all choose to let
Speaker 2: inflation run so they can manage massive global debt loads,
Speaker 2: particularly in the US, Europe and Japan. Again, this is
Speaker 2: called monetizing the debt. You run up this tremendous debt
Speaker 2: and then you have inflation so that you can pay
Speaker 2: back the dollar denominated debt with dollars that are worth
Speaker 2: a lot less or he could even say worth less dollars.
Speaker 2: And that's the strategy of monetizing the debt. That's why
Speaker 2: they always want to have as a goal two percent inflation. Well,
Speaker 2: they may get a lot more than that, so they
Speaker 2: said they will prioritize growth and they will allow inflation
Speaker 2: to run well above the traditional two percent target. Gold
Speaker 2: will go to ten thousand dollars they think in a
Speaker 2: couple of years time, and he said he wouldn't be
Speaker 2: surprised to see two hundred dollars or so on silver
Speaker 2: in that amount of time as well. And then he
Speaker 2: talked about energy warfare, talking about South Pars and the
Speaker 2: one hundred and fifty dollars oil risk well, South Pars
Speaker 2: is the name of that liquid natural gas facility that
Speaker 2: was struck a couple of days ago by Israel and
Speaker 2: also by the US that is co owned by our
Speaker 2: ally cutter. And so he said, the physical reset is
Speaker 2: taking place against a backdrop of direct military strikes on
Speaker 2: Iran's energy infrastructure, specifically the South Pars gas field, and
Speaker 2: already we have seen and so that he's saying, well,
Speaker 2: we might get up to one hundred and fifty dollars oil risk.
Speaker 2: It peaked briefly at one hundred and twenty dollars a
Speaker 2: week or so ago. This morning it had already gone
Speaker 2: up to one hundred and fourteen because not only did
Speaker 2: they strike this facility that produces a lot of natural
Speaker 2: gas and produces all the other things that come from it,
Speaker 2: the fertilizer and other stuff like that, but then Iran
Speaker 2: began striking all these other facilities as they promised they would,
Speaker 2: And so oil is but one hundred and fourteen dollars
Speaker 2: per barrel this morning. So goal prices remain stuck below
Speaker 2: five thousand, as the federal leaves they've fed leaves rates unchanged,
Speaker 2: but still sees lower rates coming this year. So they're
Speaker 2: going to have this choice. Are they going to support
Speaker 2: jobs or are they going to support and try to
Speaker 2: fight inflation. Well, I think that the bank in the
Speaker 2: one that we just talked about this in France and Belgium,
Speaker 2: I think they got it right. I think the central
Speaker 2: banks are going to choose to monetize these massive debts
Speaker 2: because we're not the only ones that have essentially bankrupted
Speaker 2: themselves with debt, and so they're going to allow inflation
Speaker 2: to run. Trump's war for Israel is going to create
Speaker 2: inflation regardless of what the Fed does with interest rates.
Speaker 2: So they're not going to be able to fight by
Speaker 2: lowering interest rates. They're not going to be able to fight.
Speaker 2: Inflation is going to be coming because of the oil
Speaker 2: embargo from Trump that is going to flood everything they
Speaker 2: could possibly try to do. And so when we look
Speaker 2: at it, said commodity analyst at another group, cru Group.
Speaker 2: This is a group that does what they describe as
Speaker 2: business intelligence. They look at mining, metals and also fertilizer.
Speaker 2: They said that goals climb from roughly two thousand dollars
Speaker 2: an ounce a year ago to now around to high
Speaker 2: around fifty six hundred dollars in January. Think about that.
Speaker 2: You know, we're looking at this and it's kind of
Speaker 2: settled out for the last month or so around the
Speaker 2: five thousand dollars an ounce basis, but it was two
Speaker 2: thousand dollars an ounce a year ago. They said that
Speaker 2: it is doing some repricing within the existing monetary framework,
Speaker 2: rather than a collapse of the monetary framework. However, they
Speaker 2: explained the US holds just over eighty one hundred tons
Speaker 2: of gold and official reserves, and if you start to
Speaker 2: look at it in terms of what would they do
Speaker 2: if they were to try to back the dollar with gold,
Speaker 2: where would gold be, Well, they wouldn't have to have gold.
Speaker 2: If you look at M two money supply, if they
Speaker 2: were to back that with gold, that would imply eighty
Speaker 2: five thousand dollars an ounce gold. So that's not going
Speaker 2: to happen. Meanwhile, even a twenty percent backing would take
Speaker 2: us to seventeen thousand dollars gold. A tying gold to
Speaker 2: just the nation's monetary base suggests a range between eight
Speaker 2: thousand and twenty thousand, depending on the level of coverage.
Speaker 2: So these figures are not forecasts, but they highlight the
Speaker 2: scale mismatch between modern financial systems and gold reserves. Goal's
Speaker 2: upside is that it is not constrained by mining supplies
Speaker 2: or by industrial demand, but by how much instability the
Speaker 2: system can tolerate before investors demand protection. So how much
Speaker 2: of this kind of instability and chaos are people going
Speaker 2: to take from Trump before they all start looking for gold?
Speaker 2: While starting to get a hint of that right now,
Speaker 2: so they point out global debt burdens especially are expected
Speaker 2: to exceed one hundred percent of GDP for many countries
Speaker 2: around the world, so the inflation to monetize the debt,
Speaker 2: and if not, they're not going to be able to
Speaker 2: even service this debt because it has gotten so high.
Speaker 2: So it expects goal prices to continue rising in the
Speaker 2: near term, with the peak around six thousand an ounce
Speaker 2: likely over the next year. That doesn't seem to be
Speaker 2: too extraordinary, does it, because we've already hit fifty six
Speaker 2: hundred in January. If it were to go from where
Speaker 2: it is right now to six thousand, that would be
Speaker 2: a twenty percent increase, which is still amazing for anything
Speaker 2: can invest in again if you try, one of the
Speaker 2: islands of stability and all this chaos and disruption that
Speaker 2: Trump is creating is gold and silver. And if you
Speaker 2: go to David Nightie Gold, that'll take you to tony
Speaker 2: ardibun helps you to do something about that, to have
Speaker 2: physical gold and physical silver. We're going to take a
Speaker 2: quick break and we will be right back.
Speaker 1: In a world of deceit. Telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 3: Here News now at apsradionews dot com or get the
Speaker 3: APS Radio app and never miss another story.
Speaker 1: Yeah right here.
Speaker 3: You have said that the US mil Jay is essentially
Speaker 3: aerial superiority, naval.
Speaker 4: Supiority over Iran, Yet we're not escorting ships to the
Speaker 4: Strait of form you why how did you not plan
Speaker 4: for this?
Speaker 15: We plan for it, We recognize it.
Speaker 2: Because although I know about that.
Speaker 15: We want to sequentially in a way that makes the
Speaker 15: most sense for what we want to achieve and ensure
Speaker 15: that we're we're sending the right signals to the world when.
Speaker 1: We do so.
Speaker 15: He why right speaks or we speak, It's based on
Speaker 15: a full assessment of what we're up against, what we
Speaker 15: want to say to the world, how that we want
Speaker 15: them to see and understand the conflict. It's like this
Speaker 15: whole idea of the war widening. That's what the press
Speaker 15: wants to make it look like, like it's widening and chaos.
Speaker 15: And you know, we're actually closing in on grabbing hold
Speaker 15: of and controlling what objectives we want to achieve and
Speaker 15: how we want to achieve them.
Speaker 9: Shape.
Speaker 15: It's called shaping operations and setting the conditions.
Speaker 2: But when you shape, these all lives on propagandas.
Speaker 15: Tell I mean, foolish political leaders and foolish military leaders
Speaker 15: of the past will hang an exact deadline on it,
Speaker 15: or here's exactly when we'll do what we're going to do,
Speaker 15: or here's how long it's going to take us. And
Speaker 15: then if you meet that, maybe you meet it, but
Speaker 15: if you don't, you fail. And if you're far beyond,
Speaker 15: we know exactly what we're shaping and why we're sending
Speaker 15: those signals working across the Inner Agency. The straight of
Speaker 15: horror moves is something we've paid attention to from the beginning,
Speaker 15: and the American people can rest assured we will ensure
Speaker 15: that our interests are advanced, no doubt.
Speaker 2: No, you dismissed that. From the very beginning, Trump thought
Speaker 2: he was going to have an instant victory and a's
Speaker 2: just trust me. Yeah, we are the professionals here, we're
Speaker 2: the experts. We got laser focus on all this stuff.
Speaker 2: I've got plans, I just can't tell you what they are.
Speaker 2: We've got a time frame here, but I just can't
Speaker 2: tell you what it is. Well, let's tell you what's
Speaker 2: happening right now. Israel just made the single most dangerous
Speaker 2: military decision of the entire war. Nobody understands what they
Speaker 2: just triggered. Israel and the United States struck South Pars,
Speaker 2: the largest gas field on the planet. Here's what they
Speaker 2: either didn't know or didn't care about. South Pars is
Speaker 2: jointly managed by Iran and Kadar. They didn't just attack Iran,
Speaker 2: they attacked the energy backbone of their own Gulf. Ally,
Speaker 2: the Iranian has just declared all major energy facilities across
Speaker 2: the entire GCC as direct and legitimate targets and they're
Speaker 2: acting on that as of this morning. Because of the
Speaker 2: time difference. They did that overnight. They have warned that
Speaker 2: strikes are coming in the coming hours, and they did.
Speaker 2: Listed targets were Cutters, LNG Complex, Saudi Saudi's Aramko Facilities,
Speaker 2: UAE Oil Terminals, basically everything. Saudi's Aramko has already evacuated workers.
Speaker 2: This is yesterday, yesterday evening, already evacuated workers from the
Speaker 2: sam Rev refinery and Yanbu. They're not waiting. They know
Speaker 2: what's coming. Irani and hackers have already hit Aramko's digital systems,
Speaker 2: posting images and issuing threats to paralyze their infrastructure. Multiple
Speaker 2: explosions just heard in Riad, confirmed by Reuter's AFP and
Speaker 2: AP sirens are sounding in the Saudi capital. So why
Speaker 2: is all this happening? Well, because Cutter's LNG complex is
Speaker 2: the largest of its sort on Earth. It supplies thirty
Speaker 2: percent of the world's liquid natural gas. If Iran hits it,
Speaker 2: Europe's heating and supplied disappears overnight, not in months, but overnight.
Speaker 2: And they have made a big move into gas in
Speaker 2: Europe because of all this environmental nonsense. That's why the
Speaker 2: North Stream pipelines going into Germany were such a big deal,
Speaker 2: and of course the US one of those blown up.
Speaker 2: In twenty nineteen. A single drone attack on Saudi Iramco's
Speaker 2: Abquake facility, if I'm pronouncing that correctly, knocked out five
Speaker 2: point seven million barrels per day and sent oil up
Speaker 2: fifteen percent in one session. Iran now has ten times
Speaker 2: the motivation and nothing left to lose. They're showing precision
Speaker 2: strikes on Iranian targets. That's what Pete Hegseth likes to
Speaker 2: talk about. But what they're not showing you is that
Speaker 2: those strikes just gave Iran the justification to destroy every
Speaker 2: oil facility from Cutter to Saudi Arabia to the UAE.
Speaker 2: So Israel and its puppet USA bomb a gas field
Speaker 2: that is jointly owned with their ally Cutter, then Cutter
Speaker 2: our ally publicly condemns the US. Then Iran formally declares
Speaker 2: golf facilities all to be legitimate targets. Aramco starts evacuating refineries.
Speaker 2: Explosions hit ryodd this. If this was a strategic victory,
Speaker 2: then why is Iramco evading evacuating workers right now? If
Speaker 2: Iran's military is degraded, why are six Gulf nations scrambling
Speaker 2: to protect their oil fields from an attack that they
Speaker 2: believe is imminent. Crickets, We don't hear anything from these people.
Speaker 2: You don't evacuate the world's most valuable company unless you
Speaker 2: know what is coming. And this is what is happening
Speaker 2: right now. This is the way, this is the Petro
Speaker 2: war is unfolding here. This is no longer a war
Speaker 2: between the US and Iran. This is a war that
Speaker 2: is about to erase the Gulf's entire energy infrastructure, the
Speaker 2: infrastructure that power half of the planet. And of course
Speaker 2: what happens is when you look at these Gulf states
Speaker 2: right there's a lot of these monarchs and kings that
Speaker 2: have been created when the US and the British went
Speaker 2: in and created these different countries so they could extract
Speaker 2: the will only said yeah, we're going to give you
Speaker 2: a huge cut of this. So these guys have gotten
Speaker 2: fat and lazy. They hire everything out, including their defense forces,
Speaker 2: and their entire country is basically running off of the
Speaker 2: massive amounts of money that they have as oil fiefdoms.
Speaker 2: If that gets cut off, if they destroy these facilities
Speaker 2: and these people run out of money, what happens then
Speaker 2: it'll be total chaos and anarchy and all of these
Speaker 2: Golf states. And I am starting to believe that maybe
Speaker 2: this was really the plan of Israel, that the Iranian
Speaker 2: stuff was that suit nonsense, that really what they wanted
Speaker 2: was to burn down the Middle East to create chaos
Speaker 2: and regime change in all of these countries so they
Speaker 2: could then step in. Do you remember the back and
Speaker 2: forth that Mike Cuckabee had with Tucker Carlson.
Speaker 10: You've appealed to Genesis. Genesis fifteen says it's Abram, it's
Speaker 10: pre Abraham. It's Abram receives from God the news that
Speaker 10: his descendants will inherit the land. And you tell me,
Speaker 10: as the as the theologian, if I'm getting this wrong,
Speaker 10: But from the Euphrates to the Nile, I think I
Speaker 10: think that's right. And that would include like basically the
Speaker 10: entire Middle East.
Speaker 1: That would be the levant.
Speaker 10: So that would be Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, would also
Speaker 10: be big parts of Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
Speaker 19: It would be I mean, sure would go that far.
Speaker 19: I mean it would be a big piece of land.
Speaker 19: But here's the point, it.
Speaker 10: Would be a lot of places that are now countries
Speaker 10: that this particular area there were talking about.
Speaker 19: Now, Israel is a land that God gave through Abraham
Speaker 19: to a people that he chose. It was a people,
Speaker 19: a place, and a purpose. We can look at.
Speaker 2: It that way.
Speaker 19: Christian Zionism. I want to go back because that's where
Speaker 19: we started.
Speaker 10: I'm not going to let you off on this because
Speaker 10: you have led it three times that God gave this
Speaker 10: land to this people, and so it is entirely fair
Speaker 10: for me with respect to ask what land are you
Speaker 10: talking about? Because I just read Genesis fifteen, as I
Speaker 10: have many times, and that land, I think it says
Speaker 10: from the Nile to the Euphrates, which is once again
Speaker 10: basically the entire Middle East. So God gave that land
Speaker 10: to his people, the Jews, or he didn't. You're saying
Speaker 10: he did. What does that mean? Does Israel have the
Speaker 10: right to that land? Because you're appealing to Genesis, you're
Speaker 10: saying that's the original deed.
Speaker 19: It would be fine if they took it all again.
Speaker 2: Maybe that is the plan. You know, as you heard,
Speaker 2: how could we say it's a people, a place, and
Speaker 2: a purpose, And yet how could be who says that
Speaker 2: he's Christian doesn't see the purpose of God's promise to
Speaker 2: Abraham doesn't see the purpose as being Christ. It is
Speaker 2: Christ through whom all nations will be blessed. Obviously, not
Speaker 2: through Israel. We're not being blessed through Israel at all.
Speaker 2: They're plunging the world into chaos and war, and of
Speaker 2: course the people here we get back to the ethnic
Speaker 2: racism of the master race, the chosen people that is
Speaker 2: not Christian either. There is no Jew or Greek, male
Speaker 2: or female bond or free under Christ Jesus. It's all
Speaker 2: based on your relationship with God. Do you trust him,
Speaker 2: do you follow him? It's not based on your pedigree.
Speaker 2: That is the world. And then the place. What is
Speaker 2: the place? Well, of course the place is all of it,
Speaker 2: all of the Middle East that should be given to
Speaker 2: this racist state. And so this is this is Huckabee
Speaker 2: denying Christ and worshiping Israel, and that really is key
Speaker 2: and shouldn't be just dismissed as Jerald Slinty does as
Speaker 2: a fairy tale. It's not a fairy tale. It is
Speaker 2: an abomination and a twisting of the word of God.
Speaker 2: And that is very serious. That is the most serious
Speaker 2: aspect of this. But there's always consequences when you get
Speaker 2: your theology wrong, and this consequence is going to be
Speaker 2: umongous for humanity and what we're looking at here. But
Speaker 2: I think they're looking for the entire thing, and one
Speaker 2: of the ways that they do it is by destroying
Speaker 2: everything as they did in Gaza, and then making their
Speaker 2: plans as Wittkoff and Jared Kushner and Trump the real
Speaker 2: estate guys. You know, they're rubbing their hands on the
Speaker 2: sideline as well. They're going to be able to present
Speaker 2: fate and this great reset building. And frankly, I think
Speaker 2: that's really what is behind all this stuff. North American
Speaker 2: house hippo, he says, for those old enough to remember
Speaker 2: when Saddam Hussein set kuwaits or rigs on fire as
Speaker 2: the forces retreated. Yeah, that's right, Scorch Shurth policy is
Speaker 2: pretty easy to do in oil fields, isn't it. Star Barkley,
Speaker 2: thank you so much for the tip. I appreciate that,
Speaker 2: and I just want to let people know I didn't
Speaker 2: get to we went a little bit longer because we
Speaker 2: had some technical difficulty at the beginning of the show,
Speaker 2: and I don't know how long we were dead on air,
Speaker 2: but I think we have made up for it plus
Speaker 2: a little bit more. So we're going to go ahead
Speaker 2: and end it now. But thank you, Star Barkley. I
Speaker 2: really do appreciate that. I want to let everybody know
Speaker 2: where we're on the gas gauge right now. We're at
Speaker 2: fifty percent, so we really do appreciate all the support.
Speaker 2: And let me just before we go, let me just
Speaker 2: real quickly read out as a thank you, the names
Speaker 2: of the people first names and last name of those
Speaker 2: who have supported us on Zell. We have William R.
Speaker 2: Kenneth C. Susan Ell, same names I keep seeing all
Speaker 2: the time, Gregory N. Stacey A, Marilyn G, Brian P,
Speaker 2: Benjamin R, Michael P. Rose, Gregory C, Gregory I, Kelly
Speaker 2: and M. Daniel C. And Sally D. Thank you all
Speaker 2: so much for your support. We really do appreciate it.
Speaker 2: And as I said, we are at fifty percent of
Speaker 2: the gas stage now. If you'd like to know where
Speaker 2: you can find the program, you probably already founded if
Speaker 2: you're listening, but you may want to watch it in
Speaker 2: a different venue. If you're listening on a podcast, you
Speaker 2: may want to listen to it without any commercials, and
Speaker 2: we have links for how you can do that as well.
Speaker 2: Just five dollars a month, you can listen to the
Speaker 2: program without any commercials, and we also have links as
Speaker 2: to how and where you can support us. Thank you
Speaker 2: so much for joining us today. Have a good day.
Speaker 2: The common Man they created Common core and dumb down
Speaker 2: our children. They created common past, track and control us.
Speaker 2: They're Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing
Speaker 2: and the communist future. They see the common man as simple,
Speaker 2: unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity
Speaker 2: created in the image of God. That is what we
Speaker 2: have in common. That is what they want to take away.
Speaker 2: Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, us about They
Speaker 2: desire to know everything about us, while they hide everything
Speaker 2: from us. It's time to turn that around and expose
Speaker 2: what they want to hide. Please share the information and
Speaker 2: links you'll find at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you
Speaker 2: for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support
Speaker 2: us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot
Speaker 2: com