Speaker 1: In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act.
Speaker 2: It's the David Knight Show. As the clock strikes thirteen,
Speaker 2: It's Tuesday, the second of December, You're our Lord, twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five. Well, we're going to take a look at
Speaker 2: what is happening with money, with Krypto, the many different
Speaker 2: options that are out there with AI that is coming
Speaker 2: at us. Is it going to cause a collapse of civilization?
Speaker 2: If so, how and when? And what have we seen
Speaker 2: in terms of civilizational collapse in the past. Interesting article
Speaker 2: from The Atlantic skipping the fourth turning by Strauss and
Speaker 2: how that point of view, but still coming to the
Speaker 2: same conclusion seeing a cycle of civilizational rise and fall
Speaker 2: over five thousand years and what drives that, Well, it's
Speaker 2: the kind of concentration of health and power represented by
Speaker 2: big tech and big government. And we are right at
Speaker 2: the cusp of this. Will they be able to succeed
Speaker 2: Even if they do, it will not be sustainable for
Speaker 2: them except for a couple of generations. What are some
Speaker 2: of the alternatives. And we're going to take a look
Speaker 2: at the amazing lies that are coming from the White
Speaker 2: House about what is either a an amazing war crime
Speaker 2: or mass murder. We'll be right back. Well, as I
Speaker 2: said at the beginning, I want to start with an
Speaker 2: overview of where we are. And I think it is
Speaker 2: always good for us to get the big picture. Occasionally
Speaker 2: it's interesting. We've got to have it's not just interesting,
Speaker 2: but we've got to have the details. You if we're
Speaker 2: on the right track here, but we need to pull
Speaker 2: back and take a look at the overall view. And
Speaker 2: that's what I want to do for just a moment
Speaker 2: here before we get into some of the details. Lessons
Speaker 2: from five thousand years of civilizational collapse. And this is
Speaker 2: coming from the Atlantic, which is a big government, leftist establishment,
Speaker 2: globalist NATO type of perspectiveness. They said. In the Middle Ages,
Speaker 2: prophesies of a coming global collapse proliferated across Europe. Historian
Speaker 2: Norman Cohen has written that parts of Western Europe witnessed
Speaker 2: the emergence of what was called miss movements of the poor,
Speaker 2: and almost every instance, he argued, a collective sense of
Speaker 2: impotence and anxiety and envy suddenly discharged itself in a
Speaker 2: frantic urge to smite the ungodly, to seize wealth and power,
Speaker 2: and to hold it for all eternity, as they pointed out, Well,
Speaker 2: as I said, I looked into asymmetric warfare because the
Speaker 2: Obama administration was ramping up and practicing for the type
Speaker 2: of stuff that Donald Trump is doing right now. Isn't
Speaker 2: that interesting?
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 2: I talked about the left right March of tyranny and
Speaker 2: the fact that it's not the Republicans, the Democrats. It's
Speaker 2: not the lefty or the righty or however they identify
Speaker 2: themselves that really wields the power. It's the Pentagon. It's
Speaker 2: the CIA. And at the time, the Pentagon was talking
Speaker 2: about how we're going to have everybody in the cities
Speaker 2: and there's going to be open conflict in world. We'll
Speaker 2: have to put the troops in the cities. And I've
Speaker 2: played the video for you more recently. That's about a
Speaker 2: ten year old video. And when Biggs and I went
Speaker 2: to the Asymmetric Warfare Center and and uh, what was
Speaker 2: in uh fort Let's see what was that fort hood?
Speaker 2: It was apl Yeah. Uh and uh they renamed it
Speaker 2: because can't have something named after Confederate general. Just wait
Speaker 2: and see what we name these these things redicular anyway, Uh,
Speaker 2: the uh when we got in there, and that was
Speaker 2: a very interesting one of the most I said. I
Speaker 2: was more concerned about that than it was the Bundy
Speaker 2: Ranch standoff, because the military is far more dangerous than
Speaker 2: bl Blam was threatening to shoot you, but you know,
Speaker 2: the military, as we see, will kill you without any threats.
Speaker 2: So uh the uh. And we were arrested for quite
Speaker 2: a while there. But anyway, the when I was doing
Speaker 2: research on it, that was exactly what all these generals
Speaker 2: were saying. You know, when they go into places like
Speaker 2: Iraq and Afghanistan and blow the place up and then
Speaker 2: put boots on the ground to occupy and to basically
Speaker 2: rebuild it and their image using their puppets, they got
Speaker 2: into what they called asymmetric warfare. Okay, we got the
Speaker 2: big guns, and we've got the big planes and the
Speaker 2: big bombs, but then when we get boots on the ground,
Speaker 2: we have to deal with this insurgency that is there
Speaker 2: and the guerrilla warfare. And they said, what motivates people
Speaker 2: is not religious. The religious stuff comes later. What motivates
Speaker 2: them is this sense of despair, and that's the way
Speaker 2: the thing begins. Listen, the collective sense of impotence, anxiety,
Speaker 2: and envy, because you go into a country line that
Speaker 2: you destroy everything, then you occupy it with the big
Speaker 2: military force. What happens people, especially the ones who have
Speaker 2: been successful, and usually they said the leaders were well educated,
Speaker 2: maybe they had some kind of a technical feel that
Speaker 2: they were in and they were the ones who started
Speaker 2: organizing things because they were the ones who felt, I think,
Speaker 2: the loss of a future. And so when people feel
Speaker 2: like they have no future, as Joel Slyn says, when
Speaker 2: people lose everything, they lose it. That's a great way
Speaker 2: to summarize, whether they're talking about with asymmetric warfare. And
Speaker 2: then of course they will turn to religious motivation and
Speaker 2: as they fall back on stude because you have to
Speaker 2: have some principles, even if you get the wrong ones. Today,
Speaker 2: the conditions for apocalypticism, it's interesting word. Gaping inequality, pandemics,
Speaker 2: rapid technological development are amply present. Well. The reality is
Speaker 2: is that none of these things are just circumstantial. They
Speaker 2: are all deliberate, planned and in our face by the
Speaker 2: people who are doing it. We all see that. The
Speaker 2: hopefully not a lot of people see it, but I
Speaker 2: think this audience sees that the pandemic was planned and
Speaker 2: a scam or otherwise you'll probably still would not be listening
Speaker 2: to me. He would turn me off because you'd be
Speaker 2: upset about that. But the end of the world vibes
Speaker 2: in many of the domains of politics and culture and
Speaker 2: apocalyptic impulse to destroy the federal bureaucracy and to re
Speaker 2: establish patriarchal or how about matriarchal. Right, that's what the
Speaker 2: people at Atlantic want to do. They want to establish
Speaker 2: a matriarchy. They always say patriarchal. Christian supremacy right has
Speaker 2: been blamed for fueling the rise of the Maga movement.
Speaker 2: Peter Til has recently spoken of the coming Antichrist to
Speaker 2: sold out audiences in San Francisco. I got to say,
Speaker 2: only to some publication that is so far left wing
Speaker 2: as the Atlantic, would they take Peter Tele as somebody
Speaker 2: seriously speaking about Christianity. What is notable now is that
Speaker 2: apocalyptic angst has become constant, said a British writer. He
Speaker 2: all flow and no ebb. Donald Trump is seen as
Speaker 2: a religious hero who will smite the political establishment. That
Speaker 2: is absolutely true. But again they don't talk about the
Speaker 2: fourth turning. They have a and yet they validate it
Speaker 2: at the same time they talk about research being done
Speaker 2: by a guy in a new book. His name is
Speaker 2: Luke Kemp. He's affiliated with the University Cambridge Center for
Speaker 2: the Study of Existential Risk. He says, this moment we
Speaker 2: have to understand, he says, shows that it's something like
Speaker 2: it has already happened many, many times over. So if
Speaker 2: we go back five thousand years of human civilization, he
Speaker 2: identifies the commonalities among recurring societal collapses, but he also
Speaker 2: argues that these events are not only potential learning experiences,
Speaker 2: but also inflection points in the history of humanity, many
Speaker 2: of which have been in certain ways productive. I think
Speaker 2: that's interesting because that is why I Straussen Howe struck
Speaker 2: home so with me, is because I'd looked at that
Speaker 2: and I thought, you know, it's interesting seventy you know,
Speaker 2: seventy eighty year cycles between the creation of the US
Speaker 2: government and when it was destroyed by Lincoln and the
Speaker 2: Civil War. The US government is not anything at all
Speaker 2: like the Republic that the founders put in, nothing at
Speaker 2: all like it. And just as when you look at
Speaker 2: the Soviet Union, you know, created in nineteen seventeen, fell
Speaker 2: in nineteen eighty nine. I think so seventy two years
Speaker 2: there still there's a lot of overlap, a lot of similarity,
Speaker 2: a lot of nostalgia between the two. You see when
Speaker 2: you talk to people like what was his name, the
Speaker 2: Russian guy I interviewed, I can't.
Speaker 4: Remember his name anyway, Alexander Dugan, thank you, Thank you.
Speaker 2: I've got to rely on you more and more for
Speaker 2: names as I'm getting older. Anyway, when you look at
Speaker 2: Alexander Dugan, he did not reject lenen and communisting, so
Speaker 2: that's part of our history. He embraced it well in
Speaker 2: the same way. You know, you have Americans who will
Speaker 2: embrace the ideas and some of the cultural aspects of
Speaker 2: the American Revolution, but they've completely rejected it and their
Speaker 2: worldview and their government view. And so when I saw that,
Speaker 2: I thought, well, that's kind of interesting because I've seen
Speaker 2: that kind of a cycle. This guy has gone back
Speaker 2: and he sees the same type of thing matured. You
Speaker 2: have a society that grows and goes through four generations,
Speaker 2: and people see how corrupt and non effective it has become,
Speaker 2: they change it. Usually there's massive economic there's always massive
Speaker 2: economic change, usually war, and then out of the ruins
Speaker 2: they build another civilization, and then they keep repeating that
Speaker 2: about every four generations. That's what this guy sees as well.
Speaker 2: He says, crises can be good for you. The destruction
Speaker 2: of capital of temples, palaces, manners, monuments, bathhouses, wealthy properties
Speaker 2: all disproportionately hurt the rich, though calamities such as disease, famine,
Speaker 2: war tend to bring greater harm to the poor. Those
Speaker 2: who managed to survive the wipeout event, he says, are
Speaker 2: left with more bargaining power with bosses and landlords, though
Speaker 2: because there are fewer people with whom to compete. The
Speaker 2: technology has changed some of that calculus as well. But
Speaker 2: he gives some evidences of this in historical times, and
Speaker 2: again we have seen ample evidence of this repeating. Here's
Speaker 2: the bottom line, he said, Our global goliath will die
Speaker 2: explosively unless we kill it first. Is it going to
Speaker 2: take us all? We look at this global system that
Speaker 2: they have created, we can see how it is fraying
Speaker 2: around the edges. And of course Trump has accelerated this
Speaker 2: by coming in and with terrorists and economic issues that
Speaker 2: I think will ultimately lead to a larger war. He
Speaker 2: argues that a new silicon goliath is emerging, composed of
Speaker 2: mass surveillance technology, data centers, artificial intelligence, and data itself
Speaker 2: a crucial new lootable resource. He said. He worries that
Speaker 2: unless citizens rise up as an army of David's, it's
Speaker 2: going to get really bad. Well, here's a lesson that
Speaker 2: we need to understand about this. You know, yeah, David
Speaker 2: killed Goliath, but it was ultimately God who killed Goliath.
Speaker 2: And we have to understand that God doesn't need horses
Speaker 2: and chariots to accomplish this stuff. He can do it
Speaker 2: with a small group of people. And of course that
Speaker 2: sociologist says who said that the only thing that's ever
Speaker 2: changed society is a small, committed group of people, I
Speaker 2: would say that that is a reflection of God and
Speaker 2: that he is moving in those people. Battle belongs to
Speaker 2: the Lord.
Speaker 5: Yes, really shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the story of
Speaker 5: David and Goliath. He says, we army of David's slinging stone.
Speaker 5: It's a very effective weapon.
Speaker 2: That's right. That's right, and so and we'll talk a
Speaker 2: little bit more about what that looks like here. He
Speaker 2: offered some ideas such as rejecting for profit AI models
Speaker 2: in terms of decentralized and collaborative ones. Another route would
Speaker 2: be to refuse to work for entities that Kemp calls
Speaker 2: agents of doom. And so then, because this is the Atlantic,
Speaker 2: he says, well, that would be like AI Labs, or
Speaker 2: a fossil fuel company or an arms manufacturer or whatever.
Speaker 2: And I would say, just the government about that, that
Speaker 2: is the agent of Let's just go right to the
Speaker 2: top and the of all this stuff. Refused to work
Speaker 2: for the CIA, refused to work for DARPA, and I
Speaker 2: would say increasingly, refused to work for the government at
Speaker 2: any level in any capacity that's there. Well, how do
Speaker 2: we actually work with this? The Lovers of Power NPR
Speaker 2: then has an idea and again I think it's kind
Speaker 2: of idiotic and quixotic at the same time, an independent
Speaker 2: effort so that AI is the secret to topple two
Speaker 2: party power in Congress. I saw that headline. I thought,
Speaker 2: are they now proposing in the US that we have
Speaker 2: just like what was the name of that country I
Speaker 2: talked about this last week again I got to code
Speaker 2: to you for names where they said we've had so
Speaker 2: much corruption that we have now made AI our minister
Speaker 2: because we can't trust people. And I think that was
Speaker 2: it was Albania, Albania. Yeah, I want to say Serbia,
Speaker 2: but I knew it wasn't Serbia. Albania, is it? So
Speaker 2: we can't trust people anymore. So we're going to get
Speaker 2: AI not understanding at all that AI is actually Indians
Speaker 2: or actually been indoctrinated, right, AI actually indoctrinated with their
Speaker 2: biases and their prejudices and so forth, and controllable by
Speaker 2: somebody who is behind the curtain and you can't see them.
Speaker 2: And so what they're suggesting is that they use AI
Speaker 2: in the way that I think AI really has been
Speaker 2: designed for and the way that it is the most dangerous,
Speaker 2: and that is for surveillance and control, for monitoring, and
Speaker 2: for manipulation. They said. One organization is suggesting that AI
Speaker 2: can go beyond making daily life more convenient. I haven't
Speaker 2: seen that yet, have you. It says the key to
Speaker 2: reshaping American politics, They said, what we're trying to do
Speaker 2: would be impossible without AI. The goal is to elect
Speaker 2: a handful of independent candidates to the House of Representatives
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty six, using AI to identify districts where
Speaker 2: independents could succeed and uncover Diamond and the rough candidates
Speaker 2: Now this is essentially what Elon Musk was talking about
Speaker 2: when we said we need to have a third party.
Speaker 2: These people are making a plea to Elon Musk for money,
Speaker 2: because what they point out is that with Congress so
Speaker 2: evenly divided, that if you've got a handful of a
Speaker 2: couple of dozen people, you could have the balance of power,
Speaker 2: and you could magnify that by being the swing vote.
Speaker 2: And that's precisely what Elon Musk was saying. So we
Speaker 2: need to have a third party. We only need to
Speaker 2: get a few candidates elected to Congress in order to
Speaker 2: wield that kind of power. And so they said, this
Speaker 2: is a bold proposition. The system has not seen a
Speaker 2: new independent candidate win a House seat in thirty five years.
Speaker 2: You might want to ask why that is the case.
Speaker 2: You see the Republicans and Democrats and whoever it is,
Speaker 2: it's got control of the redistricting. You know, this is
Speaker 2: why the fight is going on now between Texas and
Speaker 2: California and so forth. They understand that it isn't the
Speaker 2: voters picking the candidates, it's the candidates picking the voters
Speaker 2: and counting the votes, right, and so that's where the
Speaker 2: redistricting comes in. And that's where the computer really comes
Speaker 2: into play. They can go in a very precisely pick
Speaker 2: who it is that they want. This whole article is
Speaker 2: very naive in that regard, especially considering the very public
Speaker 2: fight that's going on right now between Democrat controlled and
Speaker 2: Republican controlled states. To say we're going to read district
Speaker 2: these areas so that we can get more candidates of
Speaker 2: our party elected. It's so easy for them to do
Speaker 2: that with the computers that they have now. And so
Speaker 2: what these people are doing is they're saying, well, you know,
Speaker 2: we can go and we can monitor the public. And
Speaker 2: that's really what AI is set up to do. It's
Speaker 2: set up to monitor and to manipulate. Said, when we
Speaker 2: do a poll, we take a snapshot of what somebody
Speaker 2: is thinking. But then as they're driving home listening to
Speaker 2: the radio, maybe something changes their mind. They get home
Speaker 2: and they've completely switched their view on that particular issue.
Speaker 2: We can capture that in real time. Well, how are
Speaker 2: they going to do that? Largely through social media? That's
Speaker 2: what social media was designed for. That's why it was
Speaker 2: a tool created by DARPA. It was DARPA's idea. JC R.
Speaker 2: Licklider in the early nineteen sixties, came up with the idea,
Speaker 2: they couldn't they couldn't practically implement it until technology caught
Speaker 2: up in the late nineties. And that's why the CIA
Speaker 2: openly jumped in with a venture capital firm, Incutel, which
Speaker 2: they've always manipulated corporations and supported them the ones that
Speaker 2: would do what they wanted. But they needed to do
Speaker 2: it big and they needed to do it fast, so
Speaker 2: they went public with it. Basically didn't make it secret anymore.
Speaker 2: And it's not just ink you tell. If you go
Speaker 2: back and you look at the board of directors and
Speaker 2: the venture capital companies that support them. On the boards
Speaker 2: of these venture capital companies, you would see all these
Speaker 2: people from the intelligence agencies NSSAY, the CIA and so forth.
Speaker 2: They were picking the contestants knowing that there was going
Speaker 2: to be a competition and a shakeout and they would
Speaker 2: have the strongest one. But whoever won, they first knew
Speaker 2: that these people were going to be compliant with them,
Speaker 2: as we have seen and so yeah, data shows that
Speaker 2: there's a huge rise in moderate and independent voters who
Speaker 2: don't like either party. The problem is that they're captured
Speaker 2: by the Hegelian dialectic and that kind of thinking. It's
Speaker 2: either this one or that one, Republican or Democrat. And
Speaker 2: you always see this pattern, because I've been involved in
Speaker 2: third party politics. You always see that people are disgusted
Speaker 2: with Republicans and Democrats and they've been betrayed over and
Speaker 2: over again. And so somebody comes out. If they're articulate
Speaker 2: and they have some good ideas, they rise in the polls.
Speaker 2: Maybe they get up, maybe they're polling at ten fifteen
Speaker 2: percent or something like that. As you get closer and
Speaker 2: closer to the election, the Sigellian dialectics, you can't let
Speaker 2: this other team win. So you've got to abandon your
Speaker 2: hope of having any real change and vote for the
Speaker 2: usual suspect over here. That is the party that you've
Speaker 2: always voted for, and it always melts away. We've seen
Speaker 2: this over and over again. They think it's going to
Speaker 2: be different. The independent center is the one that's doing it.
Speaker 2: They so their strategists are not political newbies. Brandon who
Speaker 2: served as president of Freedom Works, a conservative grassroots group
Speaker 2: that helped to turn tea party activists into a political
Speaker 2: force before closing its doors last year. And I've had
Speaker 2: some interaction with Freedom Works. I want a contest with him.
Speaker 2: It's a two thousand and nine I think, and there's
Speaker 2: a cash PI is plus a trip to Chicago that
Speaker 2: Karen and I went up there so we you know,
Speaker 2: won for the video and got a chance to ride
Speaker 2: segways around Chicago where nobody knew me. I didn't, I
Speaker 2: didn't care about. I liked, but it was a lot
Speaker 2: of fun. But that was when Dick Army was there
Speaker 2: and there was a power struggle within Freedom Works. He
Speaker 2: got pushed out. Never really recovered from that. And yet
Speaker 2: these guys have been in politics for a long time
Speaker 2: and we look at the Tea Party activism. I think
Speaker 2: that is really what the true issue here is, and
Speaker 2: that's what's missing in all of this stuff. They said,
Speaker 2: we can go out and we do a poll and
Speaker 2: we only know what somebody thinks at that moment in time,
Speaker 2: but we can constantly monitor them using AI. And then
Speaker 2: we can go in and we can use economic data.
Speaker 2: I've read it LinkedIn all these other things, and we've
Speaker 2: got a proprietary tool to pull that stuff together and
Speaker 2: we can see, you know, where the best districts are
Speaker 2: for our candidates to run well. The problem is is
Speaker 2: that the other side is doing that as well. The
Speaker 2: Republicans or the Democrats have already done that to create
Speaker 2: the districts. They've already created districts that are going to
Speaker 2: be won by their party, and so they're playing catch
Speaker 2: up here and they don't really have anything that is
Speaker 2: really new, I don't think, and so they're trying to
Speaker 2: understand coursues and concerns of voters and to hunt for
Speaker 2: districts that are ripe for an independent candidate to swoop in.
Speaker 2: So they said, you know, we might go into one
Speaker 2: that has been flipping back and forth, fifty percent Republican,
Speaker 2: fifty percent Democrat going there. The thing is that if
Speaker 2: you're going to go in and you're going to pick
Speaker 2: your politicians and pick your policies based on polling, then
Speaker 2: what you're going to be doing is you're going to
Speaker 2: be pandering. You're not going to be setting up principles.
Speaker 2: We need somebody who's going to lead. You know that
Speaker 2: if you just get the politicians are doing this already,
Speaker 2: and the way I see AI bringing this stuff together
Speaker 2: is just going to add more froth and volatility to
Speaker 2: the whole process. People are going to be you know,
Speaker 2: if you don't have a rudder, you're blown about by
Speaker 2: every win, by every issue, you are blown about by
Speaker 2: the constantly changing issues. And that's not leadership. That's simply politics.
Speaker 2: It's not statesmanship. You've got a fickle public and you've
Speaker 2: got fickless politicians. And that's what's the downfall of our
Speaker 2: society here, these pandering politicians. What this country needs that
Speaker 2: we don't have. So we need a foundation, we need
Speaker 2: a worldview, we need a fullt we need God basically
Speaker 2: as the basis of that. That's what was different about
Speaker 2: the American Revolution. That's why they did not accrue all
Speaker 2: power to themselves. And so they said, well, so we're
Speaker 2: looking at things like voter participation rates, which districts have
Speaker 2: really low turnout because these people are not excited to
Speaker 2: go to the ballot box. He's also looking at districts
Speaker 2: with younger voters who might embrace the independent message. How
Speaker 2: about looking at your message. How about focusing on trying
Speaker 2: to push a philosophy, a foundation that is going to
Speaker 2: support our society, a rudder that is going to guide us.
Speaker 2: None of that is here. This is just simply more
Speaker 2: noise and more static. The point to one incident where
Speaker 2: a candidate was poised to run in their home district,
Speaker 2: AI showed the district next door is a better bet,
Speaker 2: thirty minutes away, the perfect fit. And that's what that
Speaker 2: is going to do, because we found that they matched
Speaker 2: up perfectly without other district. Well, if you're running for Congress,
Speaker 2: which is what they've been talking about, it doesn't matter
Speaker 2: where you live. I mean, I lived in Raleigh and
Speaker 2: I ran for Congress in Charlotte. It was a pain
Speaker 2: in the neck to get over there to speak, but
Speaker 2: and to put up signs. I put up all the
Speaker 2: signs myself. I bought several hundred signs and then I
Speaker 2: put them all up and I took them all down
Speaker 2: after the election.
Speaker 4: Was I vaguely remember riding around in the car with
Speaker 4: you guys.
Speaker 2: You were in the car set facing backwards and you
Speaker 2: watched me putting all this stuff in the van. But yeah,
Speaker 2: that was a real pain in the neck. But it
Speaker 2: doesn't matter what district you live in. You just have
Speaker 2: to live in the state. That's kind of a secret.
Speaker 2: People don't understand one criticism. They acknowledge that here often
Speaker 2: is the idea of spoilers. Non winning candidates whose presence
Speaker 2: on the ballot effects which candidate will win. He said,
Speaker 2: it's a partisan archaic line. What's wrong with spoiling something
Speaker 2: that people don't like. That's the way I always figured
Speaker 2: out looked at it. You know, people said, well, do
Speaker 2: you sound a lot like the Republicans in terms of
Speaker 2: economics and other things like that. It's like, yeah, but
Speaker 2: they don't care about liberty or the Constitution, And I
Speaker 2: don't care if they lose their distinction without a difference
Speaker 2: really to the Democrats. And you have to look at
Speaker 2: it that way. And I was there. The reason I
Speaker 2: ran was not because I wanted to go to Congress.
Speaker 2: I gotta say, there was nothing that I would want
Speaker 2: less than to live and work in Washington, especially in
Speaker 2: the kind of system that is run by the speaker
Speaker 2: and the kind of parliamentary rules that lock you down
Speaker 2: where you can't do anything. But I ran because we
Speaker 2: didn't have social media, we didn't have any better way
Speaker 2: to get the message out. So we ran to try
Speaker 2: to get people to focus on the Constitution, to focus
Speaker 2: on liberty. And when I ran, when I would speak,
Speaker 2: I said, you know, Gingrich just flipped everything over because
Speaker 2: he had his ten point proposition is what do you
Speaker 2: call it? His plan for America? Anyway, he had ten items.
Speaker 2: I said, well, here's my ten items. It's the Bill
Speaker 2: of Rights, and here's how was the contract with America. Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's it. And so I said, here's my contract with America.
Speaker 2: It's called the Bill of Rights, and here's how every
Speaker 2: one of those are being violated right now anyway.
Speaker 5: And of course, anytime we talk about third parties, I
Speaker 5: feel the need to mention that there can't be a
Speaker 5: consistent third party. Well, and there's first past the post voting.
Speaker 5: It always devolves into a two party system when you
Speaker 5: have first past the post, which is why I think
Speaker 5: the typical one that you see, the runoff election ones
Speaker 5: is an improvement, but the approval voting is the best one,
Speaker 5: since that one is easier to telling.
Speaker 2: That's right, absolutely right lanes. And that's one of the
Speaker 2: reasons why the Republicans are so laser focused on this,
Speaker 2: because they know if a party is going to be replaced,
Speaker 2: it's going to be the Republican Party and it should
Speaker 2: be replaced. So, as they said, the Republican Democrats, stablishments
Speaker 2: live in a world that is either coke or Pepsi,
Speaker 2: Ford or Chevy, MSNBC or Fox News. That's fine for
Speaker 2: people that watch MSNBC and Fox News, but everybody else
Speaker 2: we don't live and that binary system anymore. But you do,
Speaker 2: and you will as long as it's first past the post.
Speaker 2: I mean, from the ballot access, to the districting and
Speaker 2: the way that they select the voters, to the way
Speaker 2: that the votes are counted, and to the whole system
Speaker 2: where it's first past the post. You have such a
Speaker 2: lock on this particular system. I don't really see it breaking.
Speaker 2: I think what's going to break is going to be
Speaker 2: when the dollar crashes, and we're going to talk about
Speaker 2: that coming up here. But of course, fin Sheall Hobby
Speaker 2: also points out the AI revolution is about to crash
Speaker 2: due to a lack of human labor. That's right, you know.
Speaker 2: Isn't it interesting that as they want to replace all
Speaker 2: of us, they don't have the labor that's there to
Speaker 2: build their data centers. They want to take all electricity
Speaker 2: and power away from us, They want to take all
Speaker 2: economic power away from us, all electrical power away from us.
Speaker 2: They don't want us to have jobs, and yet they
Speaker 2: can't find enough humans to build their data centers kind
Speaker 2: of a bootstrap issue here, isn't it. And it makes
Speaker 2: you wonder exactly how they think that this whole thing
Speaker 2: is sustainable when you don't have humans with jobs to
Speaker 2: buy their products. That was the whole thing Henry Ford
Speaker 2: pointed out. He said, well, I want my workers to
Speaker 2: be able to afford my cars. They don't want any workers,
Speaker 2: and so the whole thing is a house of cards
Speaker 2: that is not sustainable. The new price of eggs is
Speaker 2: the political shock of the cost of data centers on
Speaker 2: our electric bills. And don't look to the Republicans for
Speaker 2: any help on this. The Republicans have been completely bought
Speaker 2: out by a big tech on this issue, and they're
Speaker 2: not going to do anything to help with that. They're
Speaker 2: seeing it particularly in Virginia, and because Virginia is close
Speaker 2: to where so many of the big data centers are there,
Speaker 2: because that is the real application for artificial intelligence. It
Speaker 2: is a government control. So data centers are a gold
Speaker 2: rush for construction workers. Surging demand means that many are
Speaker 2: getting six figure salaries and more perks. Things are going
Speaker 2: to get even more real when it all collapses. Chinese
Speaker 2: authorities are even worried now about humanoid robots. Isn't that interesting?
Speaker 2: The country that has always been built on labor, Now
Speaker 2: they are jumping into the mechanical slaves, which is what
Speaker 2: robot means. It's the check word for slave, and they're
Speaker 2: even concerned about it. But it really is about surveilling
Speaker 2: speech and threatening our privacy rights. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: do we still have that in the deck? The guy
Speaker 2: who was arrested because of meme in the UK? Okay,
Speaker 2: that article coming up. We'll look for this and we'll
Speaker 2: talk about that article later. We've got a couple of
Speaker 2: comments before we take a break.
Speaker 4: Trapl that's right in Theburu twenty twenty nine voting strategy
Speaker 4: for twenty twenty six midterms. Change the party, get ballot,
Speaker 4: don't vote party switching alone will scare the hell out
Speaker 4: of the parasites. Not handing in the ballot will send
Speaker 4: a message.
Speaker 2: That's true. That's true. That's a good idea. I like that.
Speaker 2: Change your party, does everybody chang switch partners?
Speaker 4: Musical chairs? Guard goldsmith AI is like soilent green people
Speaker 4: at its core.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right that it consumes people and consumes what
Speaker 2: they produced and imitates them. It truly is satanic in
Speaker 2: the sense that it's all based on imitation and theft,
Speaker 2: and that's what's that's what Satan doesn't create anything. He
Speaker 2: steals things, and that pretends that he created them.
Speaker 4: I would have more seen soilent green as Indians Ai
Speaker 4: is actually Indians.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they've done that so many We've talked about that
Speaker 2: so many times as a running joke. You know this, uh,
Speaker 2: this one robot that they set up to be a
Speaker 2: domestic helper. What it is. It's actually just a camera
Speaker 2: and you've got a bunch of people that are watching
Speaker 2: it and manipulating it. And so you're paying for people
Speaker 2: to have a remote control robot that they can walk
Speaker 2: around your house and spy on you and listen to you.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I wonder what kind of person is going to
Speaker 4: apply for that job. Really, nobody nefarious or creepy. Yeah,
Speaker 4: that's right, to watch you all the time.
Speaker 2: They've done that. Sorry, they've done that in grocery stores
Speaker 2: as well. You know where you go in and it's like, oh,
Speaker 2: we're just gonna scan your look at your cart and
Speaker 2: will total up the prices. They've actually got Indians who
Speaker 2: are actually being paid to watch all the stuff and
Speaker 2: tally it as people put it in or taken out
Speaker 2: of their cart. Sorry, Lance, go ahead. Yeah.
Speaker 5: The idea of that robot was that eventually it will
Speaker 5: be AI, or they'll have it set up. They'll always
Speaker 5: have a camera connection to your robot. But when you
Speaker 5: give it a new job that it doesn't know how
Speaker 5: to do, that's when a human will take over and
Speaker 5: then it will teach it how to do that, and
Speaker 5: then it will just refer back to that video of
Speaker 5: the human doing it. So it has a rough idea
Speaker 5: in the future, at least that's what they hope, but
Speaker 5: in fact, right now it's one controlled remotely.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a that's the people who have more money
Speaker 2: than since where they buy into that thing.
Speaker 4: Sadly, with how dumb many Americans are, no matter how
Speaker 4: poor they are, a lot of them still have more
Speaker 4: money than since the real octo spook. AI is like
Speaker 4: a vehicle, farm, tool, knife, machete, gunn It's benign. Only
Speaker 4: the user determines its use and purpose.
Speaker 2: And I agree with that, because if you're using AI online,
Speaker 2: you have become their data and they're spying on you
Speaker 2: and other things like that. However, it is now possible
Speaker 2: to download a lot of the AI tools. That's the
Speaker 2: way we operate with it. You can download them locally,
Speaker 2: and now you're not dealing with these different companies and
Speaker 2: they're not getting the data from you, they're not getting
Speaker 2: paid by you as well. There's so many free AI
Speaker 2: tools out there that Lances put together and has set
Speaker 2: up a computer to simply do that. So we're getting
Speaker 2: that together. Hopefully we'll be able to do more stuff.
Speaker 2: I would ultimately, I would like to have an angry
Speaker 2: Trump reading his screaming tweets instead of me reading it
Speaker 2: to you. So we'll see if we can get that in. Yeah.
Speaker 5: I was gonna have a little set up, but then
Speaker 5: I got sick over the weekend.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, yeah, this last Thanksgiving weekend, we were hoping
Speaker 2: we were going to get caught up on a lot
Speaker 2: of things. Instead we got much further behind. Both Karen
Speaker 2: and Lance were very sick through Thanksgiving. This is Karen's
Speaker 2: second Thanksgiving in a row where she was throwing up profusely.
Speaker 2: Last year. Our daughter was here from Texas and she
Speaker 2: did Thanksgiving dinner. This year because of Karen's brother dying,
Speaker 2: Travis's wife had already planned on doing Thanksgiving dinner, so
Speaker 2: that part of it worked out for those of us
Speaker 2: who could eat. But I know Karen's not faking it
Speaker 2: because you can't fake what the way she was throwing up.
Speaker 2: She was feeling really.
Speaker 4: Bad at that point. The faking is worse than whatever
Speaker 4: you were trying to get out of. You know, there
Speaker 4: has to be a trade off. You know, Ferris Bueller
Speaker 4: wouldn't be the same movie if he literally made himself
Speaker 4: so ill that he just had to lay in bed
Speaker 4: the entire time to get out of school.
Speaker 2: Yeah, if she could throw up like that, she'd be Bolemix.
Speaker 2: So in no time at all.
Speaker 4: We've got real. Jason Barker districts should be mapped by
Speaker 4: zip code, very simple. I don't know enough about the
Speaker 4: way these things operate to say whether if that would
Speaker 4: fix the problem, But Jason's got a lot of good ideas,
Speaker 4: so I'd be willing to give it a shot.
Speaker 2: That'd be one way to get it out of them
Speaker 2: picking the districts by computer. But even before they had
Speaker 2: the kind of sophisticated data mining that AI gives them,
Speaker 2: they were very very good at picking the voters. I
Speaker 2: remember the congressional districts. I had one of them in
Speaker 2: North Carolina. They just went down a major highway and
Speaker 2: they could look at voter registration, which is what they
Speaker 2: were doing, and they were hopping from one side to
Speaker 2: the other of the major highway. I remember one of
Speaker 2: the people was running, this is crazy trying to get
Speaker 2: in touch with these people because of the way this
Speaker 2: thing is drawn. But they did it before they had computers.
Speaker 2: That's why they called it jerrymandering. They could figure out
Speaker 2: that type of thing, but it really has made it
Speaker 2: into a very detailed science. Now, well, we're gonna take
Speaker 2: a quick break, folks, and we will be right back.
Speaker 6: I wish I had a Christmas Night album. You can
Speaker 6: get the Christmas Night Album at the Davidnightshow dot com
Speaker 6: for just thirteen ninety nine. It's right in the second
Speaker 6: flour there.
Speaker 7: See what'd you wish?
Speaker 3: Do it?
Speaker 7: Well, not just one wish, a whole hat flog.
Speaker 6: First, I'm going to the Davidnightshow dot com and purchase
Speaker 6: the Christmas Night Album.
Speaker 7: Then I'm gonna listen to Christmas classics like.
Speaker 2: We are you gonna throw it on?
Speaker 8: I want the Christmas Night Album too.
Speaker 7: Yeah, that's pretty good.
Speaker 9: Hello, girls, can't you come out to can't You Come.
Speaker 6: David's Christmas Night album includes twenty one instrumental Christmas melodies
Speaker 6: like God Rest You, Merry Gentlemen, Silent Night, and It's
Speaker 6: all New. I'll be home for Christmas.
Speaker 7: What do you want?
Speaker 2: You want the moon?
Speaker 6: Just say the word and I'll throw a glasshole around it,
Speaker 6: pull it down.
Speaker 7: I'll take it and what and then I'll buy you
Speaker 7: your own download of David Knight's Christmas Night Album.
Speaker 6: In a.
Speaker 1: S you're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: Well, if you want to get home for the holidays
Speaker 2: this year, it could cost you a lot more. We
Speaker 2: have TSA has just decided arbitrarily and capriciously that they're
Speaker 2: going to charge people a forty five dollars fee a
Speaker 2: fine if you don't have real ID. It's always about
Speaker 2: the money, isn't it. That's what I said about the
Speaker 2: COVID stuff. All these people then you're crazy. It's a
Speaker 2: bad Democrat governors. It's not Trump, and it's not all
Speaker 2: these others. It's not the federal government. It's bad Democrat governors.
Speaker 2: It's like you really don't understand how things work. It's
Speaker 2: always done with bribery and with financial blackmail. That's the
Speaker 2: way they get past the tenth Amendment. And this is
Speaker 2: another example of how the bureaucracy is out of control.
Speaker 2: Where do they get the authority to levy a fine
Speaker 2: like this? Something like that onto be coming from Congress. Right,
Speaker 2: we shouldn't have Trump imposing tariffs, and we shouldn't have
Speaker 2: the TSA imposing forty five dollars fees on us. They
Speaker 2: had originally proposed, and this is a something's already published
Speaker 2: in a paper. They put the stuff out and say, well,
Speaker 2: you know, this is what we're thinking about doing. Give
Speaker 2: us your feedback, and they don't care what your feedback is.
Speaker 2: Originally they were talking about making it eighteen dollars. Then
Speaker 2: they decide, now let's go with forty five. What stops it?
Speaker 2: Where does it stop? If they want to make sure
Speaker 2: that you don't fly unless you've got real ID, they
Speaker 2: don't have to wait for Congress to pass along. They
Speaker 2: don't have to make a loss, and you can't fly
Speaker 2: if you don't have real ID. They can just find
Speaker 2: you and make that happen that way. So if you
Speaker 2: haven't upgraid.
Speaker 5: That we have TSA to keep us safe from these
Speaker 5: terrafts that don't have real ID or forty five dollars
Speaker 5: to get around this.
Speaker 2: That's right. Well, you know these guys who took down
Speaker 2: the Twin Tours by flying the planes and to them
Speaker 2: they must add some really good ID because they found
Speaker 2: it on the rubble. You know, it survived the explosion
Speaker 2: and the fires and everything else, and they managed to
Speaker 2: find these things, so we knew who the guys were.
Speaker 2: They had really good ID. How do I get ID
Speaker 2: like that that's indestructible.
Speaker 5: Well, that's certainly not real ID though, that's a fake ID.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Forty five dollars fee for people without real ID
Speaker 2: comes after the TSA started requiring the identification or other
Speaker 2: approved documents in May, and so since people didn't get it,
Speaker 2: since it was required, now you're going to have to
Speaker 2: have it. The TSA warned that people without real ID
Speaker 2: could enter increased weight times at airports while their identities
Speaker 2: are verified. You know, we could get rid of all
Speaker 2: these weight times at the airport if we got rid
Speaker 2: of the TSA. That's where the bottleneck is. And quite frankly,
Speaker 2: they have created the biggest security threat with these long
Speaker 2: bottleneck lines. That's where the terrorist would attack if they attacked.
Speaker 2: But the TSA knows that there's no threat against airports
Speaker 2: or airplanes. They said that in twenty eleven that information
Speaker 2: that was part of a lawsuit was accidentally published by
Speaker 2: them on pacer dot gov, and then they discovered that
Speaker 2: they put up the unredacted version, and then they put
Speaker 2: up the redacted version for us so we could conveniently
Speaker 2: go in and see what they didn't want us to know.
Speaker 2: But they know that there was no threat to airports airplanes,
Speaker 2: and if there had been a threat to airports airplanes,
Speaker 2: they would not have been able to stop it. They
Speaker 2: have been totally ineffective whenever they've been tested. They won't
Speaker 2: say because it's national security secret. No, it's job security
Speaker 2: secret that they fail probably eighty ninety percent of the time.
Speaker 2: But so if there had been a real threat, we
Speaker 2: would have had more attacks, but there never was a
Speaker 2: real threat. There wasn't a real threat on nine to
Speaker 2: eleven either. This is an agency that was created to
Speaker 2: stop an imaginary threat, just like the pandemic. Like I
Speaker 2: said before, the COVID pandemic is the other shoot drop
Speaker 2: from the nine to eleven lie. Both of them were
Speaker 2: based on lies about things that didn't exist. We didn't
Speaker 2: have a virus, we didn't have a pandemic, we didn't
Speaker 2: have terrorists on airplanes. They've just used these lies to
Speaker 2: impose the surveillance state on us.
Speaker 4: The lie of the TSA is blatantly obvious on its
Speaker 4: face when you just look at who is employed. This
Speaker 4: is not Jason Bourne or Sherlock Holmes. They're not going
Speaker 4: to stop a terrorist attack. This is generally very overweight,
Speaker 4: middle aged to elderly individuals or sometimes foreign nationals who
Speaker 4: now work for the government harassing you. Yeah, these people,
Speaker 4: these people do not care about protecting you. They are
Speaker 4: simply there to collect a check. And even if they
Speaker 4: did care, they couldn't do anything about it. The last
Speaker 4: time I was in an airport, most of the TSA
Speaker 4: agents English was their second language. These people are not
Speaker 4: loyal to America. Do you think this person is going
Speaker 4: to see a terrorist and go it is now my
Speaker 4: duty to sacrifice myself for the good of America and
Speaker 4: the American people. No. No, Just on its face who
Speaker 4: they hire shows what it's really about, and it's homeless.
Speaker 4: Do you have real ID I don't think so.
Speaker 2: Okay, I believe so. If you and your wife, it's
Speaker 2: going to be one hundred bucks yep or okay, like
Speaker 2: buy another ticket. And I don't know if they if
Speaker 2: your one year old son will have to have a
Speaker 2: real idea or another forty five right for him, But anyway,
Speaker 2: they said that it could increase your weight time, which
Speaker 2: is what the TSA is really all about. And it's
Speaker 2: all about obedience training. Right. This is positive operant conditioning.
Speaker 2: It's what b. F. Skinner said, right, you do what
Speaker 2: I want. In other words, you know this is negative.
Speaker 2: In other words, I'm going to punish you because you
Speaker 2: didn't get real id. But the basic premise of the
Speaker 2: TSA is you do what I want. You know, you
Speaker 2: go through this machine, or you let me put my
Speaker 2: hands on you and then you can fly. Here's your reward, right,
Speaker 2: and that is a much more effective way to train animals,
Speaker 2: which is the way they see us. The policy, though, however,
Speaker 2: creates a bizarre situation where your identity expires like a
Speaker 2: carton of milk. So you pay them forty five dollars
Speaker 2: because they say, well, we have to run this through
Speaker 2: a system. And this is as ridiculous as banks charging
Speaker 2: you a special fee because you've got to check from
Speaker 2: Canada or something like that. It's like, come on, you
Speaker 2: don't have to charge ten percent of the check or
Speaker 2: something like that. So they're going to check you through
Speaker 2: their verification system and make sure that you are paying
Speaker 2: not taxpayers or footing the bill for the advanced verification system. However,
Speaker 2: once they go through this advanced verification system, the system
Speaker 2: is so advanced that it can't remember who you were
Speaker 2: if you stay more than ten days. So if you
Speaker 2: take a two week vacation and you don't have real ID,
Speaker 2: you got to pay forty five dollars, going forty five
Speaker 2: dollars to come back because they only keep your ID
Speaker 2: for ten days. How could it get any worse? I
Speaker 2: just wait, they'll think of a way.
Speaker 5: Yeah, this forty five dollars fee to search through a database.
Speaker 5: We've got to enter in your name exactly our database.
Speaker 5: It's such difficult work for these.
Speaker 2: People, and it's so expensive too. Yeah, when you look
Speaker 2: at all the power that's consumed by the by the
Speaker 2: computers there and.
Speaker 5: The way they put that to make sure that it's
Speaker 5: these scums that are paying for it that don't have
Speaker 5: the real ID rather than the taxpayers. It's only these
Speaker 5: delinquents that don't have ID. It it reminds me of Brazil.
Speaker 5: It's people aren't paying enough for their interrogations exactly.
Speaker 2: And of course, if you want to get your real ID,
Speaker 2: some stay don't charge you. New York doesn't have a
Speaker 2: fee for real ID besides the amount of time that
Speaker 2: they waste on you and all the hassle. But in
Speaker 2: Pennsylvania they hassle you, they waste your time, and they
Speaker 2: charge you a one time thirty dollars real ID fee
Speaker 2: on top of standard renewal fees for your driver's license.
Speaker 2: So you know they're going to get you everywhere. Right Surprise,
Speaker 2: when your package arrives, you have to pay the tariff.
Speaker 2: Wait a minute, I thought terifs didn't cost Americans anything.
Speaker 2: What Trump was land, Well, you're going to pay directly
Speaker 2: because of this deminimous shipping exclusion that has been taken away.
Speaker 2: It was a tariff exemption on goods that were worth
Speaker 2: eight hundred dollars or less. It has left some US
Speaker 2: shoppers with extra shipping bills that have to be paid
Speaker 2: before they can get their their stuff. And then of
Speaker 2: course it creates a massive issue. You can imagine in
Speaker 2: this particular case. They begin with an example. A woman
Speaker 2: who's a physical therapist California bought a trench coat from
Speaker 2: a Dutch retailer for four hundred and fifty six dollars.
Speaker 2: She said that was already a bit above her budget,
Speaker 2: but then when it arrived ups told her that she'd
Speaker 2: have to pay two hundred and fifty dollars in customs
Speaker 2: to get it. Now, if she did not pay that,
Speaker 2: you know, she wound up paying it. She said, this
Speaker 2: is the second most expensive article clothing I've ever bought.
Speaker 2: The only thing that was more expensive was my wedding gown. So,
Speaker 2: but you can't wear your wedding down out in the rain,
Speaker 2: I guess. So this is a trench coat, good news.
Speaker 4: And with a trench coat you can pretend to be
Speaker 4: a hard boiled detective around saying things like these streets
Speaker 4: just ain't the same.
Speaker 2: So anyway, she wound up paying seven hundred dollars for
Speaker 2: it by the time she had to pay the taxes
Speaker 2: on it. So if somebody doesn't want to pay a
Speaker 2: surprise bill of two hundred and fifty dollars to get
Speaker 2: their item, then what happens. What happens with the ship
Speaker 2: or what happens with the company on the other end.
Speaker 2: It becomes a real quagmire. And that's one of the
Speaker 2: reasons why they did not have this there. For decades
Speaker 2: there were no custom duties imposed on items under eight
Speaker 2: hundred dollars. But that has ended in China for Chinese
Speaker 2: goods in May and for the rest of the world.
Speaker 2: That ended in August. Democrats Republicans favored ending the exemption.
Speaker 2: So again, the rationale they gave was that made it
Speaker 2: easier to smuggle fentanyl into the country. It's always fentanyl,
Speaker 2: isn't it. That's become the excuse for every kind of tyranny.
Speaker 2: We got to stop that fentanyl. It was they were
Speaker 2: just in the White House. They were saying, well, you know,
Speaker 2: the Biden administration really didn't watch the fentanyl stuff, and
Speaker 2: so we had enough fentanyl come into the country under
Speaker 2: Biden to kill every man, woman, and child in America.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, how are we still alive because maybe
Speaker 2: some of us are not interested in taking it, you know. Anyway,
Speaker 2: the ludicrous arguments that they make with this stuff, it's
Speaker 2: just never ends. Still, the abruptness with which the US
Speaker 2: closed the loophole, and that's the key caused major disruptions
Speaker 2: for sellers of all sizes, as well as for express
Speaker 2: carriers like FedEx and ups postal networks, and for American shoppers.
Speaker 2: This is the key. This is the the chaos and
Speaker 2: disruption that Trump specializes in. That's why they put him
Speaker 2: in place, because you could change these things. You could
Speaker 2: if you don't like the interlocking just in time delivery
Speaker 2: system and you know, offshoring of manufacturing things like that,
Speaker 2: which I don't really like either. But if that system
Speaker 2: has been put in over decades and you're not going
Speaker 2: to rip that out overnight without causing major problems, Trump
Speaker 2: doesn't care. As a matter of fact, he likes to
Speaker 2: do that kind of stuff. Here's another example of the
Speaker 2: destructive policies of Trump. Costco is suing the Trump administration
Speaker 2: seeking tariff refunds before the Supreme Court rules if they're illegal.
Speaker 2: Why are they doing that? Well, because it turns out
Speaker 2: that the Trump administration has said that even if they
Speaker 2: lose in the Supreme Court, which if any justice is done,
Speaker 2: they will lose. There's absolutely no way that AEPA fraud.
Speaker 2: There was not any emergency. Nothing had changed over several
Speaker 2: decades in terms of trade deficits with other countries, and
Speaker 2: so you can argue whether or not you think trade
Speaker 2: deficits are an issue or not. Some people don't think
Speaker 2: trade deficits are an issue. Whether you think it's an issue,
Speaker 2: it clearly had not changed and so it was clearly
Speaker 2: not an emergency. So it's not even about that. He
Speaker 2: is declaring emergencies left and right everywhere, so he can
Speaker 2: just rule by executive order. And that's what the Supreme
Speaker 2: Court needs to shut down, not just for the tariff issue,
Speaker 2: but for all these other issues. We've got to stop Trump.
Speaker 2: And the Democrats who will follow him will do the
Speaker 2: same thing. They will declare an emergency and then just
Speaker 2: rule as czars and dictators. But the issue is is
Speaker 2: that if the Supreme Court says we're going to enforce
Speaker 2: the constitution. The Trump administration has said that companies that
Speaker 2: have paid the tariff, like Costco has paid, will not
Speaker 2: get their money back. Now we've also heard them saying, well,
Speaker 2: there's going to be so many refunds are going to
Speaker 2: have to give that we will just this astronomical amount
Speaker 2: of money that they're going to have to refund, and
Speaker 2: they made that as an argument for why the Supreme
Speaker 2: Court should not take away the power that they usurped. Hey,
Speaker 2: we stole this power, don't take it away because it's
Speaker 2: going to be expensive and complicated for us to undo
Speaker 2: what we did when we didn't have any authority to
Speaker 2: do it. What that's a Trump administration in a nutshell.
Speaker 2: And so we created all this problem and you're going
Speaker 2: to make even a bigger problem if we have to
Speaker 2: refund all this stuff. But the separate action is necessary,
Speaker 2: said Costco in the lawsuit because even if the ipid
Speaker 2: duties and underlying executive orders are held unlawful by the
Speaker 2: Supreme Court, importers have paid the duties, including the plaintiff Costco,
Speaker 2: and they're not guaranteed a refund for those unlawfully collected
Speaker 2: tariffs and the absence of their own judgment and judicial relief.
Speaker 2: So Trump is basically, with his abruptness and with his
Speaker 2: vacillation and its constantly changing rates, he has thrown a
Speaker 2: monkey wrench into every kind of business, whether it's retail
Speaker 2: or manufacturing in the US. Because the manufacturers have been
Speaker 2: thrown under the bus. They don't get all of the
Speaker 2: components that they need for whatever they're manufacturing here. Domestically,
Speaker 2: every one of the manufacturers is going to be getting
Speaker 2: a lot of components from abroad. They don't know what
Speaker 2: their prices are going to be because constant changing and
Speaker 2: flipping of these duties based on what Trump is, the
Speaker 2: games he's playing with other leaders in other countries. It's
Speaker 2: not based on even protecting an industry or even funding
Speaker 2: the government. It's just based on the whims and the
Speaker 2: likes and the dislikes of Donald Trump and who he's
Speaker 2: trying to reward or who he's trying to punish. Who
Speaker 2: does he like kiss his ring or other things attached
Speaker 2: to him, and to get away from this or whatever.
Speaker 2: So that is one of the worst aspects of this.
Speaker 2: So after he creates all this chaos and freezes a
Speaker 2: lot of people and destroys their businesses, really the people
Speaker 2: who have survived who are able to work around this,
Speaker 2: pay the tariffs and they buy the goods and they
Speaker 2: don't know if the price of the goods are going
Speaker 2: to go up or go down, but they pay these
Speaker 2: tariffs and then it's all illegal, and then they've got
Speaker 2: to go through the process of suing the US government
Speaker 2: in order to get that money back. It's just unbelievable
Speaker 2: what Trump is doing to our country. This court and
Speaker 2: this Federal Circus Circuit Circus Circuit have cautioned that an
Speaker 2: importer may lack the legal right to recover refunds of
Speaker 2: duties for entries that have liquidated, even where the underlying
Speaker 2: legality of the tariff is later found to be unlawful.
Speaker 2: Isn't that amazing? We can put unlawful, destructive tariffs on you,
Speaker 2: and even after they are we agree that they are unlawful,
Speaker 2: We're not going to let you get your money back.
Speaker 2: And notice that this is for importers, right, so the
Speaker 2: foreigners may get their money back, but not the Americans.
Speaker 2: How is this America first? The Trump administration has warned.
Speaker 2: And the potential fallout of having to rEFInd hundreds of
Speaker 2: millions of dollars in tariffs, What about the fallout when
Speaker 2: you close American businesses because of your lockdowns like you
Speaker 2: did five years ago, or your tariffs like you're doing now?
Speaker 2: Just amazing. So a british Man was reportedly arrested for
Speaker 2: posting posing with a gun on social media. It's a
Speaker 2: british Man who was reportedly arrested after posting a photo
Speaker 2: on social media showing him holding a gun. I guess
Speaker 2: like toy story. You know you can't have a gun. Wait,
Speaker 2: he can't have it. And if you're going to draw
Speaker 2: a gun, you got to do it with that just sketch, right,
Speaker 2: you can't actually pull it out. The image for the
Speaker 2: sky it is taken in the US, is uploaded to
Speaker 2: LinkedIn back in August, and according to this man, who
Speaker 2: is an IT contractor, the photo caused a nightmarish legal
Speaker 2: drama from the West Yorkshire Police, despite the gun being
Speaker 2: legal and the image being taken on private property and
Speaker 2: America and it was not threatening. It was not threatening
Speaker 2: to anyone. Cop initially came to his home warned him
Speaker 2: about the posting, citing a complaint from a person who
Speaker 2: saw the image. Then cops came back later that night,
Speaker 2: August to twenty fourth, and arrested him. That was only
Speaker 2: the beginning. The Yorkshire Post reported that he ended up
Speaker 2: having strained relations with neighbors and others over the constant
Speaker 2: police presence, even had his equipment and devices seized by cops.
Speaker 2: He's an IT contract I'm.
Speaker 4: Glad they're doing this instead of going after the Pakistani
Speaker 4: rape gangs. Yeah, every single officer involved with this should
Speaker 4: be brought up on charges of treason and summarily executed.
Speaker 4: Just no, no, we don't need your kind and power.
Speaker 4: You officious, relentless bureaucrat know.
Speaker 2: They're doing exactly what the government wants them to do.
Speaker 4: Doesn't Still my statement stands.
Speaker 2: Most perplexing is that the caption and the accompanied text
Speaker 2: purportedly included nothing was threatening or legally concerning. He also
Speaker 2: told the media that he tried to explain to the
Speaker 2: cops that the photo wasn't taken in the UK and
Speaker 2: was instead captured in America, where you're allowed to have guns.
Speaker 2: He was reported Now, yeah, he was reportedly held in
Speaker 2: prison overnight, interrogated and being accused of holding a firearm
Speaker 2: with intent to cause fear of violence. So if you
Speaker 2: are holding a firearm, even if it's not in a
Speaker 2: threatening way or whatever, you are causing fear of life.
Speaker 4: Scary, it's so spooky.
Speaker 2: After being released on bail, authorities came three other times
Speaker 2: to visit him throughout October. The case was eventually dropped
Speaker 2: over lack of evidence. He's now speaking out against what
Speaker 2: he believes to be an Orwellian nightmare. I've not been
Speaker 2: able to sleep. I've lived in fear of a knock
Speaker 2: at my door for the last three months. I haven't
Speaker 2: spoken to my neighbors for four months. It has damaged
Speaker 2: my ability to run my business. On the evidence seen
Speaker 2: by The Yorkshire Post, there was never a sentilla of
Speaker 2: a chance of a successful prosecution and so serious questions
Speaker 2: remained about the policing standards and motivations applied in this case,
Speaker 2: the leadership who permitted this pursuit until the day after
Speaker 2: this newspaper applied to cover the impending court case. A
Speaker 2: spokesperson for West Yorkshire Police told The Metro that the
Speaker 2: complaint at the center of the crisis was based on
Speaker 2: fears that the initial photo was a threat. You know,
Speaker 2: we had just in case you think this is something
Speaker 2: that's limited to the thought police in the UK. Remember
Speaker 2: we had a person put something up on social media
Speaker 2: as a protest of yet another Charlie cook Kirk memorial
Speaker 2: that was being held at a school and he put
Speaker 2: up a meme which was about a shooting in a
Speaker 2: town that had the same name as this school. But
Speaker 2: he wasn't threatening the school. He didn't create the meme,
Speaker 2: he reposted it and what he reposted was what Trump
Speaker 2: had said and was criticized at the time. He said,
Speaker 2: it's just time for us to just move on. And
Speaker 2: that's what this guy was saying. It's time for us
Speaker 2: to move on. We've focused on this Charlie Kirk shooting
Speaker 2: for so long. Can't we just move on? And so
Speaker 2: the Tennessee sheriff arrested him for that. He said, we
Speaker 2: can't arrest him for a speech, but we can arrest
Speaker 2: him for threatening. And that's an implied threat, even though
Speaker 2: he didn't create the meme, even though it was something
Speaker 2: that Trump said, and it was about a completely different organization.
Speaker 2: So this is the way this stuff is running. As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, what we were talking about before
Speaker 2: was a protest that was being held. A lot of
Speaker 2: people are protesting the Israeli genocide and Gaza, and one
Speaker 2: guy showed up and he had a sign that said
Speaker 2: I support genocide and just as an experiment, right, they
Speaker 2: arrested everybody that had anti genocide signs, but they left
Speaker 2: him alone.
Speaker 4: And well, I mean, you can't go after the genocide
Speaker 4: enjoy just a funny little guy, that's right.
Speaker 2: So again, as long as you support Israel, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 2: If it's genocide or not. Just support Israel. That's the
Speaker 2: key thing that's here. But notice the reaction of the
Speaker 2: other people. There's an interesting thing about this. A lot
Speaker 2: of people haven't talked about that Lance pointed out. But
Speaker 2: here's the original clip.
Speaker 10: You're going to be arrested you support genocide?
Speaker 1: Yeah to you.
Speaker 10: I've already found out in Liverpool that supporting a genocide
Speaker 10: doesn't get you arrested. From supporting the war crimes and
Speaker 10: net and Yahoo. And I'm wondering if you'll arrest me,
Speaker 10: So now find out whether supporting genocide gets you arrested.
Speaker 8: Here?
Speaker 10: Does it offend you that I support genocide? I don't
Speaker 10: have an opinion. I support Gennifon. Is that a problem
Speaker 10: for you?
Speaker 4: Yes, it is.
Speaker 10: You support the bombing of innocent men, women and children.
Speaker 10: You won't get arrested. I wouldn't get arrested.
Speaker 5: But I can't be like you.
Speaker 10: I'm supporting a genocide. Do you think I should get arrested?
Speaker 10: Will I get arrested? You should be arrested. He's asking
Speaker 10: whether you've decided to be harried or you're going to walk?
Speaker 10: I will walk. I've got spinal problems isn't the fact
Speaker 10: that I'm not in my eighties that I'm not gonna
Speaker 10: get arrested because you only seem to like arresting really
Speaker 10: old people. I support genocide. That's absolutely fine. You'd still
Speaker 10: want a chances to support genocide and not be arrested,
Speaker 10: you know that. Good luck in the cells. Well, yeah,
Speaker 10: why weren't they arrest me? They're arresting my friend here?
Speaker 10: Why ain't you been arrested yet?
Speaker 5: Mate?
Speaker 10: Well I'm going to arrest you. Where have my friends gone?
Speaker 10: They've all been arrested for protesting against the genocide, and
Speaker 10: here I am all alone, unarrested for supporting a genocide.
Speaker 10: But let me come clean. Of course I don't support
Speaker 10: a genocide. How could you? Where you'd see the destruction
Speaker 10: of the hands of the Israeli.
Speaker 2: Government in Gaza.
Speaker 10: If we care about our human rights, we must defend
Speaker 10: our right to protest, especially against genocide.
Speaker 2: Yeah, except that, as Lance pointed out, his protesters there
Speaker 2: don't support his right to support genas. In other words,
Speaker 2: they don't they don't agree with him, and they want
Speaker 2: to shut him down as well. Here's what he put together.
Speaker 2: If you look at this albeit a minute, that's a
Speaker 2: different one here. Yeah, when we.
Speaker 4: You should be arrested.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. The problem with the protest actually is a
Speaker 2: repeat of the Hong Kong high rise fire. By the way,
Speaker 2: let me show that here I pulled out. Look at this.
Speaker 2: This is the fire that burned for several days. This
Speaker 2: is a complex of a lot of high rise apartment
Speaker 2: complexes in Hong Kong. Hundreds of people died from this.
Speaker 2: You noticed something the buildings after days of being on fire,
Speaker 2: even though these are just residential buildings, they're still standing.
Speaker 2: They didn't collapse into their footprint. How did that happen?
Speaker 4: Strange?
Speaker 2: They must be making this out of some super materialurial
Speaker 2: in Hong Kong that we don't have in New York.
Speaker 4: Obviously they changed the building codes. Oh yeah, no, way
Speaker 4: they didn't.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right, they didn't do that. Yeah, that's what
Speaker 2: Tony Rook was talking about in the UK. So, so
Speaker 2: if we're supposed to believe that these buildings collapse because
Speaker 2: of fire, very minor fire in Building seven, for example,
Speaker 2: it was not even hit with a plane, then how
Speaker 2: is it that we haven't changed the firefighting procedures or
Speaker 2: the building codes. There ought to be changes in all that,
Speaker 2: and of course it stands as a singular moment in
Speaker 2: time where steel structures just collapsed in their own footprint
Speaker 2: after a couple of hours of fire. And so I
Speaker 2: give oh you did. So here's the problem with the protest.
Speaker 10: I'm supporting the genocide. Do you think I should get arrested.
Speaker 10: You should be arrested. Why are you even arrested yet?
Speaker 11: Mate?
Speaker 2: Well, these people don't support free speech either. Here's the thing.
Speaker 2: If you support free speech, if you don't support the
Speaker 2: views that you oppose, right, as people will paraphrase that,
Speaker 2: I may disagree with everything you have to say, but
Speaker 2: I will defend to the death you're right to say it. Right.
Speaker 2: If you don't do that, you don't support free speech.
Speaker 2: So those people who are protesting the genocide, that's fine,
Speaker 2: except they also don't support free speech. So his whole
Speaker 2: point was that they're arresting people for showing for having
Speaker 2: an opinion that the government doesn't agree with. And yet
Speaker 2: the people there on the street once you're arrested, if
Speaker 2: they don't agree with your.
Speaker 5: Position either, it's more of a protest to say, hey,
Speaker 5: the government needs to be arresting with people I don't
Speaker 5: like instead of a protest and support a free speech,
Speaker 5: or at least that's how it seemed. At a few points.
Speaker 5: We might have been taken things out of context and
Speaker 5: implying things they didn't mean to imply. But you have
Speaker 5: to be careful of these protests. They have everyone yelling yeah,
Speaker 5: rest him isn't a great look.
Speaker 8: No.
Speaker 2: I think you're right, Lance, because I see this everywhere,
Speaker 2: you know, not just in the UK, but I see
Speaker 2: it in America as well. People do not support the
Speaker 2: free speech of somebody that they disagree with, and the
Speaker 2: more they disagree with them, the more they demand this
Speaker 2: person be silenced. Take a look at Nick Flinte's for example.
Speaker 2: I don't agree with anything Nick Flinte says, nothing at all,
Speaker 2: and yet I think he has a right to say it.
Speaker 2: And the Conservatives don't think that's the case. They want
Speaker 2: to purge him and cancel him. And of course we
Speaker 2: have seen what Mark Levin wants to do to people
Speaker 2: who disagree with net Yahoo and the Israeli government.
Speaker 4: Personally, I think Nick Fuints and Mark Levin should have
Speaker 4: a cage match, you know. We put them in the
Speaker 4: same room and let them tear at each other, let.
Speaker 2: Them scream, at each other. Yeah, just we're gonna put
Speaker 2: it in a soundproof room so we don't have to
Speaker 2: hear it. But anyway, the bottom line is that nobody
Speaker 2: understands or appreciates or supports the principle of free speech.
Speaker 2: That's the key thing. And so that's why the people
Speaker 2: are saying, you know, shut this guy down. There is
Speaker 2: no we don't understand that you're not going to have
Speaker 2: free speech if you don't stand for the speech of
Speaker 2: people that you disagree with. Well, Campbell's is denying that
Speaker 2: they have lab grown meat after that recording that came
Speaker 2: out with the guy says, yeah, we're three D printing
Speaker 2: this chicken or whatever that's in the soup. I wouldn't
Speaker 2: eat this stuff. It's now being investigated by Florida's Attorney
Speaker 2: General because there's a law in Florida that they put
Speaker 2: on the books to say that you are not going
Speaker 2: to be creating lab grown meat. And so Campbell's has
Speaker 2: come back and said, well, it's not lab grown meat.
Speaker 2: What we were talking about on the label where it
Speaker 2: says bioengineered products Ingredients company said this refers to genetically
Speaker 2: modified crops like canola, corn, soybean, sugar beets, etc. They're
Speaker 2: grown by the vast majority of American farmers. The language
Speaker 2: on our labels refers to ingredients derived from those crops
Speaker 2: and not the chicken. Well, Farida has a statewide ban
Speaker 2: on lab grown meat, but of course they don't have
Speaker 2: a ban on genetically modified plants. And this is why
Speaker 2: when that person goes into Aldi and looks at all
Speaker 2: the ingredients, everything, and pretty much all the American food
Speaker 2: has bioengineered ingredients now because they've gone in and genetically
Speaker 2: modified the plants.
Speaker 5: So also, it's funny that it's, oh, don't worry, it's
Speaker 5: just the oil, the corn starts, the soybean, the sugar beets,
Speaker 5: it's everything in there except for the chicken. It's not
Speaker 5: the chicken. Don't worry.
Speaker 4: We're working on that part.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, we feed all that stuff to the chicken,
Speaker 2: and we just started injecting the chickens with mr Anda
Speaker 2: vaccines at the behest of rawlins. The Trump used Department
Speaker 2: of Agriculture appointee. That's how they did it this time.
Speaker 2: The handoff between the Democrats and Republicans and vice versa.
Speaker 2: So you've got the Biden administration going in and using
Speaker 2: a PCR test as an excuse to kill millions of chickens.
Speaker 2: And then the Trump administration comes in and says, we'll
Speaker 2: stop killing your chickens if you start injecting them for
Speaker 2: our partners, the pharmaceutical companies. So the injected chicken as
Speaker 2: well as a chicken that has fed all this GMO
Speaker 2: stuff as well. So the Attorney general in Florida said
Speaker 2: his office would demand answers from Campbell's and shut it
Speaker 2: down if they were really using any lab meat and
Speaker 2: so forth. But this article from Children's Self Defense points
Speaker 2: out that lab grown meat meets the definition of cancer.
Speaker 2: This is what I've said before. Yeah, these eternal cell
Speaker 2: line and they just keep reproducing. And that's why I
Speaker 2: called it, you know, tumor steak. You know, instead of
Speaker 2: tube steak, which people call a lot of dogs. You know,
Speaker 2: I got tumor steaks, or I guess you could have that.
Speaker 2: The t bone is actually a tumor bone steak. And
Speaker 2: the cultivated meat uses techniques developed in biopharma industry. Producers
Speaker 2: take cells from live animals or from a cell bank.
Speaker 2: They create immortalized cells from cultured stem cells. They grow
Speaker 2: them in large steel tanks called cultivators or bioreactors, and
Speaker 2: the National Cancer Institute has noted that uncontrolled indefinite cell
Speaker 2: division is the defining feature of cancer cells. So it
Speaker 2: is not an exaggeration to call these things tumor meat,
Speaker 2: a point critics invoke when arguing against the live grown meat.
Speaker 2: I've said this a long time ago, and I even
Speaker 2: played that clip from Kindergarten cop with Arnold Schwarzeningers saying
Speaker 2: it's not a tuma. He said, I got addache, and
Speaker 2: they kids said, maybe it's a tumor. It's not a tuma.
Speaker 2: So the food is not a tumai. I guess. Trump
Speaker 2: slammed Biden's fifty two billion dollar Chips Act, then he
Speaker 2: used it to buy a federal stake in Intels As reason,
Speaker 2: Biden said, companies are investing in America again. Instead, though
Speaker 2: the reality is that America is investing in companies and
Speaker 2: getting little in return, because when the government is making
Speaker 2: the investments, it's always a malinvestment. They're going to invest
Speaker 2: in their friends and they're going to invest in failing companies.
Speaker 2: In March, Trump blasted the Chips Act. They called it
Speaker 2: an acronym supposedly creating helpful incentives to produce semiconductors. That's
Speaker 2: what it stands for. What it actually is is just graft,
Speaker 2: corruption and central plan. He called it a horrible, horrible thing.
Speaker 2: It was passed under Biden, and the Chips Act was
Speaker 2: essentially a fifty two billion dollar industrial policy slush fund
Speaker 2: intended primarily to bolster domestic production of computer chips. Early
Speaker 2: grants largely went to either the factories that were already
Speaker 2: in development or that would have been built anyway, So
Speaker 2: the facilities questions whether there was any economic value to
Speaker 2: have additional taxpayer funding. Trump was on solid ground, he
Speaker 2: told Congress. He said, you should get rid of the
Speaker 2: Chips Act, and whatever is leftover, you should use it
Speaker 2: to reduce debt or any other reason you want to. Yet,
Speaker 2: in the months since, Trump has made use of the
Speaker 2: Chips funding not to reduce the debt, but to pursue
Speaker 2: his own questionable industrial policy. His version is even less
Speaker 2: accountable and may well be even worse for taxpayers. There's
Speaker 2: your difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Intel was set
Speaker 2: to receive eleven billion dollars to help fund the construction
Speaker 2: of semiconductor fabs in several states by late summer, the
Speaker 2: company said it Adhari received more than five billion dollars
Speaker 2: of the fund, but Intel struggled to fulfill those commitments,
Speaker 2: falling further behind on factory construction in some places and
Speaker 2: laying off workers as it suffered from ongoing financial and
Speaker 2: managerial problems. By the middle of twenty twenty five, Intel
Speaker 2: looked very much like a failing business. This is pretty amazing.
Speaker 2: I mean, I've not really kept up with electronics and chips,
Speaker 2: and until just recently, Lance is telling me about how
Speaker 2: Nvidia and their sister company which is AMD, SAMD, isn't it, Yes, Yeah,
Speaker 2: And how they basically have frozen Intel out of the
Speaker 2: CPU market, certainly out of the GPU market, not really
Speaker 2: a player there, but they've really lost competition to AMD.
Speaker 2: And which is really surprising because the whole time that
Speaker 2: I was in it, Intel was just was dominant, absolutely dominant.
Speaker 2: But now under new management, they got a CEO called
Speaker 2: lip Bouton, and we just couldn't succeed in America without
Speaker 2: these geniuses that we bring in from other countries. Right,
Speaker 2: there must be an H one B visa recipient that's
Speaker 2: come in to do it. Intel was American built, It
Speaker 2: was American managed when it was successful and now it
Speaker 2: is not successful. With lip Bhutan, essentially the US government
Speaker 2: would produce a roughly ten percent stake in the chip maker,
Speaker 2: partially nationalizing the company. That's the other issue, nationalizing production.
Speaker 2: That's what Trump wants to do. Funds from Chip are
Speaker 2: used to do this. It was a good deal for
Speaker 2: the company, but the taxpayers get the bill. So we're
Speaker 2: going to have privatized profits and you know, public expense.
Speaker 2: The risks will now be borne by the taxpayers. Undamentally,
Speaker 2: Trump gave Intel a federal bailout, removing the company's public
Speaker 2: obligations and accountability while loading more financial risks onto the public.
Speaker 2: When the Chips Act passed in twenty twenty two, the
Speaker 2: Biden administration celebrated it by declaring that quote, companies are
Speaker 2: investing in America again. But under both Biden and Trump,
Speaker 2: just the opposite was true. America was investing in companies,
Speaker 2: investing in companies that couldn't make it on their own
Speaker 2: and aren't going to be successful in the long term. Meanwhile,
Speaker 2: we have three casinos are going to be licensed in
Speaker 2: New York City. That's just what they need is more gambling.
Speaker 2: They've already got Wall Street. They've already got the biggest
Speaker 2: casino in the world. But that's not enough. They're going
Speaker 2: to have three more of them. And the guy who
Speaker 2: the Mets, Steve Cohen, won approval. He's going to open
Speaker 2: a casino close to their stadium there and so again
Speaker 2: more non productive use of capital. New York Times is
Speaker 2: torching Tim Waltz after the Somalian scam woke Minnesota for
Speaker 2: a billion dollars on his watch. I mean, even the
Speaker 2: New York Times is coming after him. And so maybe
Speaker 2: we should call this Sharia Gate a massive, sprawling fraud scandal.
Speaker 2: The federal prosecutors say siphoned over a billion dollars from
Speaker 2: Minnesota's social safety net programs. Now here's the kicker. Put
Speaker 2: this in perspective. A billion dollars is more than the
Speaker 2: entire state spends in a year to run its Department
Speaker 2: of Corrections, which is where all these people belong. I
Speaker 2: got a correction here. We need to put these three
Speaker 2: in prison. The fraud involved a series of schemes, and
Speaker 2: we talked about this. We won't go back into it,
Speaker 2: but it's the Somalis and the al Shabab and all
Speaker 2: the rest of this stuff.
Speaker 4: And this is a continual problem.
Speaker 2: And they look the other way because they vote Democrat. Right.
Speaker 4: People come here, They come here to leech off the system.
Speaker 4: They come here to steal what they can, whatever they
Speaker 4: can get away with, anything that's not nailed down. America
Speaker 4: is nothing more than an economic zone to these people.
Speaker 4: They don't care about freedom, they don't care about what
Speaker 4: it was founded for. They simply care that, Oh look,
Speaker 4: I bet I can make money. I bet I can
Speaker 4: take advantage of these people.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And every single one of them needs to be
Speaker 4: shipped back at minimum.
Speaker 2: Not coming for freedom, coming for free stuff. That's the
Speaker 2: difference from the el As Island.
Speaker 4: They as before. There is the appropriate number of Somalians
Speaker 4: for America is zero zero. Not a single Somali is
Speaker 4: necessary for the United States to function or keep going forward.
Speaker 4: Every single one could be sent back and a thing
Speaker 4: would happen, no one would notice.
Speaker 2: By the way, Lance will up this article here and
Speaker 2: show people this picture of Laura Lumer. She is now
Speaker 2: a Pentagon approved All.
Speaker 4: Right, everyone careful, you're about to see something terrifying.
Speaker 2: One picture is worth a thousand words, said one person
Speaker 2: about this. She gets a desk at the Pentagon and
Speaker 2: some of the people who are kicked out by warpete
Speaker 2: because you are going to say exactly what we tell
Speaker 2: you and they're not even trying to conceal it anymore.
Speaker 2: You know, Operation mocking Birders of the CIA would tell
Speaker 2: people what to say, and they would give them access.
Speaker 2: But now they're saying, we're going to kick you out
Speaker 2: of the Pentagon press pool if you don't say exactly
Speaker 2: what we say, and no more, no less. And so
Speaker 2: they kicked everybody out except for I think it was
Speaker 2: News Nation. Was that it, and you know, some small
Speaker 2: right wing Trump sucker media, And so now they've got
Speaker 2: another Trump sucker, Laura Lumer. As one person said, imagine
Speaker 2: the idea that the Pentagon is going to have a
Speaker 2: serious press conference given the current situation. The only people
Speaker 2: there will be groupies and influencers, you know, people like
Speaker 2: Laura Lumer. And it's pretty amazing.
Speaker 4: How is she going to get to the press conference
Speaker 4: when people keep slashing your tires?
Speaker 2: Though, it's going to be somebody slash your tires.
Speaker 4: No, it's that old story where her tires rotted out
Speaker 4: on her car because she didn't drive it, and they
Speaker 4: just sat there. Then she put up a gofund me
Speaker 4: or something.
Speaker 2: Help.
Speaker 4: The woke left has slashed my tires. Everyone's like, you
Speaker 4: can clearly see the tires have just rotted, Laura.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, if you follow the maga people, it will
Speaker 2: rot your brain, not just your tires. But I am
Speaker 2: tired of it. I gotta say, this is an interesting
Speaker 2: observation from World Magazine. They said Christmas music still unites us.
Speaker 2: So in the December nineteen ninety five issue of The
Speaker 2: American Spectator, Mark Stein had an army said it's the
Speaker 2: best time of the year. He wrote about what he
Speaker 2: called the American Christmas. He said that what he meant
Speaker 2: by that was it's an occasion where popular songs are
Speaker 2: able to unify a country. He said, we don't have
Speaker 2: pop culture anymore, but uniquely in today's fragmented market, seasonal
Speaker 2: songs cross all boundaries. The way I always looked at it,
Speaker 2: I thought it crossed generational and time boundaries. It's about
Speaker 2: the only time of the year that you can get
Speaker 2: everybody listened to let's say, crop classical orchestral music, or
Speaker 2: music from the forties or fifties or something like that.
Speaker 2: I mean bing Crosby's White Christmas is still played a lot,
Speaker 2: and so that was one of the things I always
Speaker 2: liked about Christmas music, was the fact that it was
Speaker 2: so varied in terms of different genres and different time
Speaker 2: periods and so forth, and it is still there, which
Speaker 2: is really kind of surprising. Every generation will sometimes introduce
Speaker 2: some thing, whether it's good or bad, that will be
Speaker 2: a real hit, but they still go back and go
Speaker 2: to the historical songs. They said, thirty years later, the
Speaker 2: market is more fragmented than ever, but seasonal songs still
Speaker 2: cross boundaries. Stein had this in mind pop songs such
Speaker 2: as White Christmas and Winter Wonderland, but he could just
Speaker 2: as easily have been talking about Handles the Messiah. So
Speaker 2: we're going to take a break here. We got a
Speaker 2: couple of comments.
Speaker 4: You want to read those, Yes, please, con Think, Thank
Speaker 4: you very much. Con Think really do appreciate it. I
Speaker 4: would love it if you could make a sequel album
Speaker 4: with full length selections. In regards to the Christmas Night album, well.
Speaker 2: I'd love to do that too. It's just become increasingly
Speaker 2: difficult for me to know. The stroke really slowed me
Speaker 2: down and I couldn't work at all on any of
Speaker 2: this stuff. For several months, I was completely out of
Speaker 2: it and you couldn't use my left hand, and so
Speaker 2: some of that stuff is coming back. I'm trying to
Speaker 2: do some new music. I think we've got one or
Speaker 2: two new songs this year. But yeah, that is a
Speaker 2: goal of mine. I want to try to do.
Speaker 4: That, working towards it. Stealth Patriot, thank you very much,
Speaker 4: Stealth's Patriot. We appreciate it. And again it's your support
Speaker 4: that keeps us on here. So Stealth Patriot, you are
Speaker 4: what's keeping us on.
Speaker 2: Thank you. He says.
Speaker 4: They called the viet Cong soldiers Charlie, what are they
Speaker 4: gonna call the Vina Venezuelan soldiers in Latin Vietnam two
Speaker 4: point zero? We'll have to figure that out. That's to
Speaker 4: be decided. I guess maybe since we're a more mature
Speaker 4: and older nation, we call them Charles's.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know. It to be something Spanish. What's
Speaker 2: spanished for, Charlie Carlos says? The Carlos is out there.
Speaker 2: I guess a p rumbles. They're revolting and saying no
Speaker 2: to the enforced hell.
Speaker 4: In Britain. The public there is waking up.
Speaker 2: Yes, as a matter of fact, let me play this.
Speaker 2: This is since you bring that up, an interesting clip.
Speaker 2: This is the New Republican Movement. These are some Irish guys.
Speaker 2: It looks very much like the old Irish Republican Army
Speaker 2: that was pushing back against the British. And of course
Speaker 2: you had the the war there and the terrorist events
Speaker 2: that were taking place and things like that, and they
Speaker 2: would put out these, uh, these videos where they would
Speaker 2: set there all masked up and everything. They've got another
Speaker 2: one now, but they're not talking about whether they're not
Speaker 2: Ireland is being ruled by the Brits. They're talking about
Speaker 2: the fact that Britain is being overwhelmed by foreign immigrants.
Speaker 2: Listen to what they have to say. It looks like
Speaker 2: an ira thing.
Speaker 12: We the New Republican Movement, have watched their parents and
Speaker 12: las over the past twelve once the level of disrespect
Speaker 12: showing to the people who put you into power that's
Speaker 12: come up ignored any longer. We are prone men of Ireland,
Speaker 12: We are patriots. Your policies and decision making regards to
Speaker 12: flooding at their communities with undocumented militaration man is not acceptable.
Speaker 12: We were not sit back any longer and watch a
Speaker 12: culture and religion destroyed by the people we put in Powell. Also,
Speaker 12: the sexual adoptination of our children schools has not went
Speaker 12: unnoticed either. The New Republican Movement would take immediate action
Speaker 12: against anyone who threatens their ways of life and the
Speaker 12: safety of our women and children. We have your addresses
Speaker 12: and knowing their movements, have you one of you are
Speaker 12: legitimate targets as of today, the New Republican Movement twenty
Speaker 12: eight or eleven twenty five.
Speaker 2: That's interesting. Now, if those guys are not in government plants,
Speaker 2: always be careful about that, thank you, yeah big. If
Speaker 2: if they're not government plants, if this is not some
Speaker 2: kind of a false flag thing, my response will be
Speaker 2: what has taken them so long? All this stuff? But again,
Speaker 2: I don't think that vigilanti violence is the answer to anything.
Speaker 2: When Karen and I were in the UK back in
Speaker 2: the early nineteen eighties, I remember we came out of
Speaker 2: out of a Gilbert and Sullivan thing and there a
Speaker 2: big bomb that went off down the street. Was pretty
Speaker 2: surprising at first. It's like, you know, it's like when
Speaker 2: people hear a gunshot and are where they don't expect it.
Speaker 2: You know, you think, well, that was a firecracker that
Speaker 2: went off, so you're thinking all the different things that
Speaker 2: could be. The last thing that came into my mind
Speaker 2: was a bomb till people started yelling about it. I
Speaker 2: don't agree with terrorist attacks. I don't agree with vigilante violence.
Speaker 2: I think is important for war to be justified, for
Speaker 2: to be done openly, and for the reasons to be declared.
Speaker 2: I don't like it when we have people on either
Speaker 2: side wearing masks. That is an indication that they know
Speaker 2: that what they're doing is not legit. And so yeah,
Speaker 2: it's but it is interesting. This maybe what they want,
Speaker 2: and so we'll have to see what happens with that.
Speaker 4: The Irish. The Irish have given the British more trouble
Speaker 4: than any other group of people throughout history. Yeah, the
Speaker 4: Irish have absolutely refused to back down over the years
Speaker 4: when they want something, if a portion of the population
Speaker 4: wants it bad enough, they will just sit there and
Speaker 4: they will make the British miserable.
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course the British have done a deal on
Speaker 2: the Irish as well. But the scott they never really
Speaker 2: came to any kind of deatonte you know, Scotland, I
Speaker 2: guess that helped that they put in King James. But
Speaker 2: all right, well yeah, and then there's the Welsh. They
Speaker 2: just skill along with everybody and sing.
Speaker 4: The Welsh are small enough that you just kind of
Speaker 4: forget they exist until someone reminds you, like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 4: Wales is there. That's right, there's Wales.
Speaker 2: We did go to Wales and it's some of the
Speaker 2: nicest people ever met where they're say.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so Bogus says, I love etymology in the morning.
Speaker 4: Robot from the Czech Robotnik, forced worker from Robota, forced labor,
Speaker 4: compulsory service, drudgery from Robota, ty to work drudge. Also
Speaker 4: doctor Robotnick is Sonic's villain, so you've got that too.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and drug important and maybe it'll change the drug
Speaker 2: report to robot report when it's done by AI.
Speaker 4: Right I boost data centers are union construction workers dreams.
Speaker 4: I have two friends that are building a data center
Speaker 4: in Sandusky, Ohio right now, that's right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah. They are really searching for people to do real
Speaker 2: stuff again, having real trade skills. That people are realizing
Speaker 2: what a bad deal college is and a lot of
Speaker 2: people are pushing for trade stuff. Got to have real
Speaker 2: the real world. You can't live in this virtual reality,
Speaker 2: even though that's what Silicon Valley tells us. They're telling
Speaker 2: you a lie.
Speaker 4: Video games are fun. I enjoy them myself, but you
Speaker 4: got to do other things. You got to actually spend
Speaker 4: time in the real world. It's important otherwise you slip away.
Speaker 4: Brian Debitcartney, one of my best friends. The is and
Speaker 4: documents the growth of data centers in Virginia. I'm sure
Speaker 4: they're pulling their hair out, yeah, Jerry Alatalo. The art
Speaker 4: official intelligence bubble is set for total collapse due to widespread,
Speaker 4: rapidly growing opposition to digital slavery dystopia. That's right, No, sir,
Speaker 4: do not turn off the AI, sir, do not turn
Speaker 4: off the AA. I need my job, sir. J W
Speaker 4: sixty eight Domain is the AI data center's friend. Take
Speaker 4: whatever they need, whether it's your water or your land.
Speaker 4: Briana Debuit Kartney. I got groped at every turn in
Speaker 4: October on my trip to Florida for not having real ID. Well,
Speaker 4: that's something to look forward to.
Speaker 2: Well, that's one of the reasons why I hate flying
Speaker 2: so much, because I refuse to go through the machines.
Speaker 2: As a matter of principle, and because I want to
Speaker 2: be a monkey wrench in the system as much as
Speaker 2: I can, so whenever I fly, I get them really
Speaker 2: pissed off because I demand that I not go through
Speaker 2: the machine and that they search me. So they go, well,
Speaker 2: we got to go get somebody to do that. Stand
Speaker 2: over here. They invariably will tell me to stand right
Speaker 2: next to the machine, the radar of the X ray machine,
Speaker 2: which I know they know what they're doing, and I
Speaker 2: know what they're doing, and I don't stand next to
Speaker 2: that machine, but it really does bother them. And I
Speaker 2: never forgot the opt out, you know, protest that was
Speaker 2: going to happen, and it was such a problem for
Speaker 2: them that they just shut down all screening and let
Speaker 2: everybody go through on Thanksgiving holiday, the busiest travel day
Speaker 2: of the year. And so I want to be a
Speaker 2: wrench in that machinery as much as I can, so
Speaker 2: I always refuse, and I hate the process as much
Speaker 2: as they do.
Speaker 4: But we can't dole seven ss. Wait, you said it
Speaker 4: was a TSA who would be finding people for not
Speaker 4: having the real ID.
Speaker 2: That's right. Yeah, they determined what the amount was going
Speaker 2: to be. We're going to find people and here's what
Speaker 2: the amount is going to be. And first they publish
Speaker 2: it in the register. You know, because though this is
Speaker 2: the way the government actually works. You know, forget about
Speaker 2: the schoolhouse Rock version. You know, I'm a bill, I'm
Speaker 2: a bill on a Capitol hill. That it doesn't work
Speaker 2: that way. Congress has abdicated their legal authority to the
Speaker 2: executive branch, to the bureaucracy, so they don't do anything
Speaker 2: anymore except to collect paychecks and hold hearings and dog
Speaker 2: and pony shows. So the way it happens is you
Speaker 2: have these bureaucracies make up the rules. And when they
Speaker 2: make up a rule, they publish it on the register.
Speaker 2: They take comments for a while, and then they do
Speaker 2: as they please. They don't care whether you like it
Speaker 2: or not. And so I think what it really is
Speaker 2: is kind of just publishing it on the register. It
Speaker 2: just kind of a way for them to take the
Speaker 2: temperature of the public. And if it's something that's going
Speaker 2: to create a lot of waves, they might back off
Speaker 2: of it because they don't want to lose their system
Speaker 2: that they have set up. But they publish that they
Speaker 2: were going to charge people eighteen dollars, and then they
Speaker 2: said well, after the comment period, I guess they want
Speaker 2: enough comments where people were angry, so they decided that
Speaker 2: they would up it to forty five dollars.
Speaker 4: Thank you, bureaucrats. Very cool, Brandon Bennett. I'm in one
Speaker 4: of the five states that real idea is mandatory, and
Speaker 4: it's a red state.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, you know, when I got my license here,
Speaker 2: I thought that it was they were asking me for
Speaker 2: all this paperwork and everything. Man, this is really getting crazy.
Speaker 2: And so because I'd let my license expire in Texas,
Speaker 2: I didn't drive much, so anyway i'd get the license
Speaker 2: again and massive amounts of paperwork and then like I
Speaker 2: finished and said, now you got a real idea. Aren't
Speaker 2: you excited about this? It's like, no, I didn't want that,
Speaker 2: but they didn't charge me extra for it here in
Speaker 2: Tennessee as far as I know. But it was a
Speaker 2: lot of paperwork, big paper chase.
Speaker 4: It's amazing. They can't even they can't even give you
Speaker 4: a break when they're forcing you into their system. Yeah,
Speaker 4: and he goes Sonita and they said real idea was voluntary.
Speaker 4: How does something that's voluntary now require a fine? Next
Speaker 4: still change it to a misdemeanor ticket and you'll end
Speaker 4: up with a bench warrant if you don't pay up.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, they're lying, of course when they say that,
Speaker 2: and they say that all the time about they say
Speaker 2: that the income tax is voluntary as well. Remember that.
Speaker 2: I mean every year when they would mail out the
Speaker 2: paper forms before you get the forums online, it always
Speaker 2: had in the very back a message from the IRS
Speaker 2: commissioner that the income tax is voluntary. We all know
Speaker 2: what happens if you don't volunteer, right. And then the
Speaker 2: same type of thing when they had paper maps of
Speaker 2: the individual states we'd get these. In the back there'd
Speaker 2: always be a message from the governor of that state
Speaker 2: talking about how driving was a privilege. It's like, let's
Speaker 2: not moving around is a fundamental human right, it's not
Speaker 2: a privilege. But just you try driving around without a license,
Speaker 2: which I know a lot of the sovereign citizens do.
Speaker 2: But I also know that the government that lies to
Speaker 2: you about things being a privilege and things being voluntary
Speaker 2: also has no scruples when it comes to giving you
Speaker 2: due process an affair hearing about the legitimacy of their orders,
Speaker 2: they will do whatever they wish to you. So just
Speaker 2: keep that in mind before you get caught up in
Speaker 2: the legal arguments. They don't care about what's legal. They
Speaker 2: are calling people seditious and saying they need to be
Speaker 2: executed because you got congressmen telling people in the military
Speaker 2: you must not follow illegal orders. No, you tell them
Speaker 2: that I'm gonna put you in jail. Right, So that's
Speaker 2: the reality of the government that we have.
Speaker 4: Here, Fuzzy Matteo. Many of the CDL issued with no
Speaker 4: name given. We're real IDs, real ID will soon become
Speaker 4: digital ID. But it's for your safety, don't you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it doesn't matter. It's all just part of the
Speaker 2: surveillance stuff that they were ramping up. There's nothing real
Speaker 2: about it. So righting biometric, Yeah.
Speaker 4: Right, overtures, says My wife and I flew recently, even
Speaker 4: with the so called real ID. My wife was told
Speaker 4: to stand aside because the scanner kept going off because
Speaker 4: she had new replacements, even though she had a medical card. Well,
Speaker 4: it's because it's about harassing you. And also most the
Speaker 4: TSA workers are very very dumb, very very dumb. He
Speaker 4: low IQ individuals con think real ID isn't better. It's
Speaker 4: just annoyingly harder to fulfill their requirements a proof of residents.
Speaker 4: Every time they add something new, it gets more and
Speaker 4: more difficult because you need all the previous forms of
Speaker 4: ID they made you get to get the new one.
Speaker 5: Just put no name given, no address or whatever.
Speaker 4: That's my plan. That's my plan for when I need
Speaker 4: to update my idea of going to call up and
Speaker 4: fake an Indian accent and tell them that hello, sir, no,
Speaker 4: do not have a branch of residents. Are con think
Speaker 4: it's almost like they're making the red tape for an
Speaker 4: ID so tedious that we will just be begging to
Speaker 4: give them blood samples and figerprints stopped out of all
Speaker 4: the paper requirements.
Speaker 2: I think that's it. I think you got it.
Speaker 4: That's also part of how they're going to get rid
Speaker 4: of cash or any other form. But they're stable coins.
Speaker 4: They will make it incredibly tedious. They will make it very,
Speaker 4: very difficult to spend your money in any other way.
Speaker 2: That's part of what they're doing with a penny band, right,
Speaker 2: it's not about saving money. They don't care about When
Speaker 2: do they ever care about saving money? And it's like
Speaker 2: you got to print the penny gets ripped up and
Speaker 2: torn up like paper money every year, so you got
Speaker 2: to print another penny. That's not the case.
Speaker 4: Most of the pennies are still kicking around.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and they're not. They're not banning those machines where
Speaker 2: you put a quarter in and then get it to
Speaker 2: press the penny.
Speaker 4: Remember the they're still around, but those are going to
Speaker 4: fade away too. So get your pressed pennies while you
Speaker 4: can until you can no longer. James Faithways, Hey, can
Speaker 4: someone post the name of David Knight shop? I want
Speaker 4: to buy his Christmas album? Well, you go to David
Speaker 4: Knight dot news.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's it and find it there. All of the
Speaker 2: stuff is there on that website.
Speaker 4: David Knight dot news and you can find the album,
Speaker 4: t shirts, hoodies, all kinds of other things. And yeah,
Speaker 4: David Night dot news. Ap rumble seat. Everything you see
Speaker 4: happening in the UK is planned to visit here in
Speaker 4: the States. They launched beta test in various places. That's
Speaker 4: it's essential, not to comply, you pointed out.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 4: It's just the UK is between ten to twenty years
Speaker 4: ahead of the United States, depending on where you look
Speaker 4: at in terms of their tyranny, and we seem to
Speaker 4: be catching up to them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the leftist ideas seemed to premiere in the UK,
Speaker 2: then they go to New York, to California, then they
Speaker 2: go into.
Speaker 4: The also Canada. They can sometimes shot us in Canada
Speaker 4: first and trickle down. Yeah, but UK, Canada, then California,
Speaker 4: then New York T nine seven four zero one. The
Speaker 4: building was constructed with old passports.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 4: That's why I didn't collapse. That's what protected them.
Speaker 2: I like that. What about the building across the street
Speaker 2: did it fall over to.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it got the building across the street got the vapors.
Speaker 4: They just couldn't contain itself anymore. It's contagious. Christian constitutional
Speaker 4: conservative people don't like being censored, but love censoring if
Speaker 4: they have the power to do so. That's right, that's right.
Speaker 4: That's why I'm in chat banning all of you all
Speaker 4: the time. You will fear my wrath and power. Yeah,
Speaker 4: the real octo spook cancer meat good.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: It's gonna call the rose gardens. It's not a thuma,
Speaker 4: that's right. It's not a tuma. It's delicious, delicious tumor
Speaker 4: esque meat.
Speaker 5: It's not it's not a killer t bones.
Speaker 4: Instead of killer t cells. It's killer t Bone.
Speaker 13: As Lands pointed out, well, we're going to be right back.
Speaker 13: Stay with us.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the David Knight Show. If you like
Speaker 1: the Eagles on.
Speaker 4: The Cars and Huey Lewis and the news, they say.
Speaker 9: You'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio, download
Speaker 9: our app or listen now at APS radio dot com.
Speaker 2: And again we thank APS Radio for their support and
Speaker 2: also for carrying the show on their news channel. All
Speaker 2: this there here are the ads. They have a lot
Speaker 2: of different genres of music that are there, only have
Speaker 2: a news channel as well, and we are there at
Speaker 2: APS Radio. Let's take a look at this press conference
Speaker 2: that Caroline Lovett had responding to the accusations from all
Speaker 2: corners that this was a war crime, that it was murder,
Speaker 2: and so you have as a matter of fact, Mark
Speaker 2: Kelly has taken center stage, and this is a problem.
Speaker 2: Mark Kelly is a gun grabbing Democrat and he's got
Speaker 2: a lot of other policy issues as well, but he's
Speaker 2: somebody who's not focused on all the LGBT stuff like
Speaker 2: so many of the New York and California Democrats, and
Speaker 2: so he is more palatable to the general public because
Speaker 2: he's not gotten into that aspect of things, and what
Speaker 2: Trump is doing is elevating him to kind of a
Speaker 2: status that I hate to see him elevated to, but
Speaker 2: that's the way these guys play the game. And he
Speaker 2: said that warpete is a twelve year old playing army
Speaker 2: in a press conference yesterday. I think that's a pretty
Speaker 2: succinct description of Pete Hegseth. He said, this guy is
Speaker 2: so unqualified for the job. I mean, think about this.
Speaker 2: He turns around on a stage talking about lethality and
Speaker 2: warrior ethos and killing people. We have the most competent,
Speaker 2: capable military this planet has ever seen by far. That's
Speaker 2: not the message that needs to come from the Secretary
Speaker 2: of Defense, he said. Heg Seth should be talking about
Speaker 2: mission and accountability and making sure that members of the
Speaker 2: military are trained and equipped to do really hard jobs. Instead,
Speaker 2: he runs around in a stage like he's a twelve
Speaker 2: year old playing army. It's ridiculous, it's embarrassing, and I
Speaker 2: can't imagine what our allies think of looking at that
Speaker 2: guy in this job, one of the most important jobs
Speaker 2: for our country. Kelly's video on refusing illegal orders, that's
Speaker 2: what has set him up at war with Warpete. Warpete
Speaker 2: wants to court martial him even though he's out of
Speaker 2: the military. I'm not really sure how that works. Does
Speaker 2: he lose benefits or something. I mean, he's got a
Speaker 2: lot of benefits with the Senate, and I think this
Speaker 2: is a very stupid fight to pick. This is one
Speaker 2: of the key things if you're going to be commander
Speaker 2: in chief, if you're going to be a head of
Speaker 2: what you want to now call the War Department, maybe
Speaker 2: you need to pick your battles wisely, if not ethically.
Speaker 2: The White House on Monday said that Admiral Mitch Bradley
Speaker 2: gave the order and this is exactly what Jason Barker
Speaker 2: was talking about. This is the plan to throw the
Speaker 2: subordinates under the bus. And can imagine that this lame
Speaker 2: is going to fall maybe further down the chain of
Speaker 2: command as things heat up on this, because everybody sees
Speaker 2: what this is and it was pretty amazing what happened
Speaker 2: at the press conference. We'll play it for you here
Speaker 2: in a second here, But anyway, heg Seth is calling
Speaker 2: these six lawmakers who released the video the sedous seditious six.
Speaker 2: Isn't that interesting? Because it's now sedition to say that
Speaker 2: you must not follow illegal orders. You've got to follow
Speaker 2: the constitution. Stead Why is that sedition? Because Trump thinks
Speaker 2: that he is what everybody needs to follow, not the Constitution.
Speaker 2: The Constitution has been dethroned by Trump and Trump is
Speaker 2: now king. So if you don't obey his unconstitutional, illegal orders,
Speaker 2: then you're guilty of sedition. And you know, it's not
Speaker 2: just him that's saying it. It was pretty amazing to
Speaker 2: me to see. I went around and looked at conservative
Speaker 2: media sites to see what people are saying about this
Speaker 2: war crime, this murder that took place, and pretty much
Speaker 2: has been ignored by all of the conservative sites pretty much.
Speaker 2: There was an interesting pointed question that was made by
Speaker 2: a Fox News reporter yesterday. We're going to play that
Speaker 2: for you. However, when you look at places like Breitbart
Speaker 2: WorldNet daily info Wars, they're ignoring this. As a matter
Speaker 2: of fact. Info Wars look at this headline here, take
Speaker 2: a screenshot of this. This is mundy war room democrat
Speaker 2: Mark Kelly continues his seditious six operations to advance US
Speaker 2: color Revolution. This is just cut and paste nonsense, folks.
Speaker 2: They want to throw color Revolution in there because Soro
Speaker 2: source doesn't have anything to do with any of this part.
Speaker 2: And to call them seditious because they told people that
Speaker 2: you must disobey illegal orders, that's not sedition, that's patriotism.
Speaker 2: You guys are bought and sold. I don't know how
Speaker 2: much did Trump pay you, or is it that you
Speaker 2: know that you get your money from the people who
Speaker 2: follow Trump like some kind of messiah. If you refer
Speaker 2: to him as the king that disgusts me, I tell
Speaker 2: you I wouldn't be working there now at this point.
Speaker 2: I would have gone off on this thing anyway, Hechsath said.
Speaker 2: Kelly is still subject to the Universal Code of Military Justice,
Speaker 2: and he knows that we're going to come after him. Right,
Speaker 2: Let's see how that works. This is a stupid war
Speaker 2: that you're picking, just like the Venezuelan war is a
Speaker 2: stupid war. You're picking foreign and domestic. Your policies are stupid, illegal, unconstitutional.
Speaker 2: This is the Secretary of Defense. This is not a
Speaker 2: serious person, said Kelly. He should have been fired after
Speaker 2: Signal Gate, and then he should have been fired every
Speaker 2: single day after that. How do you wind up trying
Speaker 2: to spend this to say that this is some kind
Speaker 2: of a so color revolution. That's what I'd like to know.
Speaker 2: It's insane and it is not sedition. It is patriotism
Speaker 2: to follow the Constitution rather than an illegal dictation from
Speaker 2: a dictator. Kelly then expressed his disgust at a children's
Speaker 2: book meme that heg Seth posted on social media. He said,
Speaker 2: last night he's putting out on the internet turtles with
Speaker 2: rocket propelled grenades. I mean, have you seen this. This
Speaker 2: is the Secretary of Defense doing this. This is not
Speaker 2: a serious person. Heg Seth has threatened Kelly with court
Speaker 2: martial for reminding troops not to follow illegal orders if
Speaker 2: they come from the administration. What is it that they
Speaker 2: don't understand about that? And so, as I said, pretty
Speaker 2: much every news site has ignored this video, said nothing
Speaker 2: at all about it. Or maybe there'll be one small
Speaker 2: article like here's the example Breitbart, right. Oh wait, that's
Speaker 2: the wrong clip there. We got a can you put
Speaker 2: that in for me or pull that up I wanted.
Speaker 2: I took a screenshot of Breitbart, and they've only got
Speaker 2: one small article on the side, not a headline, thing
Speaker 2: about the fact that we had the US government go
Speaker 2: back and execute people that they unlawfully and unconstitutionally attacked
Speaker 2: in the first place. And this is the very first
Speaker 2: boat strike if you remember this, and we already had
Speaker 2: people in the military the JAG. These are the people
Speaker 2: who look at the legal issues around Thank you for
Speaker 2: putting that up. All right, there's white Bart. You can't
Speaker 2: even see it. Pull it up again, Lance. You can't
Speaker 2: even see the article that you have to zoom in
Speaker 2: on it. It's over there to the right. The big
Speaker 2: thing is that there was a Nativity play at a
Speaker 2: church where they had Baby Jesus zip Tide and Roman
Speaker 2: soldiers as ice agents. I'm sorry, but that's not as
Speaker 2: big an issue as the fact that that's just another
Speaker 2: woke church, apostate church. It's hard to even news anymore,
Speaker 2: but I think it is news when you have go
Speaker 2: down a little bit further. You've got to look for
Speaker 2: it there it is. Kelly says that Hegseth authorizing the
Speaker 2: second boat strike was in competence at the highest level.
Speaker 2: They didn't even put the real quotes that people are
Speaker 2: saying it was murder right. It wasn't just incompetence. They
Speaker 2: if you remember the initial reports of this, they said
Speaker 2: that the boat turned around and ran away when it
Speaker 2: saw the US helicopters or planes whatever it was coming in.
Speaker 2: So it was not an armed conflict. They were running
Speaker 2: away from it. And we made that point. We said,
Speaker 2: there's no justification for them to attack these boats in
Speaker 2: the first place. There is no declared war. There's no
Speaker 2: law that allows them to do this. You know. I
Speaker 2: think one of the reasons why they called the drug
Speaker 2: war the drug war is because they didn't want to
Speaker 2: call it prohibition. If they called it probition, which is
Speaker 2: what it is, then people might have asked, we wait
Speaker 2: a minute, we had constitutional amendments for probition. Where's the
Speaker 2: constitutional amendment for the drug war? But then it becomes
Speaker 2: a war, a war on the American people and a
Speaker 2: war on the constitution. And now it is a war
Speaker 2: on other countries, a kinetic war. And so it was
Speaker 2: completely unjustified and a complete repudiation of the way they
Speaker 2: have handled this illegal drug war. The boat was running
Speaker 2: away from them, and that was the big scandal. Now
Speaker 2: it's an even bigger scandal. They hit the boat with missiles,
Speaker 2: and then the survivors who were struggling in the water
Speaker 2: trying to stay afloat they ordered to have them killed. Again,
Speaker 2: that is against every moral and legal principle of American
Speaker 2: and international law. So how do you excuse that? And
Speaker 2: why would that not be a big issue with Breitbart?
Speaker 2: They doesn't even warrant a headline for them. It's stuck
Speaker 2: off on the side. And then they pull out a
Speaker 2: quote that is really mild compared to the reality of
Speaker 2: what's been said by Mark Kelly and by other people,
Speaker 2: and noticed that the people who are reading Breitbart really
Speaker 2: didn't care much about that. They only got four hundred
Speaker 2: comments about that, four hundred and thirty three comments. This
Speaker 2: is a state of the conservatives. They really don't care. Well,
Speaker 2: it's just disgusting to me. So under fire after Washington
Speaker 2: Post report revealed that Warpete gave the order to kill
Speaker 2: everyone aboard an alleged drug running boat from Venezuela. At
Speaker 2: the press conference, Lovett had previously said during the briefing
Speaker 2: that the order came from Admiral Frank M. Bradley, who
Speaker 2: was authorized by Hegsath. And again, I think this is
Speaker 2: part of passing the buck down to subordinates who will
Speaker 2: be paying the price for this. I think perhaps that's
Speaker 2: one of the reasons. One of the guy who was
Speaker 2: the commander of I think it's Southcolm they call it.
Speaker 2: He stepped down one year into his three year term.
Speaker 2: He got out of this thing because I think you
Speaker 2: could see this coming. And so here's the press conference
Speaker 2: question than Gabe's question.
Speaker 6: You said that the follow up strike was lawful.
Speaker 14: What law is it that allows no survivors.
Speaker 15: The struct conducted on September second was conducted in self
Speaker 15: defense to protect Americans in vital us.
Speaker 2: He doesn't reply.
Speaker 15: The strike was conducted in international waters and in accordance
Speaker 15: with the law of armed conflict.
Speaker 2: That's not true. She reads a press statement. This reminds
Speaker 2: me of remember Dick, Dick Divine or what's his name,
Speaker 2: Levine or something, the trainee that then as the number
Speaker 2: two at HHS.
Speaker 4: He goes by Rachel.
Speaker 2: Now, oh that's right, Rachel's what he calls himself. Yeah,
Speaker 2: his name was Richard. I call him Dick Divine. Anyway,
Speaker 2: he was asked these questions, you know about and well,
Speaker 2: that's a very complicated issue, and he had this pat
Speaker 2: little non response. They just kept reading over and over again.
Speaker 2: I'd be happy to talk to you in another places.
Speaker 2: This is a very complicated issue, and that's exactly what
Speaker 2: she does. She doesn't answer the question. It's a very
Speaker 2: good question from the Fox reporter. What law allows no survivors?
Speaker 2: How is that ever warranted? It is never warranted. That's
Speaker 2: the point. When you look at the rules of military
Speaker 2: engagement or the rules of police engagement, there's never a
Speaker 2: situation where you just go in and kill everybody, right,
Speaker 2: So what law is that? So she just read back
Speaker 2: a canned response and didn't reply to that. So then
Speaker 2: they follow up on it.
Speaker 14: Why won't the administration either confirm or deny or reveal
Speaker 14: whether or not there were survivors after that initial first strike?
Speaker 14: And what imminent threat would to survivors pose who were
Speaker 14: clinging presumably.
Speaker 8: To the wreckage?
Speaker 2: Yeah? What threats that?
Speaker 15: As I said, I think you guys are sort of
Speaker 15: not listening fully to the statement I've provided. Admiral Bradley
Speaker 15: worked well with it.
Speaker 2: You didn't and you didn't reply.
Speaker 15: Correcting the engagement to ensure the vote was totally destroyed
Speaker 15: and the threat to the narco terrorists to the United
Speaker 15: States was eliminated. And for any further questions about his thinking,
Speaker 15: I would defer you to the Department of War.
Speaker 4: I obviously wasn't in the road.
Speaker 2: Yeah. In other words, I can't do anything except read
Speaker 2: this canned non response that is absolutely a lie. So
Speaker 2: again that's another point. You know, what is the law
Speaker 2: that allows this? And then oh, you say they are
Speaker 2: a threat to the US. How are they a threat
Speaker 2: to the US if they are out of combat?
Speaker 7: Right?
Speaker 2: That's what the detailed article from Andrew McCarthy at National
Speaker 2: Review that I spent time on yesterday said said. If
Speaker 2: somebody is out of combat, in other words, they're struggling
Speaker 2: to survive, they're wounded, they can't fight anymore, you're not
Speaker 2: allowed to kill them. That's called giving people no quarter.
Speaker 2: That's what was done by Sanna Anna to the people
Speaker 2: at the Alamo. That is not a justified response. It
Speaker 2: will never be a justified response. I got to say.
Speaker 2: It just disgusts me to see these people parading their
Speaker 2: Christianity like Lovitt does, and like Pete Heigseeth. Does you
Speaker 2: know they put up all these different things about her
Speaker 2: before she goes into a before she goes into a
Speaker 2: press conference, she has a prayer. Great, what do you
Speaker 2: do do you ask God for an indulgence for the
Speaker 2: lies you're about to tell on behalf of this, Dictator Trump,
Speaker 2: Is that what you're praying about going to get an
Speaker 2: indulgence on this or something it's disgusting on this pardon
Speaker 2: for the Honduran president. Does it all undercut the administration's messaging?
Speaker 2: While you have these Congressional Republicans defending the strikes on
Speaker 2: the narco terrorists and then a pardon for a convicted
Speaker 2: drug trafficker, does that make it more difficult for your
Speaker 2: members to defend your administration? Again, this reporter Fox News,
Speaker 2: Heinrich asked perfect questions, Good job, there's no answer for that.
Speaker 2: She said, well, I don't think so, Jackie. I think
Speaker 2: the President Trump has been quite clear in his defense
Speaker 2: of the US homeland to stop these illegal narcotics from
Speaker 2: coming into our borders, whether that's my land or by sea.
Speaker 2: He's also made it clear that he wants to correct
Speaker 2: the wrongs of the weaponized Justice Department on the previous administration.
Speaker 2: All of this is a non response, you know when
Speaker 2: you look at this. If he wants to stop these
Speaker 2: illegal narcotics coming in, then why did he pardon one
Speaker 2: of the biggest drug lords. The former president of Honduras
Speaker 2: at the same time they're murdering people who are thrashing
Speaker 2: in the water after an unjustified attack on them, an
Speaker 2: illegal attack. And then at the same time as this
Speaker 2: happening on yes yesterday, the son of El Chapo, you know,
Speaker 2: the guy who ran the Cinelo A drug cartel, gets
Speaker 2: a plea bargain with the Trump Department of Justice to
Speaker 2: make sure that he doesn't spend life in prison. And
Speaker 2: he's going to be able to get out in a
Speaker 2: few years with a barole because they struck a deal
Speaker 2: with him, a plea bargain. So talk to me about
Speaker 2: how the number one priority and we've got to do
Speaker 2: anything that it takes to stop these illegal drugs. Again,
Speaker 2: it'll never be stopped by force. It won't be stopped
Speaker 2: by force with law enforcement, and it won't be stopped
Speaker 2: by force by the military either. It is not your
Speaker 2: hammer doesn't work on this problem. It's not a nail.
Speaker 2: It's something very different.
Speaker 5: Which is exactly why they are using that as their mcguffin.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, it is one of the most disgusting mcguffins
Speaker 2: I've ever seen. This whole drug war thing. And you know,
Speaker 2: I used to talk about it, and people would always
Speaker 2: get angry with me, Well you like drugs, right, It's like, no,
Speaker 2: I don't use drugs, and I don't need an army
Speaker 2: of thugs kicking indoors to keep me off of drugs. Either.
Speaker 2: It's a spiritual issue, it's a personal choice issue, it's
Speaker 2: a medical issue. There's a lot of different ways that
Speaker 2: it could be attacked. But using law enforcement and police
Speaker 2: is a stupid approach. It's an illegal approach. It destroys
Speaker 2: our society, it destroys the rule of law, and that's
Speaker 2: why they do it. So Caroline love Ittt hammers the
Speaker 2: media after all this stuff, because you had another reporter again,
Speaker 2: this is a conservative commenter, John fredericks, these guys are
Speaker 2: going to get banned for asking questions like this. He
Speaker 2: asks about the page that was put up. Just a
Speaker 2: couple of days ago, the White House unveiled a new
Speaker 2: page on their website calling out what it says are
Speaker 2: media offenders. At the top of the page will presumably
Speaker 2: be updated weekly. There is a section dedicated to the
Speaker 2: media offender of the week. So I guess maybe we
Speaker 2: should do the same thing. We should have the White
Speaker 2: House lie of the Week. You know, Last week's lie
Speaker 2: of the week was the illegal orders being sedition and treason.
Speaker 2: This year's lie of the week is that we had
Speaker 2: a duty of responsibility to kill those people that were
Speaker 2: swimming in the water after we illegally shot the boat.
Speaker 2: She said, I'm glad you noticed. Our original promise on
Speaker 2: day one was the whole the media accountable, because unfortunately
Speaker 2: we deal with us all day every day around here.
Speaker 2: There are so many fake stories that the that are
Speaker 2: unfortunately written, that have inaccurate characterizations, you know, inaccurate characterizations
Speaker 2: of the war in Venezuela and what happened there in
Speaker 2: terms of killing survivors illegally, you know, characterizing it as
Speaker 2: self defense, as neutralizing a threat. These people were not
Speaker 2: a threat. They were obviously out of combat. We talked
Speaker 2: about that yesterday. How you've got the genie a convention
Speaker 2: in the French term or de combas, right meaning these
Speaker 2: people are out of combat, they are out of action,
Speaker 2: and you have no right to kill them. That is
Speaker 2: simply murder. Caroline love Itt outright denies that Hegseth ordered
Speaker 2: this second boat strike, and she reveals who did so.
Speaker 2: As Hegseth is being attacked for doing this, she said
Speaker 2: with respect to the strikes in question. On September second,
Speaker 2: Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,
Speaker 2: and Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the
Speaker 2: law directing the engagements to ensure the boat was destroyed
Speaker 2: and the threat to the US was eliminated. Again, there
Speaker 2: is no threat to people who are struggling to survive
Speaker 2: in the water. There's no threat to the US again,
Speaker 2: just like there's no emergency for COVID, there's no emergency
Speaker 2: for tariffs. They have different laws every week at the
Speaker 2: Trump administration, and they go out and pardon some of
Speaker 2: the biggest drug dealers we've ever had, cut plea bargains
Speaker 2: with others. At the same time, they say that these mules,
Speaker 2: presumably if they even were doing drugs, that these mules
Speaker 2: are somehow a threat to the United States. It's all
Speaker 2: a lie. Just as Audi pointed out, it is all
Speaker 2: a lie, and that's the name of his podcast. The
Speaker 2: president has a right to take them out if they
Speaker 2: are threatening the United States and if they are bringing
Speaker 2: illegal narcotics in which are killing our citizens at a
Speaker 2: record rate. Well, I tell you it is not an
Speaker 2: emergency because this war on drugs has been going on
Speaker 2: now for fifty four years. As I point out yesterday,
Speaker 2: you got all these conservatives who just love Richard Nixon.
Speaker 2: I guess they love the war on drugs because of
Speaker 2: what allows them to do. They're like, let's them play soldier,
Speaker 2: lets them play army, lets them play policemen, lets them
Speaker 2: do whatever they wish. On the previous administration, she said,
Speaker 2: there was enough ventanyl traffic in our country to kill
Speaker 2: every American man, woman, and child many times over. Wait
Speaker 2: a minute, how are we still alive? Oh? Didn't they
Speaker 2: tell us that same lie the Trump administration about the
Speaker 2: pandemic that was not a threat to us either. They
Speaker 2: always make up these imaginary mcguffins to do whatever they wish.
Speaker 2: CBS reporter Gabe Gutis asked for clarification. He said, so,
Speaker 2: Admiral Bradley was the one that gave the order for
Speaker 2: the second strike. She said, yes, and he was well
Speaker 2: within his authority to do so. No, he wasn't. He
Speaker 2: was following illegal orders. What Bradley did you murdering sob
Speaker 2: You violated the constitution, You violated your oath to the Constitution.
Speaker 2: You're not you're not following legitimate orders. You don't have
Speaker 2: any authority if you violate the constitution. Same thing is
Speaker 2: true of Hegseth, the same thing is true of Trump.
Speaker 2: But they're going to cut it off. They may even
Speaker 2: go after the subordinates of Bradley to protect the people
Speaker 2: at the top. So he's now the commander since October third,
Speaker 2: because the other guy's like, Hey, I don't want any
Speaker 2: this is a hot potato. I don't want to have
Speaker 2: anything to do with this. This is illegal.
Speaker 5: Yes, they had so much fentanyl being imported to kill
Speaker 5: all America. We need herd sobriety to avoid this.
Speaker 2: That's good, Lands. I like that heard sobriety. That's it. Yeah,
Speaker 2: you're your abstinence doesn't protect you. It's other people's abstinence
Speaker 2: that protect you, just like the mask, just like the vaccine. Right,
Speaker 2: the vaccine doesn't protect you. The mask doesn't protect you.
Speaker 2: It's other people's mask, other people's vaccine, other people's sobriety.
Speaker 2: That's what protects you from doing all this stuff. I
Speaker 2: love that. That's great. So the former JAGS working group said,
Speaker 2: there's two things here, two possibilities. Number one, if orders
Speaker 2: were given to kill incapacitated survivors, that is a war
Speaker 2: crime understood by every nation on Earth. Number two, if
Speaker 2: the operation was not part of an armed conflict, and
Speaker 2: it wasn't, it's simply murder, simply murder. And again, yesterday
Speaker 2: I read you the case laid out by Andrew McCarthy
Speaker 2: for the same thing. He says this is a war
Speaker 2: crime or worse, who writes for a national review. He
Speaker 2: laid that out in detail yesterday. But again, that's the
Speaker 2: two options. If they killed incapacitated survivors, even if it
Speaker 2: was a war and a conflict, Even if these people,
Speaker 2: if it was an armed conflict and they were shooting
Speaker 2: back after they're incapacitated, you can't kill them. And if
Speaker 2: it wasn't an armed conflict, and it wasn't because they
Speaker 2: were not shooting back, they were running away, they got
Speaker 2: shot in the back essentially, and so it was simply murder.
Speaker 2: So again, the previous commander got out. This guy's been
Speaker 2: there since October I. He didn't want to have anything
Speaker 2: to do with this because he knew it was what
Speaker 2: this thing really was. But it gets even worse. As
Speaker 2: I was looking at these these Trump sucking media people
Speaker 2: out there doing, you know, trying to defend Trump on
Speaker 2: every issue because they want to pander to the Maga
Speaker 2: crowd that thinks that he is their messiah. That's why
Speaker 2: they do this stuff. The things that they were doing
Speaker 2: putting out there, well you have the seditious six. They're
Speaker 2: being run by Soros. It's another color revolution, the most
Speaker 2: idiotic take I've ever seen on any of this stuff.
Speaker 2: But then they also put this up Infra wars the
Speaker 2: top of the thing here full watch full must watch interview.
Speaker 2: US intelligence asset Patrick Byrne reveals the secret of why
Speaker 2: Trump is held bent on regime change in Venezuela. This guy,
Speaker 2: Patrick Byrne is the billionaire who started Overstock, and he's
Speaker 2: been hanging around with Alex Jones and Michael Flann a
Speaker 2: lot of different times. So you know, they become an item,
Speaker 2: I guess, and they identify him as an intelligence asset.
Speaker 2: I guess you just kind of abbreviated ass period, that's
Speaker 2: what he is. If you have any doubts that Alex
Speaker 2: is controlled opposition, that he is a CIA shill, this
Speaker 2: ought to get rid of it. Alex has been pushing
Speaker 2: for this Venezuelan war. He's got Patrick burn On there saying, yeah,
Speaker 2: I'm connected with the intelligence people. This is why we
Speaker 2: got to do it. He's crossed over from the kind
Speaker 2: of guy who used to oppose lies about weapons mass
Speaker 2: destruction that got us into a rock and now he
Speaker 2: is applauding lies about fentanyl to get us into Venezuela,
Speaker 2: saying it's a great thing and we need to go
Speaker 2: do that. It's absolutely disgusting to see what these people
Speaker 2: and the alternative mainstream media have been doing. Disgust me.
Speaker 2: But they're not the only ones. You've got Megan Kelly,
Speaker 2: who is I think the very definition of a prostitute.
Speaker 2: As Jarl SILENTI likes to call the press out there.
Speaker 2: She is willing to do anything and everything in order
Speaker 2: to get attention, and this is why she had to
Speaker 2: say about these war crimes.
Speaker 3: So I really do kind of not only want to
Speaker 3: see them killed in the water, whether they're on the
Speaker 3: boat or in the water, but I'd really like to
Speaker 3: see them suffer. I would like Trump and Hegseth to
Speaker 3: make it last a long time so that they lose
Speaker 3: a limb and.
Speaker 4: Bleed out a little.
Speaker 3: Like I'm really having a difficult time ginning up sympathy
Speaker 3: for these guys who ten seconds earlier almost got taken
Speaker 3: out by the initial bomb, but because they managed to
Speaker 3: get ejected, you know, a little too soon, had to
Speaker 3: be taken out in the water. I realized, legally it
Speaker 3: may make a difference.
Speaker 2: Had to be taken out in the wall.
Speaker 3: Tough case to really gin up the sympathies of the
Speaker 3: American people.
Speaker 2: Just when you think that Megan Kelly can't get any
Speaker 2: more reprehensible, you know, she proves you wrong. You know,
Speaker 2: this is the same person who just a couple of
Speaker 2: weeks ago, How was that I was putting up? At
Speaker 2: least she wasn't eight, you know, let's make America great again.
Speaker 2: There you go. That was the argument she was making that, Hey,
Speaker 2: you know, at least they didn't get eight year olds,
Speaker 2: they got fourteen and fifteen year olds with Epstein and
Speaker 2: Trump and so forth right, I'm supposed to excuse it.
Speaker 2: I'm not really sure whether pedophilia is a crime. I'm
Speaker 2: not really sure where the machine gunning people in the
Speaker 2: water is a crime or not. You might want to
Speaker 2: go back and look at the law. You're supposedly trained
Speaker 2: as a lawyer. That's supposedly what it is on her resume.
Speaker 2: Megan Kelly when she interviewed me when she came to
Speaker 2: do a hit piece on Alex Jones. She interviewed all
Speaker 2: of the people who were on air there, and when
Speaker 2: I expressed skepticism about Trump and the issues I had
Speaker 2: with them, I brought up civil asset forfeiture and the
Speaker 2: drug war and she got this blank stare said, what
Speaker 2: is civil asset forfiture? There knows nor cares anything about
Speaker 2: the war on drugs or the Constitution. It's amazing how
Speaker 2: uninformed she was. All she does is, you know, whatever
Speaker 2: Roger Els or whoever was directing her told her to do.
Speaker 2: They told her to stand up and turn around. She
Speaker 2: does that. It's pretty amazing. Really a prostitute ifever there
Speaker 2: was one. Why should we be surprised at what any
Speaker 2: of these people do after they have covered for the
Speaker 2: COVID lies and the crimes with that.
Speaker 4: It's amazing to me that she's just flat out saying that, Yeah,
Speaker 4: that's the sort of thing you would expect to be
Speaker 4: in a leaked audio call. Yeah, not just flat out
Speaker 4: said on her podcast or wherever it was.
Speaker 2: And why isn't this an outrage? You know? I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, now we get penalized for opposing genocide, and
Speaker 2: now it's a problem if we oppose killing people in
Speaker 2: the water that are out of combat, when there never
Speaker 2: was a wore to start with. Trump is saving Democrats
Speaker 2: from themselves with his latest attacks and also his alliances
Speaker 2: or his daytons, as the headline that he made with
Speaker 2: Mom Danny, with al Qaeda, terrorists and others. So the
Speaker 2: problem with this headline is that Trump is a democrat.
Speaker 2: He is a democrat, He's a globalist, he is a zionist,
Speaker 2: he is a technocrat. He is all those things because
Speaker 2: he again is a prostitute for sale to whoever pays him.
Speaker 2: And the rest of these people their job is to
Speaker 2: prostitute themselves in order to cover for him when people
Speaker 2: see what he's doing. Trump, for better or worse, has
Speaker 2: long built his political career on effectively attacking his opponents
Speaker 2: and exploiting their perceived weakness with the public. However, it
Speaker 2: seems that all of a sudden, Trump's political instincts may
Speaker 2: be faltering. Instead of exploiting the Democrats' weak spot, he
Speaker 2: is elevating one of their strong leaders onto the national stage.
Speaker 2: His attacks on Senator Mark Kelly have thrown the retired
Speaker 2: Navy captain and former astronaut into the political discourse in
Speaker 2: a whole new way. While Kelly may have been a
Speaker 2: rising star on the Democrats bench, this is the first
Speaker 2: sustained tussle with Trump. Pete is now trying to court
Speaker 2: Marshal Kelly. The fight appears far from over, and given
Speaker 2: the actual content of the clip, Kelly looks likely to
Speaker 2: prevail again. You're going to push somebody like Mark Kelly,
Speaker 2: who is about as anti Second Amendment as you can
Speaker 2: get a Democrat, and he is elevating the Syrian president
Speaker 2: who is an al Qaeda, isis al Nusra terrorist who's
Speaker 2: murdering Christians and other minorities in Syria, far worse than
Speaker 2: anything that ever happened under bashad Asar and then elevating
Speaker 2: mom Danny. And they pointed out, they said last week
Speaker 2: he warmly embraced New York City Mayor elect Mam Danny
Speaker 2: in the Oval office. For months, he had previewed his
Speaker 2: strategy of tying the Democrats nationally to Mom Danny, and
Speaker 2: now he just says, well, now we're going to praise him.
Speaker 2: He wanted to tie the Democrats to this guy and
Speaker 2: hurting them that way, but now he's praising him. Trump
Speaker 2: offered Mam Donnie and his ideas a full throated embrace
Speaker 2: that makes attacking him much harder for a GOP that
Speaker 2: is deeply loyal to Trump and reliant on his political
Speaker 2: instincts in his sway, but again, he has no principles.
Speaker 2: He's just for sale to the highest better and he
Speaker 2: will do whatever it takes to get attention, even if
Speaker 2: it is crazy and stupid, like saying We're going to
Speaker 2: make Canada of the fifty first state and then attacking
Speaker 2: them for being a fentanyl supplier, all the rest of
Speaker 2: this stuff, to the point where now American athletes are
Speaker 2: getting booed by Canadian fans because we've never had this
Speaker 2: kind of poisonous relationship between the two countries until Trump
Speaker 2: created it. It's entirely plausible that Trump saw mom Danny's
Speaker 2: message as similar to the one that he ran on
Speaker 2: and just didn't want to cede that ground to the Democrats.
Speaker 2: After all, Trump made many of the same empty populist
Speaker 2: promises that mom Danny has based his twenty four campaign on.
Speaker 2: Trump promised immediately lower prices, which have not come down.
Speaker 2: He promised to end the war in Ukraine within the
Speaker 2: first twenty four hours, and it continues. Similarly, Mom Danny's
Speaker 2: plans for free buses, raising property taxes, and arresting net
Speaker 2: and Yahoo all are not possible. They face practical, political
Speaker 2: and legal obstacles. So while it's still more likely than
Speaker 2: not that Trump flip saw mom Danny and goes back
Speaker 2: to attacking him before election day, for the time being,
Speaker 2: at least he's training his fire on Kelly. Kelly sparked
Speaker 2: trump'shire this month by appearing in a public service announcement
Speaker 2: urging military members to question illegal orders and to horror
Speaker 2: follow the Constitution. And for that Trump calls him the
Speaker 2: part of the Seditious Six, and so does Alex Jones,
Speaker 2: mimicking whatever nonsense and lies Trump puts out, and then
Speaker 2: he adds his own lies by trying to tie in
Speaker 2: Soros to this as well. The midterms are still a
Speaker 2: year way. A lot can change, but as of right now,
Speaker 2: Trump is helping to save the Democrats from themselves. Isn't
Speaker 2: it interesting they want to have the two of them
Speaker 2: switching power back and forth. That gives them plausible deniability
Speaker 2: for what they're both doing to us, just like you know,
Speaker 2: they handed it over from Trump to Biden so they
Speaker 2: could do the you know, Trump creates a vaccine and
Speaker 2: then Biden does the mandates, and then they can say, oh,
Speaker 2: it wasn't the vaccine, it was the man dates that
Speaker 2: were evil. Well, Trump wants to hand this stuff back
Speaker 2: over to the Democrats again left right, left right, and
Speaker 2: both of them can say the other guy did it.
Speaker 2: So if he's going to build up Kelly for a
Speaker 2: presidential run, even though Kelly wants to kill the Second Amendment,
Speaker 2: Trump doesn't care about that. He's fine with doing it.
Speaker 2: He did it himself by executive order. And I'm sure
Speaker 2: that Kelly would use that Trump precedent of gun control
Speaker 2: by executive order to do his best to kill the
Speaker 2: Second Amendment, all handed to him by Trump. Well, the
Speaker 2: US is rehearsing airstrikes against Venezuela, says the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 2: And just in case you think that this has anything
Speaker 2: to do with drugs, here's Trump in twenty eleven, really
Speaker 2: jumping into colonialism. You know, colonialism is a word that
Speaker 2: has been used as a majorative term so much by
Speaker 2: the left that has lost its meaning in the same
Speaker 2: way that the terms racist have lost them or anti
Speaker 2: semitism have lost the meaning, because they've been leveled at
Speaker 2: anybody that opposes their policy, and the person doesn't have
Speaker 2: to be racist or antisemitic, and you don't have to
Speaker 2: be a real colonialist to be accused of being a colonialist.
Speaker 2: And yet what Trump is proposed in twenty eleven, it
Speaker 2: really was a form of colonialism.
Speaker 16: Ultimately, the people will appreciate it. They're going to end
Speaker 16: up taking over the country eventually, but the people will
Speaker 16: appreciate it, and they should pay us back.
Speaker 17: But we have to go in to save these lives.
Speaker 2: They will take the oil.
Speaker 16: Do on a humanitarian basis, immediately go into Libya, knock
Speaker 16: this guy out very quickly, very surgically, very effectively, and
Speaker 16: save the lives. After it's all done, we go to
Speaker 16: the protesters who end up running the country.
Speaker 18: They're going to like us a lot better than.
Speaker 17: They will if we don't do it.
Speaker 16: More importantly, we're going to save lives, and we should
Speaker 16: then say, by the way, hey, from all of your oil,
Speaker 16: we want reimbursement.
Speaker 18: We should have said we'll help you, but we want
Speaker 18: fifty percent of your oil. They would have absolutely said, okay,
Speaker 18: one hundred percent. In fact, they would have said, how
Speaker 18: about seventy five percent? So and isn't it said? We
Speaker 18: could have had anything we wanted. We could have had
Speaker 18: fifty percent of those oil fields. You know, in the
Speaker 18: old days, when you had a war, it's to the
Speaker 18: victor belong the spoils.
Speaker 11: So we could have had something special. When the so
Speaker 11: called rebels came to us, we should have said, fellas,
Speaker 11: we're going to help you. We want fifty percent of
Speaker 11: your oil. They would have said, thank you very much,
Speaker 11: we have a deal. Write it down, sign it.
Speaker 17: We have a deal. We would have been a rich
Speaker 17: nation again. They have tremendous oil reserves in Libya. Instead
Speaker 17: we help, we get nothing. We're very very foolish led.
Speaker 17: Our leaders unfortunately.
Speaker 2: Are Yeah, I know there was a good leader is
Speaker 2: going to go in and shake them down. A good
Speaker 2: leader is going to steal their oil. And that's exactly
Speaker 2: what he's doing. There's a lot more oil in Venezuela
Speaker 2: than in Libya. There's a lot more oil in Venezuela
Speaker 2: than in Saudi Arabia. Could that be the motivation? As
Speaker 2: Jerald S. Clinty says, you know, we're not in these
Speaker 2: different countries because they're selling bananas. Okay, We're there because
Speaker 2: the oil. If you look at what was happening with Syria,
Speaker 2: it wasn't so much even about their oil as it
Speaker 2: was about the transit of oil across their country. Which
Speaker 2: pipeline was going to be allowed. Was it going to
Speaker 2: be something coming from Russia or something coming from the UAE.
Speaker 2: I think it was. But you know, we had our
Speaker 2: ally and we wanted to transit the oil across Syria.
Speaker 2: The Russians had their own idea. Take a look at
Speaker 2: the pipelines going into Germany that were blown up, right,
Speaker 2: they blocked that off. They got the a German government
Speaker 2: to block off that second pipeline until they blew them
Speaker 2: both up because they didn't want the Russians selling them
Speaker 2: the oil. They wanted to sell them the oil. And
Speaker 2: so that's the reality here. Trump is telling Maduro to
Speaker 2: flee as he is continually threatening him with land operations
Speaker 2: now and again. He's operating like a corrupt colonial government,
Speaker 2: like a mafia don, which is all he understands. He
Speaker 2: grew up with organized crime, He grew up in casinos,
Speaker 2: strong arm tactics corruption in terms of bribing officials and
Speaker 2: other things. That's where Trump comes from. He's not a builder,
Speaker 2: he's not a businessman. He's a crook. He's a mafia crook,
Speaker 2: and that's the way he's running this country. I'm sick
Speaker 2: and tired of him. Go ahead, Travis, read some of
Speaker 2: these comments here before.
Speaker 4: We Marky Mark and New Jersey thank you very much
Speaker 4: for the tip. Says is it me or is Carolyn levetet?
Speaker 4: Ptty and more polished version of Jen circle back ZACKI
Speaker 4: the lips.
Speaker 2: Trump went up on the lips, and.
Speaker 4: I literally cannot picture what either of these two women
Speaker 4: look like right now, despite the fact we've been talking
Speaker 4: about about them and they've been on screen. They are
Speaker 4: a void in my mind, and all I see is
Speaker 4: a silhouette.
Speaker 1: Just uh.
Speaker 2: Well, Trump doesn't talk about how how smart she is.
Speaker 2: He just talks about those lips. Can you believe those lips?
Speaker 4: Well, at least he doesn't lie about that.
Speaker 2: I guess I wonder what kind of lips over she gets?
Speaker 17: You?
Speaker 1: So smart?
Speaker 4: She's so smart? Okay, that one's too obvious.
Speaker 1: Even you guys won't buy that.
Speaker 4: Okay, Ratus, bro, what's funny about lumers that millennials can
Speaker 4: see in real time. What's selling out gets you, That's right,
Speaker 4: it gets you a lot of really bad plastic surgery. Yeah,
Speaker 4: I know I mentioned it many times, but the video
Speaker 4: of her drunkenly flirting with Mike Maw and him being
Speaker 4: utterly repulsed is.
Speaker 2: The one that Milo just put up. I had a
Speaker 2: drudge link for about four days and the language in
Speaker 2: it is pretty amazing, but it is. She is drunk
Speaker 2: and getting in his face and he's leaning back, the
Speaker 2: blonde guy, and he just kind of looks over the
Speaker 2: camera like, yeah, she messes his hair up, and he's like,
Speaker 2: you messed my hair up.
Speaker 4: I don't remember that. I've only seen a short clip.
Speaker 2: This is a clip about two minutes long, and he's
Speaker 2: Milo says, I just found the twenty minute clip of this,
Speaker 2: so I don't know what happens too.
Speaker 4: Milo is an interesting character. You don't want to be
Speaker 4: on Milo's bad side. He has He's involved in everything
Speaker 4: and has a lot of dirt on everyone. Milo is
Speaker 4: even Yeah, yeah, Milo is a interesting character. Hadrian was right,
Speaker 4: Lumour's human mask needs constant upkeep high boost. At the
Speaker 4: Irish version, of the Patriot Front.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I could be a false flying attack.
Speaker 4: Ap rumblest This isn't genuine in my opinion, it's fake
Speaker 4: and stage as many of the violences to start civil war.
Speaker 2: Don't ever follow anybody who's afraid to show their face.
Speaker 2: That's just my just like anonymous QAnon. Right, I'm not
Speaker 2: following somebody who is going to remain anonymous and is
Speaker 2: going to speak in riddles and quatrains like nostrodamus or something. Sorry,
Speaker 2: don't even go there. And I would say the same
Speaker 2: thing about somebody who is afraid to show their face.
Speaker 2: And I also reject the tactics of vigilante violence.
Speaker 4: So we have ap you read that real Jason Barker
Speaker 4: Schoolhouse Rock should redo that cartoon and change the bill.
Speaker 4: Change bill to an executive order.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. I'm an order. I'm an order. I'm
Speaker 2: a dictator of that.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's gounk call of Rose Gardens. I can't fly anymore.
Speaker 4: I won't be groped if I if I could avoid
Speaker 4: flying for the rest of my life, I absolutely would
Speaker 4: believe me.
Speaker 2: Brian B.
Speaker 4: Mack, our youngest daughter, always thought it was cannibal soup.
Speaker 4: That's good close.
Speaker 2: Cancer soup cancer soep, it's good, yeah, delicious. Oh.
Speaker 4: In that Christmas Carol, which for some reason my brain
Speaker 4: is not bringing to mind, but it says, you know,
Speaker 4: don we now are gay apparel. I always thought it
Speaker 4: was donning now our day of peril, and was very
Speaker 4: confused as to why this was our day of peril.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I won't be donning peril this.
Speaker 4: Year, ap Rumblessey. They use extremism as a tool to
Speaker 4: normalize crimes against humanity and goes on to say gas
Speaker 4: lighting one on one. The whole cabinet is trained in it.
Speaker 4: Roy mh dismantled the biggest cartel, that being the CIA.
Speaker 2: That's right, the Criminal Intelligence Agency. That's why, you know,
Speaker 2: when I look at the way Alex is selling the
Speaker 2: SWAR to people to his audience, and he's bringing in
Speaker 2: Patrick Burnett. Now he's even gone to the he's an
Speaker 2: intelligence asset. Yeah, yeah, he's telling you to your face.
Speaker 2: Just look at what David Ike is saying about Alex
Speaker 2: Showes and his warmongreen. It truly is amazing.
Speaker 4: We have high boost. How many other drug dealers has
Speaker 4: Trump pardoned? Also besides this Honduran dude, Well, he loves him.
Speaker 4: Some drug deal. There was that Jewish guy that was
Speaker 4: choking people out in synagogue and beating.
Speaker 2: People up, that's right, and doing that after Trump released
Speaker 2: him as well. So yeah, it's the Sabbath nineteen seventy four.
Speaker 2: So drugs are supplying to man issue. That's right, except that,
Speaker 2: you know, here's the issue. The government politicians don't understand
Speaker 2: supplying to man, not in the real world and not
Speaker 2: in the drug war issue either. That's the real issue.
Speaker 4: We have Hibu saying we aren't going after drugs in
Speaker 4: Central America, Columbia, Mexico, the Caribbean, etc. Boat But fishing
Speaker 4: boats a continent away is the problem. It's a distraction.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we'll just wait. They're going to go after Mexico
Speaker 2: as well. That's probably the next thing that they invade.
Speaker 2: We're going to take a quick break, folks, and we
Speaker 2: will be right back. Stay with us.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 19: Hello, it's me Voladimir Zelenski. I'm so tired of wearing
Speaker 19: these same T shirts everywhere for years. You'd think with
Speaker 19: all the billions I've skimmed off America, I could dress better,
Speaker 19: and I could if only David Knight would send me
Speaker 19: one of his beautiful gray mcguffin hoodies or a new
Speaker 19: black T shirt with the mcguffin logo in blue, but
Speaker 19: he told me to get lost. Maybe one of you
Speaker 19: American suckers can buy me some at the David Knightshow
Speaker 19: dot com. You should be able to buy me several hundred.
Speaker 19: Those amazing sand colored microphone hoodies are so beautiful, I'd
Speaker 19: wear something other than green military cosplay to my various
Speaker 19: gallas and social events. If you want to save on shipping,
Speaker 19: just put it in the next package of bombs and
Speaker 19: missiles coming from the USA.
Speaker 9: Whether you're feeling like the booths where or bluegrass, APS
Speaker 9: radio has you covered. Check out a wide variety of
Speaker 9: channels on our app at apsradio dot com.
Speaker 2: Yesterday I wanted to talk about some pharmaceutical news, and
Speaker 2: I wanted to begin as I did yesterday, but then
Speaker 2: I ran out of time talking about the fact that
Speaker 2: cash strapped Britain is going to be selling off embassies.
Speaker 2: They are cutting nearly a third of their embassy staff.
Speaker 2: The budget singles out high cost locations like New York
Speaker 2: that it could include the possible sale of a fifteen
Speaker 2: million dollar penthouse that was purchased in twenty nineteen for
Speaker 2: diplomats at the luxury fifty Uni n Plaza complex. Seven
Speaker 2: bedroom residents occupies the entire thirty eighth floor and includes
Speaker 2: a library, six bathrooms and a powder room. And this
Speaker 2: is the kind of thing we saw with New Zealand
Speaker 2: when they hit the wall with their socialist economy and
Speaker 2: they couldn't pay their ambassadors abroad and they were selling
Speaker 2: off assets. That was the point in time, as I
Speaker 2: pointed out during the shutdown, that they decided that they
Speaker 2: would spin off their air traffic control and they did that.
Speaker 2: They were the first country to do that and just
Speaker 2: incorporate that into the airline tickets that were there, and
Speaker 2: people saw how effective that was. And you've got a
Speaker 2: lot of different countries that have done that. Even Canada
Speaker 2: has done that, and that needs to be what has
Speaker 2: done in the United States, but of course they're not
Speaker 2: doing that. The other part of it is the UK
Speaker 2: is selling major embassy compounds in Bangkok. And you remember
Speaker 2: the recent defrocking or whatever they call it for Prince Andrew,
Speaker 2: the man formerly known as Prince They removed all these
Speaker 2: different titles from him, and kicked him out of one
Speaker 2: palace to another smaller palace. When he went to Bangkok
Speaker 2: on a supposed goodwill mission or something, he refused to
Speaker 2: stay at their embassy even though it's pretty posh. He
Speaker 2: decided he was saying it an even more posh private hotel.
Speaker 2: And because I guess it's because he's bringing in they
Speaker 2: said ten prostitutes a day. But that's what these people
Speaker 2: are doing. But the whole point of putting this here
Speaker 2: and talking about this in conjunction with the pharmaceutical stuff
Speaker 2: was because Pfiser tried to shake down Argentina and Brazil
Speaker 2: in a third country that refused to speak out publicly
Speaker 2: because they had agreed to capitulate to Pfiser's blackmail. Pfiser
Speaker 2: said the time, you know, we've got this thing set
Speaker 2: up so that people can't come into your country or
Speaker 2: leave your country unless they've got the shot. But at
Speaker 2: the same time, we want to be held harmless for
Speaker 2: any harm that it does, because they knew it was
Speaker 2: going to be harmful, and we don't want to just
Speaker 2: have the usual kind of guarantees that you see in
Speaker 2: other places. We want to have we want to be
Speaker 2: held harmless if we have even manufacturing issues or some
Speaker 2: other things like that, or if you understand, you come
Speaker 2: to understand later that Pfizer and Albert Borla did this deliberately.
Speaker 2: They did it as deliberately as Pete Hegseth went after
Speaker 2: these people in the water. And so they said, so
Speaker 2: we would like to make sure that as a guarantee
Speaker 2: of your word, that you're going to put up some collateral.
Speaker 2: So we want you to put up as collateral foreign embassies,
Speaker 2: military equipment that you've got in other places. And it's
Speaker 2: like people are looking at that saying, how in the
Speaker 2: world do you even do that, Well, it is property
Speaker 2: that they can sell and property that somebody could take away.
Speaker 2: The whole thing was a fraud and Pfizer knew it,
Speaker 2: and they were asking for these this collateral that was
Speaker 2: outside of the country that they were getting ready to
Speaker 2: poison the people in So only one out of seven
Speaker 2: Germans who had a positive PCR test had COVID infection.
Speaker 2: And this is coming from Children's Health Defense talking about
Speaker 2: how this is stunning an eighty six percent false positive
Speaker 2: rate for PCR procedures. Remember Handy was saying at the time,
Speaker 2: I remember when this was all happening, and Handy sent
Speaker 2: me a memo and a red on air saying that
Speaker 2: he had one of the nurses there take a one
Speaker 2: of these tests right out of the bag and run
Speaker 2: it through and it was positive. It didn't even come
Speaker 2: in contact with any humans. So what do you expect.
Speaker 2: Nothing about this is real. It was all just made up,
Speaker 2: a significant overcounting of COVID nineteen infections during the pandemic
Speaker 2: because it wasn't a pandemic. It was simply a lie.
Speaker 2: By the end of twenty twenty one, ninety two percent
Speaker 2: of Germans had already acquired a natural infection, indicating a
Speaker 2: near universal immunity in the population. Maybe it wasn't a
Speaker 2: pandemic to begin with. Maybe it was just a cold,
Speaker 2: you know, because that's one way these coronaviruses, if they
Speaker 2: even existed, right, they talk about rhinoviruses and coronaviruses. But
Speaker 2: I'm at the point now where I don't believe that
Speaker 2: the viruses even exist because they haven't used any real
Speaker 2: scientific tactics to isolate this stuff. We're led to believe
Speaker 2: that they have observed these viruses. Were led to believe
Speaker 2: that they've observed that these viruses are present and sick
Speaker 2: people and not present in people who are not sick.
Speaker 2: None of that is true, folks. It is a complete fraud.
Speaker 2: I mean the fraud goes beyond the pandemic, beyond the
Speaker 2: PCR test, it goes back to virology itself. It's all
Speaker 2: a lie. As OUDI would say, it's all liedemit and
Speaker 2: it absolutely is. And speaking of lies, just remember the
Speaker 2: lies that Bill Gates told us.
Speaker 8: But you don't have a choice. People act like you
Speaker 8: have a choice. People don't feel like going to the
Speaker 8: stadium when they might get infected. You know, it's not
Speaker 8: the government who's saying, okay, just ignore this disease. And
Speaker 8: you know people are deeply affected, yes, yes, in these
Speaker 8: deaths by knowing they could be part of the transmission chain.
Speaker 8: And old people, their parents, their grandparents could be affected
Speaker 8: by this, and so you don't you know, you don't
Speaker 8: get to say ignore what's going on here. There are
Speaker 8: there will be the ability, particularly rich countries to open
Speaker 8: up if things are done well over the next few months.
Speaker 8: But for the world at large, normalcy only returns when
Speaker 8: we've largely vaccinated the entire global population.
Speaker 2: And so so, therefore, if you want the vaccine sitching
Speaker 2: get back to normal, you're going to have to get
Speaker 2: us title to your embassies in other countries. And by
Speaker 2: the way, that was reported by stat News. Stat News
Speaker 2: is a big pharmaceutical trade magazine. They always toe the
Speaker 2: company line. This study was done by three German researchers.
Speaker 2: They analyzed how well PCR test results aligned with the
Speaker 2: results of blood tests for SARS cove two antibodies. Again,
Speaker 2: this is the same play by play scam that Fauci
Speaker 2: ran with HIV. We got we haven't isolated exactly what
Speaker 2: it is that causes age, but we see this these
Speaker 2: antibodies are something out there and we assume that that
Speaker 2: is what That indicates a presence of the disease that
Speaker 2: we can't observe scientifically, we theorize that it is there.
Speaker 2: So what they're saying is we see these antibodies. Why
Speaker 2: are they focusing on the antibodies, Well, just think about that.
Speaker 2: That's what they taught, that's how they determine it. They say, well,
Speaker 2: we're not seeing the virus, we're seeing the antibodies. Because
Speaker 2: there isn't a virus and it's not a pandemic. They
Speaker 2: don't observe the virus. They observe something else and say
Speaker 2: that that is present, but we can't observe the cause
Speaker 2: of the thing. But it is a particle or an
Speaker 2: entity or whatever. It's a virus and it's there, but
Speaker 2: we can't observe it, but can observe the things that
Speaker 2: are the reaction to it. Utter boloney. How the COVID
Speaker 2: inquiry protected the establishment? This is from Brownstone Trish Dennis.
Speaker 2: She says that for four years, hundreds of witnesses and
Speaker 2: nearly two hundred million pounds in cost, the UK COVID
Speaker 2: Inquiry has reached the one conclusion many expected, a carefully
Speaker 2: footnoted act of self exoneration. It assiduously avoids asking the
Speaker 2: only questions that truly matter. We're lockdowns? Were lockdowns ever justified?
Speaker 2: Did they work? And what was the overall cost to society?
Speaker 2: And they repeat the familiar refrain of too little, too late.
Speaker 2: Now this is the way they're handling this lie, this
Speaker 2: massive line fraud in the UK. They do an inquiry,
Speaker 2: you know, just like the Warren Commission, to explain away
Speaker 2: the conspiracy theories. When everybody sees that it is a conspiracy,
Speaker 2: there's more people involved in it that was the most
Speaker 2: obvious thing when you've got the guy who's the alleged
Speaker 2: shooter who's killed by an organized crime figure like Jack Ruby.
Speaker 2: I remember when that happened. It was right around Thanksgiving,
Speaker 2: and everybody my family. I was eight years old at
Speaker 2: the time, and everybody in my family was like, well,
Speaker 2: this is a this is a plan to a multi
Speaker 2: level was not a loan shooter. Everybody could see that.
Speaker 2: So they come up with a commission, a Warren comission
Speaker 2: to explain away or nine to eleven commission to explain
Speaker 2: away how concrete and steal buildings just collapse in their
Speaker 2: own footprint after a fire for a couple of hours.
Speaker 4: Were they bring in someone like Jolly West to give
Speaker 4: a psycho analysis to go, oh, yeah, that's very interesting. Yeah,
Speaker 4: this was definitely a crazy guy, very strange who.
Speaker 2: So you know, was it real? Is the question? And
Speaker 2: they're not asking that the way we cover it up
Speaker 2: here in the United States, we haven't had a COVID inquiry, right.
Speaker 2: Why is that why people demand some answers about this nonsense.
Speaker 2: We see the damage that was done here as well. Well.
Speaker 2: What they've done to cover up for that is to
Speaker 2: have both sides say well, I think China did it.
Speaker 2: I think it was a lab leak, and on and on.
Speaker 2: That covers them up. They say, well, you know, we
Speaker 2: did the best we could, but China did it to us,
Speaker 2: and we just had to try to recoup, and yeah,
Speaker 2: we made some mistakes. We'll do better next time. We'll
Speaker 2: move faster, we'll move harder next time. So it allows
Speaker 2: them to cover up for their crimes that they conspired
Speaker 2: against us, and it lays the groundwork for them to
Speaker 2: do even more the next time. That's the way it's
Speaker 2: being handled here in the United States, which is even
Speaker 2: more reprehensible. So the conclusions from their so called inquiry
Speaker 2: could have been drafted before the first witness entered the room.
Speaker 2: But you know, they spent a lot of time and
Speaker 2: four years, hundreds of witnesses, and two hundred million pounds
Speaker 2: in costs. But they could have written this down before
Speaker 2: because they came to the conclusion that they wanted after
Speaker 2: this dog and pony show. Here's the conclusions. The lockdowns
Speaker 2: were necessary, the modeling was solid, the critics misunderstood what
Speaker 2: was happening, and the establishment acted wisely. Every single one
Speaker 2: of these things is a lie. The modeling was absolute nonsense.
Speaker 2: We knew it at the time. Even another university, the
Speaker 2: University of Edinburgh, called out the Imperial College of London
Speaker 2: and Neil Ferguson's nonsense paper as a lie. But they
Speaker 2: said in this one. Even Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson's most
Speaker 2: influential advisor in the early twenty twenty, has accused the
Speaker 2: Inquiry of constructing what he calls a fake history. In
Speaker 2: a detailed post on x he claimed it suppressed key evidence,
Speaker 2: ignored junior staff who were present at pivotal meetings, and
Speaker 2: omitted internal discussions about a proposed chicken Pox Party infection strategy.
Speaker 2: There we go think that could be the name of
Speaker 2: the of a new third party, the Chicken Pox Party.
Speaker 4: So the harms of lack we say, our politicians are
Speaker 4: already a pox upon us, the Pox party.
Speaker 2: That's the Union Party. The harms of lockdown are too
Speaker 2: numerous for a single list, but they include an explosion
Speaker 2: of mental health and anxiety disorders, a surge in cancer's
Speaker 2: heart disease, deaths of despair that didn't come from lockdown
Speaker 2: that came from the JAB, developmental regressions and children, the
Speaker 2: collapse of small businesses and family livelihoods, profound social atomization
Speaker 2: and damage to relationships, and the erosion of trust in
Speaker 2: public institutions, which I don't see as a negative. I
Speaker 2: see that as a positive. I see the shutting down
Speaker 2: of schools and the exposure of what's happening in the
Speaker 2: classroom to parents. I see that as the silver lining
Speaker 2: to this fraud and this massive crime. The pandemic policy
Speaker 2: added twenty percent of UK's GDP to the debt in
Speaker 2: just two years, but it exploded even more here in America,
Speaker 2: the COVID vaccines. Five years after the world's largest medical experiment,
Speaker 2: there is still no mandatory system for tracking millions of injuries.
Speaker 2: This is from the Free Thought Project, and this is
Speaker 2: from Cheryl Atkinson, and again, Pfizer knew this from the
Speaker 2: very beginning. That's why they wanted these embassies as collateral.
Speaker 2: They knew that they were going to be harming people,
Speaker 2: and they worked with the governments to make sure that
Speaker 2: that was not going to be tracked. So we got
Speaker 2: to remember that when we look at how the medical
Speaker 2: community quote unquote operates. This is an article from the
Speaker 2: Daily Skeptic and a person says, the other day I
Speaker 2: published a retrospective article about how I and others could
Speaker 2: see from the start that the lockdowns would be a
Speaker 2: public health, social and economic disaster, and of course we
Speaker 2: could see that it was a fraud because of all
Speaker 2: these other flags that were out there as well. The
Speaker 2: time has come to set down a more personal record,
Speaker 2: not because it's particularly unusual or special, but because it
Speaker 2: is through individual stories that history is best experienced, and
Speaker 2: the history of lockdowns should never be forgotten or forgiven.
Speaker 2: And it's one of the reasons why I put together
Speaker 2: the monster Jab thing. This is exactly how previously unrecognized
Speaker 2: serious side effects were discovered with other medications. Again, this
Speaker 2: is talking about the hang on second device just popped here.
Speaker 2: This is talking about how the abuse takes time for
Speaker 2: doctors to catch up on this. Even the doctors are
Speaker 2: playing catch up on this, it takes them a while
Speaker 2: to discover the adverse effects from these things, because it
Speaker 2: is when these people poison us. The poisoners in the
Speaker 2: pharmaceutical industry, they make sure that they don't kill everybody once.
Speaker 2: That's why they varied the dosage so they could see
Speaker 2: what was fatal and so forth. But it's also kept
Speaker 2: them from getting caught right away. If they gave something
Speaker 2: to people that killed everybody and did it right away,
Speaker 2: then they would catch on. But if they slowly kill
Speaker 2: you with a vaccine or something like that, then that
Speaker 2: gives them plausible deniability. This is exactly how previously unrecognized
Speaker 2: serious side effects were discovered with other medications in the
Speaker 2: late nineteen nineties. As a CBS investigative correspondent, I reported
Speaker 2: says Sheryl Atkinson on Reslin, a diabetes drug that was
Speaker 2: withdrawn in two thousand after reports of liver failure began
Speaker 2: appearing in the FDA's Adverse Events Reporting system. Again, we
Speaker 2: saw that with rem de Zoviet as well rem Desaviet
Speaker 2: had been They tried to push fout. He tried to
Speaker 2: push that for his friends at Gilead Pharmaceuticals. He tried
Speaker 2: to push it as a cure for AIDS. He tried
Speaker 2: to push it in previous other previous conditions, and it
Speaker 2: never was effective and it was very unsafe, and so
Speaker 2: he pronounced it himself as the standard of care one
Speaker 2: week after a Chinese study said that it was ineffective
Speaker 2: and very very dangerous to the liver. And by the way,
Speaker 2: when we talk about ram Paul, who's been one of
Speaker 2: the people pushing this lab leak thing so much, And
Speaker 2: I say it's an alibi and it is laying the
Speaker 2: foundation for them to do it worse the next time.
Speaker 2: And I don't think ram Paul is mistaken on this.
Speaker 2: I think he's in on it. He had his wife
Speaker 2: by Shares and Gilead with Remdesevier stuff, So again I
Speaker 2: don't trust him. Experts say for each adverse event reboarded,
Speaker 2: they're likely ten thousand to one hundred thousand more that
Speaker 2: don't get reported, says Cheryl Atkinson. Well, that was a
Speaker 2: Harvard study that showed that that's why a handful of
Speaker 2: fatalities is so alarming and prompted the FDA to pull
Speaker 2: that drug, a Resilant, from the market. But of course
Speaker 2: that was back in the nineteen nineties. Pharmaceutical companies have
Speaker 2: a lot more pull with media as well as with
Speaker 2: government regulators now. Similarly, she says, I also broke news
Speaker 2: at CBS on the erectyle dysfunction drug Viagra and how
Speaker 2: it was linked to a form of sudden blindness years
Speaker 2: after approval, to which you tell people, if you don't
Speaker 2: stop it, you're going to go blind right, But it
Speaker 2: was only because clusters of blindness cases happened to get
Speaker 2: reported to the FDA's Adverse Event system, and a few
Speaker 2: intrepid eye doctors then noticed a pattern and their patients.
Speaker 2: The actual doctors prescribing viagra failed to recognize and report
Speaker 2: the blindness as a possible adverse event. The side effect
Speaker 2: was originally denied by the drug maker, but is now
Speaker 2: added to the warning on the label. But they still
Speaker 2: saw it to people.
Speaker 4: Hey, do you think maybe that the blindness that we're
Speaker 4: seeing in this group of people that we're giving this
Speaker 4: drug too could be related to the drug. No, it's
Speaker 4: probably something else, maybe something of water.
Speaker 2: And then a third example, she said, I investigated, is
Speaker 2: the cholesterol lowering statins. At first, statin makers denied that
Speaker 2: potentially fatal muscle problems and brain issues could be related
Speaker 2: to their medicine, but after enough reports made it into
Speaker 2: the federal database, it became undeniable and those adverse events
Speaker 2: were ultimately added to the label. Except my doctor was
Speaker 2: not aware of it. She kept trying to push statins
Speaker 2: on me, and I said, no, it's got some really
Speaker 2: nasty adverse effects. I remember which ones were they in sight. Well,
Speaker 2: it's been a long time since I looked at it.
Speaker 2: I don't remember. But how about potentially fatal muscle problems
Speaker 2: and brain issues? How about that? And how about the
Speaker 2: question as to whether or not we need to even
Speaker 2: control the cholesterol levels that are there? She replied by
Speaker 2: And we had this conversation multiple times. She went through
Speaker 2: the whole spiel twice with me, lecturing me about this,
Speaker 2: framing him Massachusetts study that showed that STATINS was great
Speaker 2: for everybody. I said, well, that's fine, no thanks, I'm
Speaker 2: not taking them. Vari's data for the COVID nineteen vaccines
Speaker 2: now exceed leads one point six million reports in the
Speaker 2: US alone, including more than thirty six thousand deaths and
Speaker 2: two hundred thousand hospitalizations reported after the vaccine. Why aren't
Speaker 2: we stopping it? Well, that's a rhetorical question. We all
Speaker 2: know why. Experts across the spectrum agree these figures represent
Speaker 2: massive unreporting because most physicians are not filing reports even
Speaker 2: asking their sick patients about their vaccine status, and many
Speaker 2: adverse events are never recognized as possibly vaccine related. Trump, meanwhile,
Speaker 2: is proud of his mass murder campaign, and so you know,
Speaker 2: one point six million reports in the US alone, and
Speaker 2: that's a tiny fraction of it. But we're not going
Speaker 2: to do anything at all about it. That's the way
Speaker 2: it all operates. The FDA is going to introduce a
Speaker 2: new COVID nineteen vaccine protocol after report claims that the
Speaker 2: shots killed ten children. Well that's good, except you know,
Speaker 2: we've already got the VARs thing out there that she
Speaker 2: just pointed out, thirty six thousand deaths, two hundred thousand hospitalizations.
Speaker 2: But now they've got another ten and they're going to
Speaker 2: run with us. And so the FDA is reviewing this.
Speaker 2: I hope they stop it whatever reason they do, but
Speaker 2: it would be it seems strange to me to try
Speaker 2: to focus on these ten cases when you've got millions
Speaker 2: of cases that you could focus on a Midwestern.
Speaker 5: I wonder if they're focusing on ten people that died
Speaker 5: in a different way to discredit the other injuries like
Speaker 5: it killed ten people.
Speaker 2: Oh no, yes, I think just to give us an
Speaker 2: insight into the thinking of medicine and what has happened.
Speaker 2: This is a great op ed piece here from a
Speaker 2: website called midwesterndoctor dot com. Why have vaccines become a religion,
Speaker 2: And I guess my first response to it would be that, well,
Speaker 2: the accumulation of money has basically become a religion in America,
Speaker 2: the love of money, and that's a big part of it.
Speaker 2: You know, the fact that this magisterium of doctors in
Speaker 2: the AMA has made these people very, very rich. That
Speaker 2: was something that was not the case even in my
Speaker 2: parents' generation, and even when I was young enough, doctors
Speaker 2: would make house calls and things like that. Can you
Speaker 2: imagine something like that today. No, That's how their status
Speaker 2: has radically changed. As more and more people are awakening
Speaker 2: to the dangers of vaccines, they're gradually discovering a problem
Speaker 2: vaccine safety advocates have had to deal with for decades.
Speaker 2: Talking to vaccine zealots is like speaking to a brick wall.
Speaker 2: Regardless of the evidence you put forward, you can't teach them.
Speaker 2: For example, in two thousand and nine, after nephrologist doctor
Speaker 2: Suzanne Humphreys noticed patients, particularly the hospitalized ones, kept on
Speaker 2: developing kidney failure flu shots, she experienced significant pushback from
Speaker 2: trying to delay vaccination until after discharge. She said, in
Speaker 2: the past, when I consulted on kidney failure cases and said, oh,
Speaker 2: that was the statin or that was the antibiotic that
Speaker 2: did it. Instantly the drug would be stopped, No questions
Speaker 2: would be asked. Now, however, a new standard was applied
Speaker 2: to vaccines. It didn't matter that the internist notes in
Speaker 2: the charts said no obvious ideology of kidney failure found
Speaker 2: after throw evaluation. The next time, the medical chief of
Speaker 2: staff and I met in the corridor. At one point
Speaker 2: I asked the chief why doesn't anybody else see the
Speaker 2: problem here? Why is it just me? How can you
Speaker 2: think that this is okay? Why is it now considered
Speaker 2: normal to vaccinate very sick people on their first hospital day.
Speaker 2: The oncologist gave me an answer that surprised me. She said,
Speaker 2: medical religion, right, it is an orthodoxy. It is pushed
Speaker 2: for money by people, in the same way they have
Speaker 2: other orthodoxies, like Zionism, pushed for money. Once people awake
Speaker 2: to the vaccine issues, one of the most frequent questions
Speaker 2: which emerges is why the medical field has such a
Speaker 2: rigid ideological attachment to it. I would argue that's due
Speaker 2: to three interrelated reasons. First, human society has always been
Speaker 2: defined by competing groups vying for status, and wealth. It
Speaker 2: is a very recent development that doctors attracted the kind
Speaker 2: of prestige and salary that this profession now commands, and
Speaker 2: I would argue that that is ultimately result of two
Speaker 2: other things. Number one market monopolization brought by the AMA
Speaker 2: and number two, medicine creating a mythology that it rescued
Speaker 2: us from the dark ages of disease and hence deserves
Speaker 2: its supremacy in the current social hierarchy. As quote, vaccines
Speaker 2: infectious disease unquote is a central part of that mythology.
Speaker 2: Doctor Humphries raised her concerns about the influenza vaccine causing
Speaker 2: kidney failures. Colleagues used the mythology of medicine's most esteemed
Speaker 2: vaccines to dismiss her. For example, the chief of Internal
Speaker 2: Medicine went on to remind me that smallpox was eradicated
Speaker 2: by vaccines and polio was eradicated in the US by vaccines.
Speaker 2: This eventually motivated doctor Humphries to scrutinize that mythology and
Speaker 2: to create the pivotal book Dissolving Illusions that showed exactly
Speaker 2: why that was a lie. And that is a lie.
Speaker 4: Yeah, if you go in and you actually look at
Speaker 4: when these diseases started to disappear. You'll notice that there's
Speaker 4: a tremendous drop off in cases, and then a vaccine
Speaker 4: comes along for it, and the precipitous drop continues. The
Speaker 4: vaccine doesn't seem to have any impact on the speed
Speaker 4: and the rate at which it drops. It's generally coincided
Speaker 4: with at an increase in hygiene. People figured out something
Speaker 4: about how to keep themselves clean, how to better prevent
Speaker 4: themselves from getting bacteria around. That's usually what does it.
Speaker 4: That's right, and the vaccines show up and someone gets
Speaker 4: to go, look the vaccines cause this completely ignoring the
Speaker 4: fact that the drop off had already started before the
Speaker 4: vaccine showed up.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I should get doctor baileyon again her husband.
Speaker 5: In the case of polio, you have a lot of
Speaker 5: people with polio like symptoms where it's identical symptoms to polio.
Speaker 5: It's identical in every way, but it can't be polio
Speaker 5: because that's gone. We can't test it, of course, but
Speaker 5: trust us, it's not polio despite having all the same
Speaker 5: symptoms and no additional symptoms.
Speaker 4: And there's tons of cases of vaccine induced cases of
Speaker 4: these things.
Speaker 2: Well, when you look at it. As I've said for
Speaker 2: the longest time, science only advances when you question the
Speaker 2: status quo, only when you look at what everybody else
Speaker 2: is accepted, especially the experts in the field. It was
Speaker 2: when the Right Brothers questioned the airlift tables and they
Speaker 2: created their own tables that they were able to get
Speaker 2: something that worked. Whereas the highly prestigious scientist Langley that
Speaker 2: was at the top of the academic social order, he
Speaker 2: was head of the Smithsonian as well, he couldn't get
Speaker 2: his airplanes to operate because he was using the wrong data.
Speaker 2: He assumed that that was correct. But the Right Brothers
Speaker 2: did their own investigation and that helped them to make
Speaker 2: something that worked. And so yeah, she'd get Sam Bailey,
Speaker 2: doctor Sambailey and her husband who's also a doctor. They
Speaker 2: co wrote a book, The Last Pandemic, and it should
Speaker 2: be the last Pandemic if we really understand how they
Speaker 2: pull the wool over our eyes. But they're going to
Speaker 2: sell this lab leak nonsense. Doctor Mendelssohn, who in his
Speaker 2: nineteen seventy nine book Confessions of a Medical Heretic, argued
Speaker 2: that medicine was a dogmatic institution that prioritized authority control
Speaker 2: and ritualistic practices. As I said over and over again,
Speaker 2: that's precisely what Francis Bacon argued against when he created
Speaker 2: formulated his scientific method. He said, we're not going to
Speaker 2: go with dogmatism and established authority figures. We're going to
Speaker 2: go with observation and testing and repetition. So he said,
Speaker 2: it's treated as infallible doctrines that require blind obedience from
Speaker 2: patients over patient well being, over data transparency, and over
Speaker 2: evidence based care. He said there are unwritten rules in medicine,
Speaker 2: such as doctors compulsively rushing to prescribe new drugs before
Speaker 2: their side effects are fully known, and there's a rigid
Speaker 2: faith like adherence to protocol over science. He demonstrated how
Speaker 2: many routine practices and procedures cause significantly more harm than benefit,
Speaker 2: for example, X rays for tonsillitis later creating thyroid cancer,
Speaker 2: but could not be challenged due to the dogmatic nature
Speaker 2: of medicine and also the massive amounts of money involved
Speaker 2: the financial interests that are there. He also demonstrated many
Speaker 2: illnesses that are routinely treated with harmful interventions would recover
Speaker 2: on their own, especially if augmented with simple natural healing practices.
Speaker 2: He argued that medicine's tendency to withhold foundational medical information
Speaker 2: from the public, forcing them to trust the doctor. So,
Speaker 2: as they point out in this article from midwesterndoctor dot com,
Speaker 2: the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. For example,
Speaker 2: when people attempt to conduct placebo controlled trials of vaccines,
Speaker 2: they are vehemently rejected by the medical field as being
Speaker 2: unethical to perform because it denies children the tiny placebo
Speaker 2: group a life saving vaccine. So despite it being far
Speaker 2: more unethical to inject every child in the country with
Speaker 2: a vaccine of unknown safety or efficacy, which is the
Speaker 2: real concern of safety. And this is something that also
Speaker 2: came up in the early days of the so called pandemic,
Speaker 2: as Trump was pushing the vaccine. It's like, hurry, hurry, hurry,
Speaker 2: we got to get this thing out. I reported at
Speaker 2: the time. There was a group of people who were
Speaker 2: bought into this pandemic lie so deeply that they said,
Speaker 2: will be guinea pigs. Let's do a challenge test, you know,
Speaker 2: inject us with a vaccine and then expose us to COVID. Well,
Speaker 2: it was two problems with that. They didn't have COVID
Speaker 2: to expose them to. They'd not isolated it. But I
Speaker 2: said at the time, I said, they will never do it.
Speaker 2: You don't understand what the procedure have been always for
Speaker 2: the FDA to use when it is a drug versus
Speaker 2: a vaccine. If it was a drug, they would have
Speaker 2: a group of people that had the illness or the
Speaker 2: condition or whatever that it was supposed to help, and
Speaker 2: they would break that into two different groups and have
Speaker 2: a control group of people who had that condition or
Speaker 2: that disease or whatever, and another group that didn't have it.
Speaker 2: So that's for a drug that is supposed to treat that,
Speaker 2: and then they would look to see what happened with
Speaker 2: those two groups. They never do that with vaccines. They
Speaker 2: don't have a control group. They never expose you to
Speaker 2: the illness. Could it be that they've not isolated the virus?
Speaker 2: They always tell us, so, well, no, we can't do
Speaker 2: that because it'd be unethical to allow people to deny
Speaker 2: them access to this life saving treatment. That is the
Speaker 2: prevailing assumption, and that is the fundamental lie. Thank you
Speaker 2: for joining us. Have a good day. The common man.
Speaker 2: They created common Core and dumbed down our children. They
Speaker 2: created common past, track and control us their Commons project
Speaker 2: to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future.
Speaker 2: They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated ordinary. But
Speaker 2: each of us has worth and dignity, created in the
Speaker 2: image of God. That is what we have in common.
Speaker 2: That is what they want to take away. Their most
Speaker 2: powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know
Speaker 2: everything about us, while they hide everything from us. It's
Speaker 2: time to turn that around and expose what they want
Speaker 2: to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find
Speaker 2: at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank
Speaker 2: you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please
Speaker 2: keep us in your prayers. D Davidnightshow dot com